What crime is he being tried for now? IP infringement? Is that still pending? What connection does this have with the hit and run case? Aren’t past convictions only releaved at the sentencing stage as not to influence the trial? So what IS he being tried for?
The broader issue seems to be that a condition of his bail for the previous infringement, was that he was not permitted to leave the country. Given that recently he was about to do just that, it would be important if that condition of bail was still in force.
I’m not following this case very closely. However, I’m fairly certain that as a condition of his bail in the hit and run case he is not permitted to leave Taiwan.
[quote=“Big Fluffy Matthew”]What crime is he being tried for now? IP infringement? Is that still pending? What connection does this have with the hit and run case? Aren’t past convictions only releaved at the sentencing stage as not to influence the trial? So what IS he being tried for?[/quote] In the other thread about this matter, I was informed that this isn’t the U. S. Our evidentiary and procedural rules are similar to yours–I guess some of them, the main ones, were taken from yours–so I guess this isn’t Britain, either. I wonder if the ROC has this rule, or something like it:
[quote]The rule that a man shall not be charged with one crime and convicted of another, may sometimes cover real guilt, but its observance is essential to the preservation of innocence. [/quote]–The Schooner Hoppet and Cargo v. The United States (U. S. Supreme Court, 1813) (emphasis added by me)
[quote]Trial by Google?[/quote] Since I’m pretty sure I’m the main Google offender in this matter, and since the matter is really none of my business, I’ll leave off googling and take my leave of this thread. I’m about googled out anyway. 
I’m not following this case very closely. However, I’m fairly certain that as a condition of his bail in the hit and run case he is not permitted to leave Taiwan.[/quote]
I’m sure that’s the case. I was talking about the fact that the condition of his bail in the earlier IP fraud case, he was not permitted to leave Taiwan. I don’t know if that condition of bail was still in place before the hit and run case, but if it was he has a problem since he was planning to leave Taiwan.
I’m not following this case very closely. However, I’m fairly certain that as a condition of his bail in the hit and run case he is not permitted to leave Taiwan.[/quote]
I’m sure that’s the case. I was talking about the fact that the condition of his bail in the earlier IP fraud case, he was not permitted to leave Taiwan. I don’t know if that condition of bail was still in place before the hit and run case, but if it was he has a problem since he was planning to leave Taiwan.[/quote]
According to the United Daily News article under discussion earlier, before the hit and run case there was already a warrant out for his arrest (for 8 years) for failure to show up in court for the earlier case. He had never been brought in on the warrant, and had changed his Chinese name to a different name from the one on the warrant. This was discovered when he was brought in on the hit and run case.
It’s interesting to know if it is a connected case with the Microsoft one or a different case. Seems he was flying a bit close to the wind with some business dealings but again it’s fairly common practice here too. It’s hard not to get into some scrapes.
Are you allowed to leave the country if there’s a warrant out for your arrest, if it’s really old and they haven’t caught you yet?
Bullshit, he has official legal Chinese names in Taiwan. Even my son has an official legal Chinese name in Taiwan.
Being British has nothing to do with anything.
I thought the issue for the courts to decide was over who was driving the car at the time of the accident? Zain Dean drove the car that night and so did the KTV chappie. Obviously the courts charged Mr Dean so they belive that he was driving at the time of the accident.
Are you allowed to leave the country if there’s a warrant out for your arrest, if it’s really old and they haven’t caught you yet?[/quote]
No, you’re definitely not “allowed” to do so. If you try to leave the country with a warrant out for your arrest and are discovered at the airport, they will detain you and turn you over to law enforcement. A change of name and identity document, however, is one way that a person might avoid detection at the airport. In the case at hand (according to the United Daily News Article), Dean left the country before the warrant was issued for his arrest for missing the court hearing in the case 8 years ago, changed his Chinese name and passport, then reentered the country under the new identity. When he missed the court hearing, the warrant was issued for him under (obviously) his original identity. Because of the change in identity, he was able to evade detection during the subsequent 8 years, until he was brought in and investigated on the recent hit and run charge.
Ah. So this could get messy.
Are you allowed to leave the country if there’s a warrant out for your arrest, if it’s really old and they haven’t caught you yet?[/quote]
No, you’re definitely not “allowed” to do so. If you try to leave the country with a warrant out for your arrest and are discovered at the airport, they will detain you and turn you over to law enforcement. A change of name and identity document, however, is one way that a person might avoid detection at the airport. In the case at hand (according to the United Daily News Article), Dean left the country before the warrant was issued for his arrest for missing the court hearing in the case 8 years ago, changed his Chinese name and passport, then reentered the country under the new identity. When he missed the court hearing, the warrant was issued for him under (obviously) his original identity. Because of the change in identity, he was able to evade detection during the subsequent 8 years, until he was brought in and investigated on the recent hit and run charge.[/quote]
Actually, there are a lot of low profile criminal cases that will not have you flagged. The prosecutor has to send a certified written request to immigration in order for a ban to be implemented. That is not always the case. If you are a foreigner and you fail to show up for interrogation, though, the prosecutor is very likely to contact immigration.
The broader issue seems to be that a condition of his bail for the previous infringement, was that he was not permitted to leave the country. Given that recently he was about to do just that, it would be important if that condition of bail was still in force.[/quote]
According to my understanding, he had made his plans to leave Taiwan prior to the hit and run case. This is irrespective and regardless of what copyright infringement accusations were in place beforehand. He communicated his intention to move back to the UK to his friends months before the traffic accident in question ever occured.
Yes, that is exactly what the problem is. It’s not a good idea to plan to leave the country if you’ve been released on bail from your copyright infringement case on the grounds that you don’t leave the country, and it’s not a good idea to try and leave the country when there’s still a warrant out for your arrest.
Yes, that is exactly what the problem is. It’s not a good idea to plan to leave the country if you’ve been released on bail from your copyright infringement case on the grounds that you don’t leave the country, and it’s not a good idea to try and leave the country when there’s still a warrant out for your arrest.[/quote]
I think one would do well to remember that, especially in Taiwan, there are “warrants” and then there are “warrants”. When the copyright story first hit the local news a couple of weeks ago, the gist of it was that his company had been pinched for unlicensed Windows use, and a settlement was reached. The extent of his misconduct, they were saying, was that he’d failed to visit the police station to finalise the settlement.
Name change or no, the company at which the copyright violation took place remained in business in the intervening years.
There were no SWAT teams rappelling down from choppers and blasting in the windows in search of the CID’s Public Enemy Number 1, wanted for installing Windows on 12 workstations rather than the licensed 10, only to be met with a well-groomed Indo-Scot boss chap saying “Sorry, I’m not the well-groomed Indo-Scot boss chap you’re looking for, I’m a DIFFERENT well-groomed Indo-Scot boss chap, as you can see by my shiny new papers.” At which time the tactical squad humped it back to he station house.
No effort was made by the authorities to shut down the company in the years since, and Mr. Dean’s assertion was that he was unaware that he was supposed to finalise the proceedings with a visit to the station house.
The Internet and local press have been lousy with video and photos of the guy over the years, he’s hardly been laying low and keeping a low profile 'til the heat dies down.
The DA simply jumped upon this relatively minor administrative infraction and hauled him in (after, of course, notifying the media scumbags) and made sure there was plenty of photo-op with him being escorted down the stairs in cuffs.
One will note that no additional indictments have been brought in, nor has any court date been set regarding the copyright case.
As for the name change, a lot of guys from the old days will recall knowing him by a completely different name from that in use now.
My understanding of the situation was that, after his mother’s death, he changed his name to her maiden name, as some sort of remembrance.
A masterly post, the chief!
[quote=“the chief”]As for the name change, a lot of guys from the old days will recall knowing him by a completely different name from that in use now.
My understanding of the situation was that, after his mother’s death, he changed his name to her maiden name, as some sort of remembrance.[/quote]
I can confirm that.
Are you allowed to leave the country if there’s a warrant out for your arrest, if it’s really old and they haven’t caught you yet?[/quote]
No, you’re definitely not “allowed” to do so. If you try to leave the country with a warrant out for your arrest and are discovered at the airport, they will detain you and turn you over to law enforcement. A change of name and identity document, however, is one way that a person might avoid detection at the airport. In the case at hand (according to the United Daily News Article), Dean left the country before the warrant was issued for his arrest for missing the court hearing in the case 8 years ago, changed his Chinese name and passport, then reentered the country under the new identity. When he missed the court hearing, the warrant was issued for him under (obviously) his original identity. Because of the change in identity, he was able to evade detection during the subsequent 8 years, until he was brought in and investigated on the recent hit and run charge.[/quote]
So did he know there was a warrant out of his arrest under his old name when he returned? If so an “upstanding” citizen would hand himself into the authorites and explain both that he was unaware about the arrest warrant due to being out of the country and also that he had changed his name in remembrence of his mother and not in order to avoid “capture”.
Now I am not saying I would do that myself 
I’m just saying that is how the magistrate would see it no? If I knew the British police had a warrant for my arrest I would either leave the UK permanently or just turn myself in before I got on crimewatch. I don’t see how the situation is any different in Taiwan are the police more incompetent here ? If he did know there was an arrest warrant out for him then why return to the country if not willing to go to court. There are so many places in Asia one could go so why come to a country where you are a wanted felon? Love ? Money? Ignorance ? Seems like either he did not know about the warrant or that he beleived that his name change would enable him to avoid detection. 
Are you allowed to leave the country if there’s a warrant out for your arrest, if it’s really old and they haven’t caught you yet?[/quote]
No, you’re definitely not “allowed” to do so. If you try to leave the country with a warrant out for your arrest and are discovered at the airport, they will detain you and turn you over to law enforcement. A change of name and identity document, however, is one way that a person might avoid detection at the airport. In the case at hand (according to the United Daily News Article), Dean left the country before the warrant was issued for his arrest for missing the court hearing in the case 8 years ago, changed his Chinese name and passport, then reentered the country under the new identity. When he missed the court hearing, the warrant was issued for him under (obviously) his original identity. Because of the change in identity, he was able to evade detection during the subsequent 8 years, until he was brought in and investigated on the recent hit and run charge.[/quote]
So did he know there was a warrant out of his arrest under his old name when he returned? If so an “upstanding” citizen would hand himself into the authorites and explain both that he was unaware about the arrest warrant due to being out of the country and also that he had changed his name in remembrence of his mother and not in order to avoid “capture”.
Now I am not saying I would do that myself I’m just saying that is how the magistrate would see it no? If I knew the British police had a warrant for my arrest I would either leave the UK permanently or just turn myself in before I got on crimewatch. I don’t see how the situation is any different in Taiwan are the police more incompetent here ? If he did know there was an arrest warrant out for him then why return to the country if not willing to go to court. There are so many places in Asia one could go so why come to a country where you are a wanted felon? Love ? Money? Ignorance ? Seems like either he did not know about the warrant or that he beleived that his name change would enable him to avoid detection. [/quote]
It certainly seems possible that Dean was unaware of the arrest warrant. I want to reiterate that I don’t know any details of the case other than what I’ve read in the Chinese and English media. I only waded into the latter part of this discussion to try to clarify some points that were getting muddled by inaccurate translations of the Chinese-language media reports.
In violation of IP laws, the Fu Je Ren of the company in question would not only have to face the civil compensation but also the criminal charge and penalty.
For case no., 臺灣臺北地方法院刑事判決95年度易字第584號, it was Taipei DA office filed the appeal to the High Court.
The summary of this appeal judgment (case no. 臺灣高等法院刑事判決97年度上易字第1609號) is the sentence was reduced from ten months to five months in jails ; alternative imposition as NTD900 per day. Meanwhile, as he was also against Article 91 of Copyright Act, the fine was also reduced from NTD320,000 to NTD160,000. in the appeal.
In his IP suit, his attorney was 簡泰正律師 who represented him both in civil and criminal trials. How come his lawyer didn’t tell him what to do after the judgment decision is made?!
I am doubtful with the following saying.
[quote]I tried to copy the captions that are supposedly a transcript of what Mr. Chen, Mr. Dean’s, attorney, said to the media in this video at 0:47 to 1:08:
Quote:
這個案子，它是已經結案的一個案子 之前微軟就是美國的微軟公司告他這反著作權法的問題 那個案子已經跟微軟達成和解而且已經判決確定了因為他不知道台灣的這個法律 他必須要到謷察局那邊去做銷案的動作，所以才有今天這個誤會。
It looks to me as if the lawyer is just saying that Microsoft brought a copyright infringement case against Mr. Dean, and that the case was closed at some point. Mr. Chen does seem to use the expression “misunderstanding” (誤會), which is interesting, because it appears Mr. Dean was “immediately arrested by police in court” (警方立即將他當庭逮捕) over this misunderstanding, and it was apparently all over the news.
[/quote]
Actually after the IP trial, the plaintiffs, Microsoft and the other company, Adobe Systems Incorporated also filed a motion to ask NCL Media and its Fu Je Ren to have a public letter of apology on press. (case no. 98聲1387號 date of decision May 27, 2009 )
Change the “Legal Name” on Passport
It’s totally cool whether we ‘d like to be called as A, B, or C or if you’d like to have one English name, one French name, one Gernam name and one Chinese name, and change the name at any time we want, but when it comes to the Legal Name on the papers, the document should always match with each other.
Quoting from the report on page 3 on Taipei Times dated June 15, 2010, “Chen showed a document issued by the British Trade and Cultural Office in Taipei showing that Dean is a British passport holder, valid until Sept. 16, 2012. Although Dean has had other passports, they have all expired and are no longer valid, Chen said.”
(taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/ … 2003475501)
“The British Trade & Cultural Office Taipei has proved that Dean currently holds only one valid British passport.
Although Dean has had other copies of passports, those were all out of date and thus became invalid, including the one with the Chinese name Ke Jui-ming, Chen continued” Quoted from The China Post dated June 15, 2010.
(chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/loca … rchant.htm )
It confirms Mr. Dean has had other passports, but didn’t say or reveal they were under which LEGAL NAMES, given the fact that he did LEGALLY change the name in remembrance of his mother is true or whether they were all British Passports.
Generally the period of a valid British Passport is 10 years, which implies unless his passport had been stolen or owing to some unforseen circumstance, the passport in question should have applied under the Legal Name, Zain Tai Dean in 2002. If he had entered Taiwan by then with his British passport, the entry record should be shown under his Legal Name, Zain Taj Dean.
About changing the name on British Passport ukdps.co.uk/ChangingYourName … sport.html
As we don’t know whether he was born in India, considering his Indian origin, let’s assume he was also etitled to be an Indian Passport Holder.
Under this circumstance, in case of changing the Legal Name on Indian Passport, at least the applicant should place an advertising on a daily newspaper both in the UK and in India and such documents should be attested by a Notary Public.
Does anyone know he ever did this?
Source:Consulate General of India-Edinburgh cgiedinburgh.org/PassportAnd … ices.shtml
Regarding to “his previous company”, EVOLVE LEW MEDIA LTD. (company ID no. 16433778, Company Chinese Name:英商怡法媒體設計股份有限公司)
Quoted from Liberty Times, dated June 12,2010
libertytimes.com.tw/2010/new … ay-so4.htm
昨上午再度開庭，法官葉力旗比對指紋發現，林克穎（Zain Taj Dean）與柯睿明是同一人，他在87年間即以柯睿明（Khala Hami）名義在台居留，任職怡法公司時被微軟控告侵權而起訴，卻不到法院出庭遭通緝，原來他早已潛逃出境，改名林克穎再回台做生意，當庭將他逮捕歸案。
Quote from China Post dated June 15,2010,
“Dean also tried to clear himself of allegations that he broke copyright law by saying they were about a few copied Microsoft programs circulated among the staff of his previous company eight years ago; when he used Ke Jui-ming (柯睿明) as his Chinese name.
The company had reached reconciliation with the plaintiff, the Microsoft Corporation, in private but it did not inform the concerned authorities at the time, explained Chen Ta-cheng (陳達成), Dean’s attorney. “
EVOLVE LEW MEDIA LTD. (company ID no. 16433778, Company Chinese Name:英商怡法媒體設計股份有限公司), the company which was ever mentioned several times in the press related to the IP suit; according to the information on Taiwan Commerce Industrial Services Portal(Source: gcis.nat.gov.tw/pub/cmpy/cmpyInf … 33778#note), that company was set up in Dec 23, 1997 , but went to administration/ liquidation in March 07, 2003.
However according to the research result on court’s system (jirs.judicial.gov.tw/Index.htm) , no case has been found both in civil or criminal trial.
( I’d like to put a note : the company information system didn’t show who was the Fu Je Ren of that company at that time but it’s very unlike Microsoft would just sue the company’s manger alone!)
Instead, it’s the company NCL Media’s case which is linked to IP suite has been found on the court system!
By the way, EVOLVE LEW MEDIA LTD. had not been registered in the UK either.
About NCL Media UK Ltd (Company ID no. 80352688,Company Chinese Name英商恩禧策略傳播股份有限公司, established in Jan. 16, 2003, based on the information on Taiwan Commerce Industrial Services Portal)
It’s totally fine for a foreigner to set up a local business in this country. However please bear in mind that you’d have a decent compliance officer to take care of everything in details in daily operations, otherwise hire a good local lawyer and an accountant who can speak your and the local languages!
Since is NCL MEDIA’s website ( nclmedia.com ) is not accessible, the company information of this firm was found on a local recruitment agency, Yes 123’s website.
I don’t know what to say. Can someone tell me is it called misleading or deceiving? Or it’s simply the information failure on Company House website?
How come we could never find a company, called “NCL Media UK Ltd.” or NCL Media Ltd registered in the UK?
NCL Media UK Ltd. Company Introduction quoted
Company Introduction
NCL Media UK Ltd is a British company, registered in Scotland UK. Our office in Taipei was founded and managed by Zain T. Dean since 1996. We also have offices currently operating in Edinburgh, Geneva and Washington. Our vision is to deliver well articulated messages that convey the brand value persuasively, in the style that will appeal to the audience.
We have the most experience in producing corporate communications for Taiwanese companies. With the Taiwan office established in 1996, we have over 11 years experience in producing films, websites and print materials for sales and marketing use in the international markets, and have over 150 projects completed.