Teditorial: Wrong aim, wrong law – YouTube

Teddy Locsin Jr., compares the Anti-Cyber Crime Law of the U.S. to that of the Philippines.

=Video transcribed=

The cyber crime law of the United States punishes whoever:

  1. Accesses a computer without authorization and by such means obtains information that by US government order cannot be disclosed for reasons of national defense, foreign relations, but only if he had reasons to believe that information could injure the US and discloses it but only injure the US and with the access and the disclose is not covered. That is how careful the US is about internet freedom.
  2. By such means obtains financial records of a financial institution.
  3. By such means obtains information of a US agency or department.
  4. By such means obtains information from any protected computer if it violates inter-state or foreign communication.
  5. By such means intentionally access a private computer of a US agency or department which is exclusively for the use of the department or agency, or any computer being used by the US government.
  6. With intent to defraud, accesses a protected computer unless the purpose was just to use the computer or the loss is not more more than $5,000 in a year.
  7. Knowingly transmits a program, information, code or command and causes damage exceeding $5,000. Physical injury, damage to the protected computer. Modifies a medical examination, diagnosis, treatment or care of an individual. Poses a threat to public health or safety. Affects a government computer system involved in the administration of justice, national defense and national security. 
  8. Traffics and passwords in violation of the inter-state or Foreign Commerce Acts or any attempt to do the foregoing.
Nowhere do you see any interference with or any hint of interest in the freedom of the internet, of free speech or even the privilege to insult people as we regularly do in private communication. Cyber-crime legislation is confined to matters of national defense, national security, banking transactions including letters of credit or inter-state and foreign commerce. As you can see, the US anti cyber crime law is an example of such a law for a nation of HUMANS, our anti-cyber crime law is an example of a similar legislation for a PLANET OF THE APES. The best ground for striking down the entire, and not just the libelous point of the anti-cyber crime law is that it does not address, in any manner whatsoever, what should be the only concern of such a measure which is to protect information rather than to authorize and facilitate its disclosure. Goodnight and good luck.

DEFINITION and PURPOSE

The Republic Act No. 10175, also known as the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, is an act that defines and punishes cyber crime to prevent and suppress its proliferation . It aims to effectively prevent and combat misuse, abuse and illegal access of the Internet by facilitating their detection, investigation, arrest and prosecution at both the domestic and international levels, and by providing arrangements for fast and reliable international cooperation. To formulate and implement a national cyber security plan, a Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center (CICC) will be created under the administrative supervision of the Office of the President.
AUTHORS OF THE LAW
Reps. Susan Yap (2nd District, Tarlac), Eric Owen Singson, Jr. (2nd District, Ilocos Sur), Marcelino Teodoro (1st District, Marikina City) and Juan Edgardo Angara (Lone District, Aurora). Other authors of the bill are Reps. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (2nd District, Pampanga), Diosdado Arroyo (2nd District, Camarines Sur), Carmelo Lazatin (1st District, Pampanga), Rufus Rodriguez (2nd District, Cagayan de Oro City), Maximo Rodriguez, Jr. (Party-list, Abante Mindanao), Mariano Michael Velarde and Irwin Tieng (Party-list, BUHAY), Romeo Acop (2nd District, Antipolo City), Bernadette Herrera-Dy (Party-list, Bagong Henerasyon), Anthony Rolando Golez (Lone District, Bacolod City), Juan Miguel Macapagal-Arroyo (Party-list, Ang Galing Pinoy), Ma. Amelita Calimbas-Villarosa (Lone District, Occidental Mindoro), Antonio Del Rosario (1st District, Capiz), Winston Castelo (2nd District, Quezon City), Eulogio Magsaysay (Party-list, AVE), Sigfrido Tinga (2nd District, Taguig City), Roilo Golez (2nd District, Parañaque City), Romero Federico Quimbo (2nd District, Marikina City), Mel Senen Sarmiento (1st District, Western Samar), Cesar Sarmiento (Lone District, Catanduanes), Daryl Grace Abayon (Party-list, Aangat Tayo), Tomas Apacible (1st District, Batangas), Jerry Treñas (Lone District, Iloilo City), Joseph Gilbert Violago (2nd District, Nueva Ecija), Hermilando Mandanas (2nd District, Batangas), Ma. Rachel Arenas (3rd District, Pangasinan) and Ma. Victoria Sy-Alvarado (1st District, Bulacan).

OFFENSES PUNISHABLE UNDER THE LAW

  • Offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems.
  • Illegal access to the whole or any part of a computer system without rights.
  • Illegal interception of any non-public transmission of computer data to, from, or within a computer system.
  • Data interference such as alteration, damaging, deletion or deterioration of data without rights, including the introduction or transmission of viruses.
  • System (computer or computer network) interference.
  • Cyber-squatting or the acquisition of a domain name over the Internet in bad faith to profit, mislead, destroy reputation, and deprive others from registering the same.
  • Misuse of devices.
  • Computer-related offenses.
  • Computer-related forgery (input, alteration, or deletion of data) without rights resulting in inauthentic data, with the intent that it be considered or acted upon for legal purposes as if it were authentic. 
  • Computer-related fraud (input, alteration, or deletion of data or interference in the functioning of a computer system) causing damage.
  • Computer-related identity theft or the acquisition, use, misuse, transfer, possession, alteration or deletion of the identifying information of  another person.
  • Content-related offenses.
  • Cybersex or the engagement, maintenance, control, or operation of any lascivious exhibition of sexual organs or sexual activity, with the aid of a computer system.
  • Child pornography or the unlawful acts as defined and punishable by Republic Act No. 9775 or the Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009  committed through a computer system.
  • Unsolicited commercial communications which seek to advertise, sell, or offer for sale products and services.
  • Libel or unlawful acts as defined in Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code. 
  • Aiding or abetting in the commission of cyber crime.
  • Attempt in the commission of cyber crime

PENALTIES
Any person found guilty of committing cybercrime acts enumerated in the first two groups shall be punished with prision mayor, or serving of six years and one day to twelve (12) years in prison, or a fine of at least PHP 200,000 up to PHP 500,000.

  • A person found guilty of committing punishable acts enumerated in the first group shall be punished with reclusion temporal, or serving of 12 years and one day to 20 years in prison, or a fine of at least PHP 500,000 up to the maximum amount in proportion to the damage incurred, or both.
  • A person found guilty of committing cybersex shall be punished with prision mayor, or serving of six years and one day to 12 years in prison, or a fine of at least PHP 200,000 but not exceeding PHP 1,000,000, or both.
  • A person found guilty of committing child pornography shall be punished with the penalties enumerated in the Republic Act No. 9775 or the Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009 .
  • A person found guilty of committing unsolicited commercial communications shall be punished with arresto mayor, or serving of one month and one day to six months, or a fine of at least PHP 50,000 but not exceeding PHP 250,000, or both.
  • A person found guilty of committing other offenses enumerated in the last group shall be punished with imprisonment one degree lower than that of the prescribed penalty for the offense, or a fine of at least PHP 100,000 but not exceeding PHP 500,000, or both.

CORPORATE LIABILITY

  • If any of these offenses are knowingly committed by a natural person on behalf of or for the benefit of a juridical person, the latter shall be held liable for fines enumerated above up to a maximum of PHP 10,000,000.
  • If, for the benefit of the juridical person, the offense was made possible because of a natural person’s failure to supervise or control, the former shall be held liable for fines enumerated above up to a maximum of PHP 5,000,000.

ENFORCEMENT and IMPLEMENTATION

  • Law enforcement authorities, such as the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) shall be responsible for the implementation of the provisions of this Act.
  • The Department of Justice (DOJ) shall be responsible for assisting in investigations or proceedings concerning criminal offenses related to computer systems or data, in collection of electronic evidence of criminal offense, and in ensuring that the provisions of the law are complied with.
 ———————————————————————————–

 What is the deal with the legislative branch of our country? Why did our President sign such a thing that focuses on stuff like cyber libel and such provisions in the law that are mostly or totally uncalled for? The only part that I found good about the law is the troublesome cyber pornography problem in the country wherein plenty of cases of such were filed in the country and the statistics are overwhelming. This law could minimize or totally stop this scheme by locals and foreigners who would attract women and children to do exotic scenes in exchange for a sum of money. Hey! who would refuse? With the status of most people of the country right now, selling their bodies and dignities in order to buy a meal is already a priority in the survival list.

I agree completely with Teddy that the Cybercrime Law version of the Philippines mostly/totally doesn’t give a **** about national defense, national security, and inter-state and foreign commerce. On the other hand, focused on stuff like the problem with internet freedom and the freedom of speech via the use of any information technology devices wherein the law does not limit to the internet alone but reaches out to the intranet and extranet of both government and private sectors.

Our lawmaking body should sincerely put some sense on their laws. They should create laws that truly benefit the public rather than their own interests. After all, all the elected senators and congressmen in the legislative branch were elected by the people, for the people, and with full emphasis on PUBLIC TRUST and SERVICE.

References / Credit to:

  • TheABSCBNNews in YouTube for the video.
  • Teddy Locsin Jr. for the comment.
  • WikiPinas for the summarized information of the law.
Awesome Adventure!



Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s