"Congress approves Anti Cybercrime Bill HB 5808" - are we safer or worst for it?

[ghosthunter]

Sir GH, a little off topic. This reminded me of a thread before specifically the INC thread which has been locked or better yet it was dissolved. Na sobrahan ata sa freedom of speech doon?

You can have your right to freedom of speech... but Tsikot.com is a private entity with it's moderators to control the peace & order in the forums. At the end, the mods or the admin has the last call to either let it exist or to pull the plug on certain threads.

[Bin Diesel]

Muntanga yang cybercrime law na yan. Paano kapag may gumawa lang ng account tapos pangalan mo ginamit edi ikaw na huhulihin?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

yes mukhang tanga talaga kagaya nung nag insert ng libel diyan sa cybercrime law.

[falken]

Eto, nagdedeny na siya may kagagawan.

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/-depth/09...-me-sotto-says

[ghosthunter]

Sotto: What’s wrong with having libel law in cyber space?
By Norman Bordadora
Philippine Daily Inquirer
1:16 am | Sunday, September 23rd, 2012

He doesn’t get it.

“I can’t see the logic,” said Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III when asked to react to media protests regarding the dangers and possible unconstitutionality of extending libel laws to new social media in the new Cybercrime Prevention Act.

“If mainstream media are prevented by law from cursing and engaging in character assassination, why should those in the social media and in the Internet be exempted from such accountability,” said Sotto, who had proposed the extension of the Act’s coverage to include libel.

“What’s so special about (mainstream journalists) that they have those prohibitions, and that they (social media bloggers) don’t?” Sotto had insisted in a recent interview.

Always been a crime

Sotto had complained of being the victim of “cyber bullying” after he was pilloried in social media for allegedly “plagiarizing” online blogs in support of his objections to the reproductive health (RH) bill.

“All the crimes punishable under the Revised Penal Code are included. Now just because they (bloggers) are now accountable under the law on libel, they are again angry with me? Libel has always been a crime,” Sotto told reporters before the start of a Senate session last week.

“The regular media can’t curse and can’t engage in character assassination because they have accountability. Those in the social media don’t have that… Now that they are already covered, pumapalag sila (they are protesting)? I can’t see the logic.”

The Cybercrime Prevention

Act ostensibly aims to go after cyberfraud and cyber****ography. However, media commentaries point out that when it comes to libel, the complexities of interactive online media would make the application of the law highly controversial.

Police, NBI problem

Asked to comment on the charge that another provision, the taking down of websites, was a form of prior restraint in violation of the Constitution, Sotto said “That’s already the problem in formulating the implementing rules and regulations. We didn’t place that kind of provision… That’s already the problem of the (police) and the National Bureau of Investigation. That’s their problem.”

Sen. Teofisto Guingona III, who voted against the bill when it was passed in the Senate, agreed that the application of libel laws to the online community was “problematic.” It could lead to violations of the constitutional prohibition on prior restraint to free speech.

“This is because in the case of online communities, people are encouraged to actually participate (make comments, retweet, repost on Facebook),” Guingona said in a statement. With the cybercrime law, editors and owners of these sites will be forced to lock down their websites and prevent people from commenting, Guingona said.

Act of prior restraint

“I believe that editors can regulate the works of their writers but if you gag the general public, surely the constitutional right to freedom of expression is threatened,” Guingona said.

“This act is a prior restraint on freedom of expression and freedom of speech. This law sets us back. We cannot legislate morality. The Spanish inquisition has long been disbanded. I do not know why we are reviving it today,” he added.

source: Sotto: What


Sarap sakalin...

[ghosthunter]

[Bin Diesel]

sana naman last na niya yan at wag na iboto ng mga tao.

[CoDer]

Ah basta ang Australia eh part ng Asia!

Escalera boy iskul bukol.

[ghosthunter]

Posted something "offensive" many years ago?.. you still can be sued for online libel today.

LINK: http://www.yugatech.com/curious/dele...nuing-offense/

[ZENMasterTYL]

may pagasa pa para sa mga bloggers at netizens

MANILA, Philippines—Senator Teofisto Guingona on Thursday joined the call to declare as unconstitutional Republic Act 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.

At a press conference, Guingona said while there is a need for a cybercrime preention act, the law that was passed contains provisions that violate the 1987 Constitution.

He said the recently passed law contains confusing and vague provisions that suppress the citizens’ right to freedom of speech and expression.

“Without a clear definition of the crime of libel and the persons liable, virtually, any person can now be charged with a crime even if you just like, retweet or comment on an online update or blogpost containing criticisms,” Guingona said.

Guingona added that the new law violates the rule on double jeopardy because a person can be prosecuted for the same offense under the Cybercrime Prevention Act and the Revised Penal Code.

Guingona will file his petition with the Supreme Court today (Thursday).

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/278368/...nator-guingona

[niky]

Well... it's most likely the SC will strike the entire law down.

All because someone in the Senate inserted a clause that was not necessary and not part of the original bill.