My wife compiled some links regarding the Cyber Crime Law while we did research on the subject. Might be helpful for people who want the information all in one place. Links to sources provided.
Read Republic Act No. 10175, also known as the Cyber Crime Prevention Law:
Black Tuesday: The event that encouraged protesters to rally outside Supreme Court while the bill was supposed to be deliberated, and asked Facebook supporters and websites to black out their profiles:
NO TRO FROM SC: Efforts to delay the law becoming real failed as the Supreme Court issued no Temporary Restraining Order.
Despite the seven different and separate complaints against it, the implementation of the controversial Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 will still push through as scheduled.This was after the Supreme Court on Tuesday decided not to take a vote on whether to grant several petitioners request to issue a temporary restraining order against Republic Act 10175 because a number of justices skipped the regular weekly en banc session.“The SC did not issue a TRO in the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 petitions which are up for further study,” said SC spokesperspn Ma. Victoria Gleoresty Guerra in a statement sent to media in the afternoon.
The en banc decided to take up the matter in next week’s full court session instead.
LIBEL CLAUSE: New Law has a generic but potentially stifling libel clause
10 Terrifying Things About the Cybercrime Prevention Law
1. It only wants to hear nice things. “Your tweet about the barangay captain who loves San Miguel more than his job? That could be classified as libel”
2. It champions the dead by asking the living to shut up.“You would also be committing a crime if you “blacken the memory of one who is dead.” So, what happens if the person who died was a criminal who molested kids, backed a law that resulted in thousands of people being tortured, or killed journalists”
3. It’s so “special” that it hurts. “So, even if you’re kidding around by using somebody’s name as a verb or noun to signify not-too-admirable acts (Noynoying, Sottomy, etc), you could get arrested.“
4. It’s a time traveler. “So, that scathing post about your ex that you put up way back in 2004? You could end up going to jail for that.”
5. It’s outdated.“The Philippines’ libel law, enacted during the American colonial period and intended mainly to stifle dissent, continues to consider the offense a criminal act. Media organizations contend the law on libel has most often been used by people in power to harass journalists and muzzle critical reportage.”
6. It won’t like you liking what it doesn’t like.“Those who play a part in unwittingly or willfully encouraging the spread of libelous content shall be charged for abetting libel. That means the act of clicking the “Like” button of Facebook or retweeting posts on Twitter may be tagged as unlawful as well.”
7. It’s prudish.“The willful engagement, maintenance, control, or operation, directly or indirectly, of any lascivious exhibition of sexual organs or sexual activity, with the aid of a computer system, for favor or consideration.” However, what if cybersex is done by two consenting adults? If a woman sends a picture of herself eating ice cream in a suggestive manner to her boyfriend, will she be sent to jail if someone rats her out?”
8. It shits on wit. “You don’t have to directly call someone a liar and a thief to get sued for libel. It’s enough to suggest it or state it sarcastically—as long as you do so in a public manner like posting on the Internet.”
9. It won’t play fair.“No court intervention is needed, the DOJ can go right ahead and compel you to stop publishing your posts.”
10. It’s got killer penalties. (read entire article and what those 10 things mean here)
“Senator Tito Sotto proudly owned up to the fact that he was responsible for inserting the libel clause into the law. Senator Chiz Escudero called the insertion a “mistake” and has said that he’ll move to have the law repealed. Meanwhile, Senator TG Guingona (along with the other senators who didn’t back the law) continues to be against the law. For its part, Malacañang said President Noynoy Aquino thoroughly reviewed the law before he affixed his signature to it—a fact which strikes some people as strange.
For the record, the following senators voted to pass the law:
- Sen. Tito Sotto
- Sen. Bong Revilla
- Sen. Manny Villar
- Sen. Lito Lapid
- Sen. Koko Pimentel
- Sen. Jinggoy Estrada
- Sen. Loren Legarda
- Sen. Chiz Escudero
- Sen. Ping Lacson
- Sen. Gringo Honasan
- Sen. Pia Cayetano
- Sen. Bongbong Marcos
- Sen. Ralph Recto
NEW SITES TO PRESSURE LAWMAKERS: Philippine Internet Freedom Alliance and The New Media came out with another site: Internet Freedom (www.internetfreedom.ph).
Digital marketing professional and blogger Carlo Ople said in an online interview, “We want to pressure Senators to amend/repeal the Cybercrime Law.”The site is an interactive portal of senators for and against the Cybercrime Law. The webpage shows photos of Senators who voted for the Cybercrime Act to be passed. It also shows who among them publicly announced their support for the campaigns to amend or repeal the law.Ople, also editor-in-chief of The New Media, said that they will update the site once a senator said that he or she would support the campaign. As of posting, Senators TG Guingona, Francis Escudero and Pia Cayetano have already expressed their support toward these actions.Each photo of the senators is linked either to the Facebook or Twitter account of the official, “(S)o people can tweet or message them on Facebook so that they can rethink their positions,” said Ople.
‘Anonymous Philippines’ on a hacking spree
Anonymous Philippines’ message to Cybercrime Law Supporters:
–Transcript:Hello Philippines, we are anonymous.
The Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 poses serious threats to Internet freedom, the right to privacy and other essential civil liberties including the freedom of speech, expression, and the press.
As you can see, the worst thing you can do about the country is being blind to its own diseases. Are you trying to console yourself in thinking that we a good government with no flaws? No.
For too long corporations and the government believe they have the right over people, as though we were pieces of property and information to be handled for profit.
The government dont know anything about the internet. Did they really think they can control the internet with just this? Discipline the internet? Really? Did they think everyone in the internet are within their jurisdiction? Not everyone in the internet is a Filipino citizen that they can “punish”. The internet is way bigger than what they believe it is.
People from around the world will just look down on us Filipinos because of this sort of ignorance. I am so embarrassed to be under this government right now.
You want to see Anonymous rise up?
Try to shut down the message.
Try to squash the message.
Try to chill our speech.
Then you will see what Anonymous can do.
If speaking up against idiocy in government and unconstitutional amendments is a crime, then we are proud to be a cyber criminal.
We are anonymous.
We are legion.
We do not forgive.
We do not forget.
De Lima stressed plagiarism also becomes a criminal act when “committed in the form of online piracy by using the Internet or other telecommunications networks and the same act constitutes copyright infringement.”
She said these provisions in the two special penal laws are covered in the new cybercrime law.
De Lima, however, clarified they do not apply to copying of news items or any work of the government.
Apart from identifying the laws that may apply in plagiarism acts, she also gave guidelines on how to avoid criminal prosecution for plagiarism.
De Lima said the public should just avoid copying the works of others, cultivate the habit of attribution, always be vigilant in detecting cases of plagiarism and encourage institutions to adopt anti-plagiarism measures.
The advisory, De Lima added, is part of the DOJ’s “thrust to take a proactive stance and a dynamic approach in criminal justice concerns.”
De Lima issued the legal opinion over a month after Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III was accused of plagiarizing a blog entry in his speech against the Reproductive Health bill.
Sotto had already admitted he was one of the two lawmakers who inserted the libel clause in RA 10175.
While she did not directly point to Sotto, De Lima has, however, criticized certain provisions in cybercrime law that impose higher penalty for libel and give the DOJ authority to order searches and seizures similar to that of a judge.
Offenses Punishable Under New Cyber Crime Law:
Offenses punishable under Cybercrime Prevention Act are:
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 right
llegal interception of any non-public transmission of computer data to, from, within a computer system
Data interference such as alteration, damaging, deletion or deterioration of data without right, 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 right 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 cybercrime
Attempt in the commission of the cybercrime
Added/Updated Oct 3: International Criticism from Forbes
The Philippines Passes a Cybercrime Prevention Act that Makes SOPA Look Reasonable
The dark days of SOPA and PIPA are behind the US, at least temporarily as copyright tycoons reground and restrategize, attempting to come up with measures that don’t cause the entire internet to shut down in protest.
But one country has already moved ahead with similar legislation. The government of the Philippines has passed the Cybercrime Prevention Act, which on the surface, as usual, sounds perfectly well-intentioned. But when you read the actual contents of what’s been deemed “cybercrime,” SOPA’s proposed censorship sounds downright lax by comparison.