Thread 1, October 01 to 02:
Anthony: Cybercrime Law: I've reconsidered the issue and now agree with Harry Harry Santos that there's cause for concern. Initially I thought that the law's passing wouldn't matter since it would be difficult to implement.
However, as the latest PNP Facebook fiasco shows, actual implementation isn't the danger. The real danger is that it can be used to intimidate.
Nonoy Oplas makes the point that the law does contain some useful points but when bad provisions are inserted, I'd say that it makes the whole thing more dangerous.
http://www.rappler.com/nation/13410-pnp-warns-against-using-foul-word-vs-officers-online
Nonoy Oplas I think I've posted several libelous sentences in my blog alone, especially against the climate alarmists, party list groups, RH supporters, foreign aid establishment, etc.. I will wait that someone will sue me for libel. Otherwise, I think the fear and alarm over this law is much larger than the actual danger itself, pretty much like climate alarmism.
Btway Anthony, what if someone will hack your company website, put statements like "Shoot and kill libertarians, these are cold blooded individualist people" and put your face there, other people they think are libertarians. They do this simply because they don't like your ideas, or they don't like your face, or they are envious of your successful business, whatever reason. You correct the problem, they do it over and over again.
My bet is that if you have the resources and time and you can trace the perpetrators, you will sue these people using this law and put them to jail and publicize that you have put someone to jail because of repeated personal attacks on you on the web.
Paul The alarm over RA10175 is similar to climate alarmism, except that the latter has no basis, and the former actually has provisions that could be used by the political elite to intimidate enemies. Your view of the law will also depend on if you think libel and slander should be considered crimes at all.
I don't think RA10175 did anything to further affirm the ownership of servers or databases, the existence of which is not merely 'cyber,' and thus ought to be covered by existing laws against property violations.
And punishing spam is punishing a non-violation of property. We might as well imprison people who hand us brochures at the malls; these are unsolicited offers after all.
