'CyberCrime Law Essay\r'

'The Cybercrime Law of the Philippines ( samewise k this instantn as the Cybercrime bar pr crookice of 2012 or Republic exercise 10175) is a saucilyly-gestural routine that gives us a trus tworthy legal tool to engagement cybercrime. A breach definition is granted by a tender release from the Senate, a part of which says, â€Å"The Cybercrime Pr stock-stilltion human action lays down a comprehensive legal material for the detection, investigation, and suppression of cybercrimes…” The Republic Act No. 10175, likewise k promptlyn as the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, is an act that de amercements and punishes cybercrime to close out and suppress its pro disembodied spiritration. It aims to effectively prevent and combat mis mathematical function, ab intent and illegal access of the earnings by facilitating their detection, investigation, arrest and prosecution at both the domesticated and supranational levels, and by providing arrangements for fast an d re apt international cooperation. To formulate and implement a national cyber shelter plan, a Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center (CICC) leave behind be created below the administrative supervision of the situation of the chair soul.\r\nThis Act is authored by 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). some other(a) authors of the bill ar 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, paratrooperñaque 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);\r\nTomas 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. capital of Seychelles Sy-Alvarado (1st District, Bula potful) The youngly approved police force aimed at combating cybercrimes has been met with intricate reactions from the public and private sectors. This Prevention Act is a boon for local firms, particularly in the education technology sector, business stems said. Other groups immoralwhile warned that the new constabulary threatens Filipinos’ exemption of expression as considerably as freedom of information. But what does the anti-cybercrime justice mean for the ordinary Filipino citizen? Most if non completely of the offenses in the law are already crimes penal under the revise penal Code.\r\nCommenting on the new law, Information and Communications Technology Association of the Philippines (ITAP) President Dondi Mapa said: â€Å"It’s not a subject area of identifying new crimes but besides recognizing that existing crimes now happen in a new environment.” The anti-cybercrime act itself notes under its declaration of policy that it is the state’s mechanism to adopt â€Å"sufficient powers to effectively prevent and combat such offenses by facilitating their detection, investigation, and prosecution.”\r\nThe law categorizes cybercrimes into cardinal: (1) offenses everyplace against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information processing dodging entropy and organisations; (2) information processing arrangement-related; or (3) content-related offenses. Illegal access to computer systems, illegal interception of entropy, data or system term of enlistment, as well as mis expend or computer systems or data belong in the first category. Also in the same group is â€Å"cyber-squatting,” which involves the acquisition of a expanse bring in â€Å"in bad creed to profit, mislead, destruct reputation, and deprive others from registering the same.” In case of businesses, these may embroil the use of a domain name â€Å"similar, identical, or conf usely similar” to registered trademarks.\r\nBut businesses are not the only locates of â€Å"cyber-squatters,” as the law also covers the use of personal names â€Å"identical or in either way similar with the name of a person other than the registrant.” Computer-related offenses, meanwhile, include the input, alteration or stinger of any computer data with the attentive of counterfeit, fraud or identity theft. On the other hand, cybersex, defined under the law as the wilful engagement in online sexual activities, is included in content-related offenses. Child pornography is other content-related offense in the law. The anti-cybercrime act notes that punishment to child pornography attached through a computer system ordain be one level higher than the sanctions in the Anti-Child soot Act. Also named a content-related offense is the direct of unsolicited communication which advertise or sell products or services.\r\nPunishable acts\r\nOffenses punishable under Cybercrime Prevention Act are:\r\n* Offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems 1. Illegal access to the whole or any part of a computer system withou t rights 2. Illegal interception of any non-public transmission of computer data to, from, or within a computer system 3. Data interference such as alteration, damaging, deletion or deterioration of data without rights, including the introduction or transmission of viruses 4. System (computer or computer network) interference\r\n5. 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 6. Misuse of devices\r\n* Computer-related offenses\r\n1. Computer-related forgery (input, alteration, or deletion of data) without rights resulting in in bona fide data, with the conception that it be considered or acted upon for legal purposes as if it were authentic 2. Computer-related fraud (input, alteration, or deletion of data or interference in the functioning of a computer system) causing damage 3. Computer-related identity theft or the acquisition, use, misuse, transfer, possessi on, alteration or deletion of the identifying information of another person * Content-related offenses\r\n1. 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 2. Child pornography or the felonious acts as defined and punishable by Republic Act No. 9775 or the Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009 committed through a computer system 3. unsolicited commercial communications which seek to advertise, sell, or twist for sale products and services 4. Libel or unlawful acts as defined in Article 355 of the rewrite Penal Code * Others\r\n1. Aiding or abetting in the focal point of cybercrime\r\n2. Attempt in the commission of cybercrime\r\nPenalties\r\n* Any person rear illegal of committing cybercrime acts enumerated in the first two groups shall be punish with prisons mayor, or share of sise age and one day to twelve12 years in prison, or a fine of at least(prenominal ) PHP 200,000 up to PHP 500,000. * A person shew blameworthy 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 harmonise to the damage incurred, or both. * A person found guilty of committing cybersex shall be punished with prisons mayor, or serving of half a dozen years and one day to 12 years in prison, or a fine of at least PHP 200,000 but not particular(a) 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.\r\n* A person found guilty of committing unsolicited commercial communications shall be punished with arrest 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 fou nd 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. Unfortunately, questions remain over the constitutionality of the law. It doesn’t help that in that respect are people who unsounded think they can use the law, especially a judge in Nueva Vizcaya who had an anti-mining protestor jailed over the priming of cyber defame, one of the crimes made punishable by the polemical act. But what â€Å"crimes” specifically does the suspended law target? Someone asked me for a breakdown of what is (or isn’t allowed) by the Cybercrime Law. Here’s a layman’s version of what the law entails, which I call: The 10 Commandments of the Cybercrime Law of the Philippines.\r\n1. You shall only say nice things on the Internetâ€This is the main fault attributed to the law : It’s a infraction of the Freedom of Expression with its cyber libel provision. Thanks to this provision inserted â€Å"without knowledge” by nigh of the lawmakers, if you say something bad against certain people on the Internet, you can be charged in court. What’s more, according to Bayan Muna Representative Teddy Casiño, this not only applies to statements you make on the Internet but also on smartphones or with any device you use to access the Internet. So yes, this covers texting. 2. You cannot tell the Truth, whether joking or seriously, if it hurts someoneâ€In relation to the 1st Commandment, disregardless if you state a fact or you use satire or sarcasm or even say something in a joking beef up on the ‘net, you can still be held liable for cyber libel for impugning against another person’s suppositional dignity as per the anti-libel law of the Revised Penal Code.\r\n3. What you say can be held against you forever†tally to on line legal expert Atty. JJ Disini, because of the nature of your online posts, anything you posted years ago that are still live immediately can be still held against you in a court of law. 4. What you like can also be held against youâ€In relation to the 3rd Commandment, liking a FB post can be considered as abetting libel. Retweeting a probably libelous tweet might be covered here as well so be warned. 5. The presidency now has the power to withdraw down your Internetâ€Thanks to the power given by the law, the Department of butice, together with its arms in the internal Bureau of Investigation and the Philippine National Police have the power to order the stoppage of Web sites if there is prima facie evidence of violation of the lawâ€even without a court warrant. 6. Your Internet is required to compile evidence against youâ€In relation to the 5th Commandment, Internet service providers are now required to keep their data for six months later on which they can be forced to keep it for six more months if authorities request it.\r\n7. You can be punished more harshly for online crimes than for real life crimesâ€Thanks to the wording of the law, punishment for those charged with this law is â€Å"one degree higher” than that provided for in the Revised Penal Code. Because of this, if you’re charged with online libel, you can be fined a million bucks or spend 12 months in jail. 8. You must trustfulness the government to do the right thing in implementing the lawâ€The government refuses to budge on this law, saying the public should trust them to come up with the proper Implementing Rules and Regulation to underwrite that there won’t be abuses of the law despite the vague wording. This after the some of the lawmakers who signed the law admitted they had no idea what had gone into the law.\r\n9. The law shall apply to all Filipinos wherever they areâ€Just because you think you’re not in the Philippines, you can escape jurisdiction from this Philippine law. Think again: this law has universal jurisdiction. Even your electronic devices that are situated (or even partly) in the Philippines are under jurisdiction under this law. 10. The law doesn’t unfeignedly nourish youâ€Supposedly it goes after identity-theft. However, because of the heavy victual against online libel, a hacker can take over your account and post libelous stuff, and then cast out. From the safety of distance, he can watch the fireworks aviate as the government screws you over. So yes, it can protect industries and the rich and powerful, just not you. Of course there are other issues over this law.\r\nOne is that the home for its cyber libel provision is the antiquated anti-libel law in the Philippines (which the United Nations pointedly reiterates as violating respect for freedom of expression). And there lies the irony of this law: In attempt to implement tighter data security and prevent cybercrime law s like cybersex and child pornography in the country, the Philippines are using vague language like a maul to go after cybercriminals. Unfortunately, the government doesn’t front to have any idea of the power of manner of speakingâ€whether specific or vagueâ€and how dangerous they can become when implemented as laws.\r\n'