Slashdot Mirror


Philippines' Cybercrime Law Makes SOPA Look Reasonable

silentbrad writes with this report from Forbes: "The dark days of SOPA and PIPA are behind the U.S., 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. Yes, there's the usual hacking, cracking, identity theft and spamming, which most of us can agree should be illegal. But there's also cybersex, pornography, file-sharing (SOPA's main target), and the most controversial provision, online libel." At least it doesn't mention blasphemy.

16 of 103 comments (clear)

  1. And now... by cyrano.mac · · Score: 5, Funny

    Will the USA extradite?

  2. Not so good by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Philippines don't look so good as a place to locate a data haven anymore.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Not so good by Xest · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's the usual sensationalism. The BBC published an article with a similar headline the other day, except more than anything the cybersex the BBC was referring to was not really cybersex as people classically know it - in other words, this story seems to stem from the fact the BBC reporter got a little confused about everything.

      No, the law in question states that the type of online sex that is banned is that which is for profit or other similar gain. The reason for the law is because the Philippines has a major problem with children being forced into online sex shows and so forth.

      That means it's got fuck all to do with two people typing or camming intimitately to each other in a private capacity. It's entirely about commercial for-profit shows.

      This isn't to defend the law, but to add a bit of clarity to the discussion. When looked at in context it's no worse than for example, the UK's digital economy act and similar that have outlawed cartoon porn, and home made BDSM/rape fantasy shit even when distributed in a not-for profit manner.

    2. Re:Not so good by Anonymice · · Score: 2

      Mod parent up.

      The BBC article he's referring to is here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19659801
      ...and more specifically on the topic, here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12597245

    3. Re:Not so good by wisnoskij · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You cannot ban all commercial sex online because some ass***s force children to do commercial sex shows. If you wanted to ban that you would just ban children doing sex shows. Now the whole industry has to go underground, and then there is no reason not to continue the children shows.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
  3. Problem Solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Now that all of these bad things are illegal, nobody will ever do it again.

  4. hacking, cracking by cockroach2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not sure that "most of us can agree [that these] should be illegal". Trying to outlaw that is usually accompanied by banning essential security tools like nmap, wireshark etc., tools that some of us actually need for "peaceful" purposes.

  5. Filipinos are protesting this. by Tibore+Escalante · · Score: 5, Informative

    Before anyone overreacts, keep in mind that this is being challenged. Multiple petitioners have filed against it: http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/276301/scitech/technology/petitioners-seek-tro-vs-cybercrime-prevention-act http://www.manilatimes.net/index.php/news/top-stories/32459-more-petitions-vs-cybercrime-law-filed).

    Also, the country's journalism community was part of that filing: http://www.sunstar.com.ph/breaking-news/2012/10/03/journalists-rights-center-file-opposition-cybercrime-law-246154

    Some legislators have voiced concerns about it: http://www.sunstar.com.ph/davao/local-news/2012/10/03/davao-lawyers-want-cybercrime-law-reviewed-246097 http://www.sunstar.com.ph/cebu/local-news/2012/10/02/cebuano-legislators-back-calls-amend-cybercrime-law-245887

    And if they're on the ball, the nation's version of the ACLU - the Civil Liberties Union of the Philippines - will be weighing in soon. The point is that this is not a done deal yet. There's no question that it's an ugly blow, but very few citizens trust the Filipino government with sweeping powers. The only question is what the protesters/challengers endurance is in fighting it.

  6. Re:Libel is controversial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Probably because it depends on who is deciding what is libel and what is not. Most likely it will be misused by rich people being accused of corruption getting their accusers into jail because 'nothing has been proven'.

  7. Anti-troll legislation by concealment · · Score: 3, Funny

    First they came for the trolls...

  8. Re:Libel is controversial? by junior.kun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Truth is in the eye of the beholder. What is means is that if I attack someone's politics, they can throw me in jail by saying its libel. Have you never heard of "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say "

  9. Re:Libel is controversial? by fustakrakich · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because liars aren't the problem. The believers are. A leader is never the problem. The followers always are. In every instance that you want to attack speech, you are all making the same mistake of not going after the listener instead. Case closed.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  10. Re:Cybersex? by Fulminata · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Philippines is one of the last countries in the world where the Catholic Church has a dominant voice in politics, so laws attempting to enforce morality are a fairly common thing. For example, it's one of the only countries in the world where divorce is illegal. As a result, many couples today either don't get married in the first place, or else are in a long term live-in relationship with someone while still being married to someone else.

    Cybersex in the Philippines was already legally considered to be a form of prostitution before this law was passed. Now it would appear that the punishment for getting naked on a webcam will be harsher than that for having actual sex for pay, which will only serve to drive women away from the relatively safe jobs involving cybersex and into the more dangerous work of actual prostitution.

    Just how much more severe is the punishment for cybersex? The fine for prostitution is 200 to 2,000 pesos. The fine for cybersex is 200,000 to 1,000,000 pesos. Average annual family income in the Philippines is 206,000 pesos as of 2009.

  11. Please don't speak for me. by Scutter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yes, there's the usual hacking, cracking, identity theft and spamming, which most of us can agree should be illegal.

    I can't agree on that at all, and especially with overly-broad terms like "hacking" (or even "spamming"). What is "spamming"? Is that any UCE or is that just penis enlargement pills? Because there's lots and lots and LOTS of perfectly legitimate commercial e-mail that one person would consider spam and another person doesn't.

    Hacking? What is hacking? Security research? Breaking into systems? What about altering systems that I own to do things they weren't intended to do?

    You don't speak for me, Forbes, so your blatant editorializing is not appreciated.

    --

    "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
  12. Re:Libel is controversial? by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 2

    Because liars aren't the problem. The believers are. A leader is never the problem. The followers always are. In every instance that you want to attack speech, you are all making the same mistake of not going after the listener instead. Case closed.

    Have you ever had vindictive people actively trying to destroy your relationships and your reputation with lies? I have, in both the professional and personal realms of life, and I'm still suffering the consequences of people I don't even know thinking they know me when they don't. What would you suggest is the appropriate response?

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth
  13. Re:Stop repeating the MPAA's propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    SLASHDOT, FOR FUCKS SAKE HOW IS THIS INFORMATIVE? There's no information here. Do you have proof? Any?