MERGED: All about Anti-Cybercrime Law, related issues and developments

[jake_smack11]

---

[Hammer_and_Sickle]

kini baya si sotto, nasangit ni siya ug drug scandal sauna

WOTL: Sottohin Mo - YouTube

[cliff_drew]

I think there is one way to keep that from happening: Make forum users take responsibility of their posts.
I use my real name simply because I don't acknowledge online anonymity. I knew one day our actions would come back to us, I just didn't know it was through government intervention.

Siguro if we were to expose our identity online, we'd be more cautious of our actions. Kaning mga Internet warriors, makita' kung tinuod ning isog LOL. Or maybe if our Istorya.net accounts were hooked up with our Facebook accounts, it would at least decrease the likeliness of going rogue online.

Making users responsible can be made possible even without this law. This site has in-house rules. It is just matter of dedication and discipline from each members.

[cliff_drew]

Criticism ≠ libel

I know from a technical POV. But who determines if the criticism does not constitute a libelous content? Remember prima facie.

[Ronzkie23]

[Ronzkie23]

[elord]

OT: nahan unta ko mo like sa post above me kay sigi ko katawa dire pero dili lang ko basi nya ma tingkagol ko dili bya ko kabalo mo sayaw.

[tingkagol]

But the whole point of this law, I believe, is the fact that people are abusing that privilege of anonymity. It is a good thing, until it is abused. Threats are easy to throw. You suddenly become tough. You easily talk sh!t about people. Daghan nang trolls. Identity theft cannot be blamed to the Internet, but to that person subjected to it. If all you have on the Internet is your name, what can go wrong? (< that's a little ignorant though please let me know what I might be missing)

Just because a few are abusing anonymity doesn't mean everyone should give up theirs.

Also, do you really believe "talking sh!t" and "trolling" on the internet should be punishable by law? Especially ones that are clearly troll-ish and not credible enough for any sane person to regard as "truth"?

In my opinion, libel should only be charged to someone who has:
1. lied about something someone did or did not do.
2. done so with the clear intention of maligning the subject.

Apparently, Philippine law has a different interpretation of "libel" since one can get charged even if the statements made were TRUE. (someone posted about it a few pages back)

[guterkerl]

Making users responsible can be made possible even without this law. This site has in-house rules. It is just matter of dedication and discipline from each members.

Having forum rules is a moot point. I have yet to see ANY forum that prohibits users from posting libellous comments.

[peewee_toot]

bantay mo anang naa sa ibabaw ky hapit na na maglagot. kita ka sa iyang kamot? mo gawas na dayun na ang 3 ka sharp blades. kita na jud tang wolverine sa X-men. nganga jud ta pareha sa picture nga naa sa ubos. LOL!

sottohin mo!