The Great Power of Great Responsibility
Rhenn Anthony S. Taguiam
The Journalese
Everyone is now to experience real-time lag, with every move monitored, every post self-censored, every share double-checked, sometimes even a Like requiring a moment's hesitation. Gags are to be suppressed, online
pranks avoided: The definition of the Internet has changed in a single day.
With RA 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, one wrong move could send us far, far away--behind bars. And if this is for the better or for the worse, it's for time to actually decide. The only thing we could do is wonder, and we better should. Even our own superheroes were once pinned to the test, and the Earth's Mightiest Heroes unfortunately ran out of time.
Deep in the recesses of Marvel comics' history was an earth-shaking Civil War, and who would have thought that a simple Superhuman Registration Act rendered personal relationships useless? Why should it?
How could the Cybercrime Prevention Act, so simple it merely encompasses the entirety of the Internet, create so much rage and chaos? In the first place, it can never so simple.
The Superhuman Registration Act (SRA), in its simplicity, effectively enforced the mandatory registration of superpowered individuals to the government. Its critics and supporters, human and superhuman alike, were split
into arguing for the rights of every superpowered human compared to the rights of the entire society.
Originally opposed by Iron Man, Tony Stark had led the charge against its implementation, causing massive uproar and even a split in the whole superhuman society. Sounds familiar?
Years ago, the SRA was a topic more commonly debated by comic-book geeks and fans. Now, every netizen is shook by the passing of a similar law in the real world, the Cybercrime Prevention Act.
The Cybercrime Prevention Act, or Cybercrime Law, seeks to reinforce the government's grip the government in the realm of cyberspace. This could effectively enhance the response time of the government to problems of involving Filipinos on the Internet, and could help protect Filipinos from potential cyber threats. And Spider-Man has a point.
The problem is, Peter says, that after registration always comes regulation.
The Journalese
Everyone is now to experience real-time lag, with every move monitored, every post self-censored, every share double-checked, sometimes even a Like requiring a moment's hesitation. Gags are to be suppressed, online
pranks avoided: The definition of the Internet has changed in a single day.
With RA 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, one wrong move could send us far, far away--behind bars. And if this is for the better or for the worse, it's for time to actually decide. The only thing we could do is wonder, and we better should. Even our own superheroes were once pinned to the test, and the Earth's Mightiest Heroes unfortunately ran out of time.
Deep in the recesses of Marvel comics' history was an earth-shaking Civil War, and who would have thought that a simple Superhuman Registration Act rendered personal relationships useless? Why should it?
How could the Cybercrime Prevention Act, so simple it merely encompasses the entirety of the Internet, create so much rage and chaos? In the first place, it can never so simple.
The Superhuman Registration Act (SRA), in its simplicity, effectively enforced the mandatory registration of superpowered individuals to the government. Its critics and supporters, human and superhuman alike, were split
into arguing for the rights of every superpowered human compared to the rights of the entire society.
Originally opposed by Iron Man, Tony Stark had led the charge against its implementation, causing massive uproar and even a split in the whole superhuman society. Sounds familiar?
Years ago, the SRA was a topic more commonly debated by comic-book geeks and fans. Now, every netizen is shook by the passing of a similar law in the real world, the Cybercrime Prevention Act.
The Cybercrime Prevention Act, or Cybercrime Law, seeks to reinforce the government's grip the government in the realm of cyberspace. This could effectively enhance the response time of the government to problems of involving Filipinos on the Internet, and could help protect Filipinos from potential cyber threats. And Spider-Man has a point.
The problem is, Peter says, that after registration always comes regulation.
And this is one big problem. Surprisingly, the government has found a way to hit two birds in one stone—protect a citizen’s rights against cyber abusers and at the same time enforce responsible surfing to a regular netizen using a
unified Internet-related law. For the government, RA 10175 reinforces Internet ethics and leads a path to responsible netizenry, and is made to address Internet-related crimes.
unified Internet-related law. For the government, RA 10175 reinforces Internet ethics and leads a path to responsible netizenry, and is made to address Internet-related crimes.
The Internet has been released to the public as something free—something one could access provided they have
the means to. This, of course, has engendered developing roles and responsibilities for Internet users around the world. These were ethics that were not officially written in constitutions, but were merely followed out of respect.
Legislators justify the law amid opposition and reason that the country needs such a law, because no one simply cares to protect persons from others who do not respect them as they should online. For some, adapting to a new system is hard because we have already been used to something else. But there are those who ask, where does the Cybercrime law draw the line? And this espouses calls for people to caution against another Martial Law, albeit online.
In context, a family problem normally has to be solved by its members, not by their neighbors. In a similar sense, havoc Magneto causes is normally solved by the X-Men, only involving others when necessary. The Cybercrime Prevention Law, a lot would say, might’ve just made the situation worse. And the people have a point.
the means to. This, of course, has engendered developing roles and responsibilities for Internet users around the world. These were ethics that were not officially written in constitutions, but were merely followed out of respect.
Legislators justify the law amid opposition and reason that the country needs such a law, because no one simply cares to protect persons from others who do not respect them as they should online. For some, adapting to a new system is hard because we have already been used to something else. But there are those who ask, where does the Cybercrime law draw the line? And this espouses calls for people to caution against another Martial Law, albeit online.
In context, a family problem normally has to be solved by its members, not by their neighbors. In a similar sense, havoc Magneto causes is normally solved by the X-Men, only involving others when necessary. The Cybercrime Prevention Law, a lot would say, might’ve just made the situation worse. And the people have a point.
Another problem netizens have is that the Cybercrime Prevention Law might have provided excessive power to an ordinary citizen. Anyone could sue someone because of an offending statement, even if it is meant as a joke or just plain off.
Some even say that the corruptly rich could use the law as a means to eliminate defenseless enemies, friends and allies could get trust broken into many tiny pieces just because of a simple misunderstanding.
Captain America and Iron Man, two very close friends, nearly fought each other to the death just because of different views. Similarly, because of a simple mistake, the usual friendly atmosphere of the Internet could be plunged into chaos.
The legalization of the Cybercrime Prevention Act had an adverse effect on the populace. To avoid these kinds of conflicts, then, netizens might think it is better to sit down and shut up instead of going online at all.
Unfortunately, this eliminates the very reason the Internet
exists and this is why people have been describing the Cybercrime Prevention Act as “violating our human rights."
Last year, the United Nations have declared our access to the Internet a basic human right and our libel laws too strict. A lot of critics, even some politicians, say that the RA 10175 might have crossed the line. This is why the issue on the decriminalization of
libel is underway.
Still, problems, criticisms and petitions for revision aside, the Cybercrime Prevention Law is now institutionalized, and it is saying that better be careful of our next move. The best lesson that Civil War taught its readers might be to check whatever it is we are about to do—because one screw-up can ruin everything.
Some even say that the corruptly rich could use the law as a means to eliminate defenseless enemies, friends and allies could get trust broken into many tiny pieces just because of a simple misunderstanding.
Captain America and Iron Man, two very close friends, nearly fought each other to the death just because of different views. Similarly, because of a simple mistake, the usual friendly atmosphere of the Internet could be plunged into chaos.
The legalization of the Cybercrime Prevention Act had an adverse effect on the populace. To avoid these kinds of conflicts, then, netizens might think it is better to sit down and shut up instead of going online at all.
Unfortunately, this eliminates the very reason the Internet
exists and this is why people have been describing the Cybercrime Prevention Act as “violating our human rights."
Last year, the United Nations have declared our access to the Internet a basic human right and our libel laws too strict. A lot of critics, even some politicians, say that the RA 10175 might have crossed the line. This is why the issue on the decriminalization of
libel is underway.
Still, problems, criticisms and petitions for revision aside, the Cybercrime Prevention Law is now institutionalized, and it is saying that better be careful of our next move. The best lesson that Civil War taught its readers might be to check whatever it is we are about to do—because one screw-up can ruin everything.
For some legislators, Internet users could practice the discipline of not marring someone's reputation with false statements, but the people believe that this should not keep them from being vigilant and from airing their opinions on issues. Various groups have also pointed out that the government shoul not stifle online discussion and healthy criticism nor make "libel" as justification to violate the right to privacy.
This shows that they both have to know where to draw the line clearly, or the people could end up abusing their freedoms and the government violating rights, especially with UN declaration on our "excessive" libel laws. If society does not, then Iron Man speaks of the worst:
This shows that they both have to know where to draw the line clearly, or the people could end up abusing their freedoms and the government violating rights, especially with UN declaration on our "excessive" libel laws. If society does not, then Iron Man speaks of the worst:
J
Sources:
The New Avengers: Illuminati
Brian Michael Bendis (Writer)
Alex Maleev (Artist)
The Amazing Spider-Man 531
J. Michael Straczynski (Writer)
Tyler Kirkham (Penciler)
Sources:
The New Avengers: Illuminati
Brian Michael Bendis (Writer)
Alex Maleev (Artist)
The Amazing Spider-Man 531
J. Michael Straczynski (Writer)
Tyler Kirkham (Penciler)