On "Cybercrime."

"Cybercrime,"--the way I understood it--is defamation or verbal harassment done on the net. It's actually just provisions or some legal branches included in Republic Act No. 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act that some are so outraged about. To be legally imposed the day after tomorrow, it's bound to heavily affect us netizens. No wonder it's all the hype online. As of today, the proposition has garnered heavy criticism and was already petitioned against, seven times. Some say it assails the purpose of Article 3 sec. 4 of the national constitution, which says a law could never be implemented if it alters a person's freedom of speech in any way.

Is passing the Cybercrime Prevention Act and its provisions healthy for the people? Does it not violate what the forefathers of our democracy fought for? Is this the government's way of putting the internet under their wing? Let's take a closer look, shall we.

The Filipino youth's concept of the Freedom of Speech is basically being able to say whatever you want to whoever you want. This concept is primitive. See, once upon a time when Filipinos lived in little communities among the mountains and were generally good natured, written laws were not a necessity, let alone provisions for freedom. But along came the Spaniards, the Japanese, and the Americans with all their religions, technologies and what not. Society changed. Drastically. Norms were not what they were anymore. Today, people spread rumors about you losing your virginity just because the boys at school seem to take a liking to you. People pick on you for being famous, for being overweight, for your political point of view, for your social class, for your surname, even for singing with auto-tune.

I think the internet is more like a new, virtual world that lawmakers are often ignorant about. Taking a peek back at the CJ Corona trial, I'm surprised how Former Supreme Court Chief Justice Cuevas and even the senate president was a little dumbfounded as to what they would call a Powerpoint presentation, on record. I think that to the internet, our legal structures and laws are obsolete and often do not apply. You can find everything online except rules and forms of government. The Cybercrime Law to me is just the law manifesting itself onto the internet; our world of absolute freedom, where we can bash hipsters for knowing what's cool before we do, where we can use gay people for cannon fodder, where we can download movies that take millions of dollars to make for free, where actions are virtual yet they count in the real world.  

Why such a negative perspective, Dave? Well, with the exception of the To Write Love On Her Arms movement (which I doubt you know about), what good does a third world citizen do on his/her spare time on the net? I think you know where I'm going with this. I am pro-cybercrime law. I am also pro-SOPA, though it's been postponed time and time again by the US government. Go ahead, hate all you want. But even with the Cybercrime Act and SOPA in effect, we are all entitled to our own opinions, are we not? This is mine: As true as the internet is an alternate, virtual universe, is the need to have a set of rules in it. No freedom is absolute, as it can be abused in all its forms. To fellow netizens, it's time we act civilized. Contrary to popular belief, the internet is not supposed to be a place of anarchy and thievery. Time to grow up. Pay for what you use, have a sense of etiquette, and make your criticisms constructive.