“WHAT WOULD BE THE PRACTICAL IMPLICATION OF THE AMENDED RA 10372 IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES “

            This Amended Republic Act 10372 which was passed and approved by the President into law on February 28, 2013, to which it has deleted some sections of the International Property Code of the Philippines, but it hailed a lot of revisions on the said law to the advantage of the IPL

            The President has signed this bill amending the Intellectual Property Code, this amendment will introduce that there would be no more limits to the entry of the copyrighted products into the country for personal use.

            The deletion of two provisions which is Sec 190 and 191, the said deletion does not mean that the amendment of the said law shall not allow the bringing into our country of the copyrighted products like books, music, recordings, discs, films or movies. The law meant that there shall be no limit to the entry of the following products, provided that such entry of products shall be for our personal use only.

            The amended law now allows religious, charitable and educational institutions to import more and more copies for as long as they are not infringing the copyrighted materials and they are not bought as pirated ones, as long as now more and more students, elementary, high school, colleges, and masterals and even ordinary people, working people, rich and poor ones may use those works.

            The amended law created the Bureau of Copyright and Other Related Rights under the Intellectual Property Office.  This Bureau shall be in charge of policy formulation, rule making, the adjudication, research and development and education.

            The amended law will also mandate the accreditation of collective management organization in which they will be in charge for the protection of the rights and financial benefits of copyright owners.  This amended law shall not therefore allow the non-commercial reproduction of copyrighted materials and works for the benefit of those hearing impaired and those persons having eyesight and reading problems.

            The amended law also made changes in the Intellectual Property Code by giving them the police power to the Intellectual Property Office here in the Philippines.  With these amendments, the government then can therefore use such power against people who does pirating, infringers and there will be a valid campaign against those pirating syndicates and infringements syndicates who shall be criminally liable against reproduction of copyrighted materials.

            The amended law does not criminalize those who are into jail breaking, or the practice of tweaking a communication gadget or cellular phones or circumventing technological measures.  Jail breaking is just an aggravating circumstance that shall increase the penalty for the crime of copyright infringement.

            Under this amended law, what is prohibited is the illegal downloading of copyrighted materials that will violate the copyright law.  Because the Intellectual Property Rights shall always remain to be private rights as to violate such right, the initial procedure shall be that there should always be a complaint from the Intellectual Property Right owner.

            Such Filipinos, like OFW’s. students, and members of the academe, shall fear nothing.  These amended laws are meant to protect the Filipino artist and creators while making such copyrighted materials and works more accessible to more Filipinos.

            Let us now make certain explanation with regards to certain questions that always arises in the course of these amended law.

1.      “Are we still allowed to import books, DVD’s and CD’s from other countries?“

The government’s view on this is that, Yes.  In fact, the amendments to the Intellectual Property Code have removed the original limitation of three copies when bringing legitimately acquired copies of copyrighted material into the country.  Only the importation of pirated or infringed material is illegal. As long as legally purchased, you can bring as many copies you want, subject to Customs regulations.

            This means that all purchases of books, DVD’s and CD’s derived from other countries brought into our country shall not constitute copyright infringement for the reason that it shall be for personal usage, or personal consumption, if the copies are more than 3 then it should be for any religious and charitable purposes.  Other than this reason like for mass production then it shall violate the copyright law.

2.      “Is the reproduction of copyrighted material for personal purposes punishable by this law? “

The governments view on this is that, NO.  Infringement on this context refers to the economic rights of the copyright owner.  So, if you transfer music from a lawfully acquired CD into a computer, then download it to a portable device for personal use, and then you didn’t commit infringement.  But if, for example, you make multiple copies of the CD to sell, then infringement occurs.

This means that if the said reproduction is for any propriety means and other than

for personal use, then the copyright owner may file an infringement in reproduction of the said CD for multiple copies, thus infringement then occurs.  Reproduction should be qualified if its permanent or temporary, no matter what the qualification then, the copyright owner may file a case for illegal reproduction since according to the provision stated above is it is within the copyright owners right to authorize or not to authorize the reproduction of his copyright material in any manner or any form. The exception to the amended law is that, it provides that if the reproduction is not for any propriety purposes or not for any means of profit, it shall be in consideration for the use in the libraries and archives may without any authorization of the copyright owner make limited number of copies of his work.  And if the said reproduction was for the reason is that where the original work, song is lost, destroyed and or rendered not usable.

3.      “Is the possession of, for example, a music file procured through infringing activity a violation of the law? “

The governments view on this is that, Only if it can be proven that the person benefiting from the music file has knowledge of the infringement, and the power and ability to control the person committing the infringement.

Under the amended law, there was no specific provision which expressly prohibits the possession of a music file procured thru infringing activity. Under Sec 22 of the said amended law provides that persons who directly uploaded some music and videos for personal use as always makes the rule in this amendment will not violate any copyright infringement.  If it shall be uploaded and reproduce for several copies and discharge to people for propriety purposes had entailed and violated the rights of the artist therefore the owner of the said song or music shall have the right to file charges to such persons infringing the said reproduction.

4.      “Is Jailbreaking or rooting my phone or device illegal?

The governments view is NO., Jailbreaking or rooting by themselves are not illegal.  However, downloading pirated material, or committing infringement with a “jailbroken” phone increases the penalty and damages imposed on the person found guilty of infringement.

Jailbreaking as per what had been discussed in the earlier topic is not illegal as

one of the features of this amended law.  But the governments view is that it is not illegal but the act of downloading pirated material is illegal, but for me this is just infringement too.  Because once our Iphone or Ipad is jailbreak then there shall always be a tendency for us to download and acquire infringed application for no fees at all, this act is illegal and therefore encourages infringement too.

            Stated in Sec 23 of the RA 10372, which provides for penalties if the defendant provided for the circumvention of the effective technology measures, removal, alterations of any electronic rights management information from a copy of a work.

            This provision with regards to the penalty imposed on the circumvention of the effective technology such as the jailbreaking of such gadgets will effectively avoid the violations on the risk of removing the security features of the gadgets in order that people shall refrain from downloading any application for free.

5.      “Are mall owners liable for infringement activities of their tenants?

As per the governments issue on this, the Mall owners are not automatically penalized for the infringing acts of their tenants.  When a mall owner or lessor finds out about an infringement activity, he or she must give notice to the tenant, then he or she will be afforded time to act upon this knowledge.  As stated above, the law requires that one must have both proven knowledge of the infringement, and the ability to control the activities of the infringing person, to be held liable.  The mall owner must also have benefited from the infringement. 

This shall be in accordance with the provisions under Sec 22 of RA 10372, which had discussed and enumerated acts that will constitute infringement.  As stated above, the mall owners shall not be liable with regards to the activities of their tenants as long as they have no knowledge at all of their illegal activity but if they are aware of any illegal activity of their tenants, they shall be held liable per se.  They shall be liable automatically if their tenants are caught with the activity of infringement.  If the said activity then was reported to the officials concerned and such officials had informed of the infringement activity o the tenants, then and then, the mall owners shall exercised its rights against the infringement activities of their tenants, and if then the mall owners or lessors therefore fails to stop the infringement activity of their tenants, then there shall be a presumption that the said mall owners knew and had knowledge of the illegal activity of infringement of the said tenant then the mall owner together with their tenant shall be held liable for infringement.  Such activities can be overturned or can be controlled as long as the mall owners have the control with regards to the conditions set forth on their contracts, regarding any activities that are not in contrast to what they had agreed upon for the then the contract shall also include the infringement or any activities stated in Sec 22 of RA 10372 in what ever contract that the mall owner and the tenant shall pursue or agrees upon to constitute a partnership and thus liabilities shall be held liable to either the mall owner, lessor and the tenant.

6.      “ Is it legal for the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) to visit businesses to  

Conduct searches based on reports, information, and complaints?

Again as per governments view on this, The IPO may visit establishments based on reports and complaints; this in itself is constitutional.  However, if the IPO intends to perform a search and seizure, it must comply with constitutional requirements, such as having a search warrant.  A warrant wouldn’t be required, however, if the IPO is accompanied by the Bureau of
Customs or the Optical Media Board.

As earlier stated, the amended law had created the Bureau of Copyright under the IPO, giving them the police power to the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines to take charge of any search and seizure in accordance to the compliance of their duty as their campaigns against any violation and complaints receive by them.  They are the ones given the job to ensure the protection of the rights and financial benefits of the copyright owners.  They are given the job to look after the protection of the people’s rights too and their campaign against pirates, infringers and criminal syndicates.

            CONCLUSION

In my own opinion, yes, there are certainly practical application of the

amended law but it remains to be seen that the infringement shall be always be no limit because there are certain provisions of the law on the said amended that are not conducive to us as end users.  Regarding Jailbreaking for example, like me, I bought all my gadgets at a very expensive costs coming all from Singapore and yet I don’t approve such Jailbreaking and Rooting are example so decompilation, the process of removing the vendor imposed limitations on tablets, mobile devices and other electronic gadgets.  Because, like us consumers, we always wanted that all the applications downloaded should have its security features, now, becoming not illegal per se opened itself in the prying eyes of those criminally infested minds of infringers and pirates.  But then, not being illegal as what others had discussed in their bloggs too, this jailbreaking and decompilation may be in violation also of what operating system terms of use and thus as what had been discussed to us by Atty Guerrero, it shall therefore void the warranty of our gadgets.  Imagine the costs of each gadgets, phones, tablets that we acquire then, if it will open its doors to people who just have to settle for free downloadable.  Another thing is that it shall be advantageous to us students because we can acquire more knowledge of the free services that we may now have because we can search anything and watch anything, download anything we want, as long as these shall be for our personal use only.  These will definitely help us students in their research for our concerns in the study of law.  Whatever this amended law has, it shall benefit each and everyone in whatever we do but it shall be practical in the sense that it shall be accessible for us to search for all the important things we need in the net without the fear of infringing the copyright rights of the owners. 

1.  RA 10372 An Act Amending Certain Provisions of RA 8293

2. “FAQ’s on the Amendments to the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines”

    At:http://www.gov.ph/2014/05/25/faqs-on-the-amendments-to-the-intellectual- -property-code-of –the-phillippines/

3. Intellectual Property Code Sec 190 (b)
4. raisa robles / Copyright owners have more rights than heinous crime victims with

Congres IP Code changes

at: 2014/05/26 

 “WHAT WOULD BE THE PRACTICAL IMPLICATION OF THE AMENDED RA 10372 IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES “

            This Amended Republic Act 10372 which was passed and approved by the President into law on February 28, 2013, to which it has deleted some sections of the International Property Code of the Philippines, but it hailed a lot of revisions on the said law to the advantage of the IPL

            The President has signed this bill amending the Intellectual Property Code, this amendment will introduce that there would be no more limits to the entry of the copyrighted products into the country for personal use.

            The deletion of two provisions which is Sec 190 and 191, the said deletion does not mean that the amendment of the said law shall not allow the bringing into our country of the copyrighted products like books, music, recordings, discs, films or movies. The law meant that there shall be no limit to the entry of the following products, provided that such entry of products shall be for our personal use only.

            The amended law now allows religious, charitable and educational institutions to import more and more copies for as long as they are not infringing the copyrighted materials and they are not bought as pirated ones, as long as now more and more students, elementary, high school, colleges, and masterals and even ordinary people, working people, rich and poor ones may use those works.

            The amended law created the Bureau of Copyright and Other Related Rights under the Intellectual Property Office.  This Bureau shall be in charge of policy formulation, rule making, the adjudication, research and development and education.

            The amended law will also mandate the accreditation of collective management organization in which they will be in charge for the protection of the rights and financial benefits of copyright owners.  This amended law shall not therefore allow the non-commercial reproduction of copyrighted materials and works for the benefit of those hearing impaired and those persons having eyesight and reading problems.

            The amended law also made changes in the Intellectual Property Code by giving them the police power to the Intellectual Property Office here in the Philippines.  With these amendments, the government then can therefore use such power against people who does pirating, infringers and there will be a valid campaign against those pirating syndicates and infringements syndicates who shall be criminally liable against reproduction of copyrighted materials.

            The amended law does not criminalize those who are into jail breaking, or the practice of tweaking a communication gadget or cellular phones or circumventing technological measures.  Jail breaking is just an aggravating circumstance that shall increase the penalty for the crime of copyright infringement.

            Under this amended law, what is prohibited is the illegal downloading of copyrighted materials that will violate the copyright law.  Because the Intellectual Property Rights shall always remain to be private rights as to violate such right, the initial procedure shall be that there should always be a complaint from the Intellectual Property Right owner.

            Such Filipinos, like OFW’s. students, and members of the academe, shall fear nothing.  These amended laws are meant to protect the Filipino artist and creators while making such copyrighted materials and works more accessible to more Filipinos.

            Let us now make certain explanation with regards to certain questions that always arises in the course of these amended law.

1.      “Are we still allowed to import books, DVD’s and CD’s from other countries?“

The government’s view on this is that, Yes.  In fact, the amendments to the Intellectual Property Code have removed the original limitation of three copies when bringing legitimately acquired copies of copyrighted material into the country.  Only the importation of pirated or infringed material is illegal. As long as legally purchased, you can bring as many copies you want, subject to Customs regulations.

            This means that all purchases of books, DVD’s and CD’s derived from other countries brought into our country shall not constitute copyright infringement for the reason that it shall be for personal usage, or personal consumption, if the copies are more than 3 then it should be for any religious and charitable purposes.  Other than this reason like for mass production then it shall violate the copyright law.

2.      “Is the reproduction of copyrighted material for personal purposes punishable by this law? “

The governments view on this is that, NO.  Infringement on this context refers to the economic rights of the copyright owner.  So, if you transfer music from a lawfully acquired CD into a computer, then download it to a portable device for personal use, and then you didn’t commit infringement.  But if, for example, you make multiple copies of the CD to sell, then infringement occurs.

This means that if the said reproduction is for any propriety means and other than

for personal use, then the copyright owner may file an infringement in reproduction of the said CD for multiple copies, thus infringement then occurs.  Reproduction should be qualified if its permanent or temporary, no matter what the qualification then, the copyright owner may file a case for illegal reproduction since according to the provision stated above is it is within the copyright owners right to authorize or not to authorize the reproduction of his copyright material in any manner or any form. The exception to the amended law is that, it provides that if the reproduction is not for any propriety purposes or not for any means of profit, it shall be in consideration for the use in the libraries and archives may without any authorization of the copyright owner make limited number of copies of his work.  And if the said reproduction was for the reason is that where the original work, song is lost, destroyed and or rendered not usable.

3.      “Is the possession of, for example, a music file procured through infringing activity a violation of the law? “

The governments view on this is that, Only if it can be proven that the person benefiting from the music file has knowledge of the infringement, and the power and ability to control the person committing the infringement.

Under the amended law, there was no specific provision which expressly prohibits the possession of a music file procured thru infringing activity. Under Sec 22 of the said amended law provides that persons who directly uploaded some music and videos for personal use as always makes the rule in this amendment will not violate any copyright infringement.  If it shall be uploaded and reproduce for several copies and discharge to people for propriety purposes had entailed and violated the rights of the artist therefore the owner of the said song or music shall have the right to file charges to such persons infringing the said reproduction.

4.      “Is Jailbreaking or rooting my phone or device illegal?

The governments view is NO., Jailbreaking or rooting by themselves are not illegal.  However, downloading pirated material, or committing infringement with a “jailbroken” phone increases the penalty and damages imposed on the person found guilty of infringement.

Jailbreaking as per what had been discussed in the earlier topic is not illegal as

one of the features of this amended law.  But the governments view is that it is not illegal but the act of downloading pirated material is illegal, but for me this is just infringement too.  Because once our Iphone or Ipad is jailbreak then there shall always be a tendency for us to download and acquire infringed application for no fees at all, this act is illegal and therefore encourages infringement too.

            Stated in Sec 23 of the RA 10372, which provides for penalties if the defendant provided for the circumvention of the effective technology measures, removal, alterations of any electronic rights management information from a copy of a work.

            This provision with regards to the penalty imposed on the circumvention of the effective technology such as the jailbreaking of such gadgets will effectively avoid the violations on the risk of removing the security features of the gadgets in order that people shall refrain from downloading any application for free.

5.      “Are mall owners liable for infringement activities of their tenants?

As per the governments issue on this, the Mall owners are not automatically penalized for the infringing acts of their tenants.  When a mall owner or lessor finds out about an infringement activity, he or she must give notice to the tenant, then he or she will be afforded time to act upon this knowledge.  As stated above, the law requires that one must have both proven knowledge of the infringement, and the ability to control the activities of the infringing person, to be held liable.  The mall owner must also have benefited from the infringement. 

This shall be in accordance with the provisions under Sec 22 of RA 10372, which had discussed and enumerated acts that will constitute infringement.  As stated above, the mall owners shall not be liable with regards to the activities of their tenants as long as they have no knowledge at all of their illegal activity but if they are aware of any illegal activity of their tenants, they shall be held liable per se.  They shall be liable automatically if their tenants are caught with the activity of infringement.  If the said activity then was reported to the officials concerned and such officials had informed of the infringement activity o the tenants, then and then, the mall owners shall exercised its rights against the infringement activities of their tenants, and if then the mall owners or lessors therefore fails to stop the infringement activity of their tenants, then there shall be a presumption that the said mall owners knew and had knowledge of the illegal activity of infringement of the said tenant then the mall owner together with their tenant shall be held liable for infringement.  Such activities can be overturned or can be controlled as long as the mall owners have the control with regards to the conditions set forth on their contracts, regarding any activities that are not in contrast to what they had agreed upon for the then the contract shall also include the infringement or any activities stated in Sec 22 of RA 10372 in what ever contract that the mall owner and the tenant shall pursue or agrees upon to constitute a partnership and thus liabilities shall be held liable to either the mall owner, lessor and the tenant.

6.      “ Is it legal for the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) to visit businesses to  

Conduct searches based on reports, information, and complaints?

Again as per governments view on this, The IPO may visit establishments based on reports and complaints; this in itself is constitutional.  However, if the IPO intends to perform a search and seizure, it must comply with constitutional requirements, such as having a search warrant.  A warrant wouldn’t be required, however, if the IPO is accompanied by the Bureau of
Customs or the Optical Media Board.

As earlier stated, the amended law had created the Bureau of Copyright under the IPO, giving them the police power to the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines to take charge of any search and seizure in accordance to the compliance of their duty as their campaigns against any violation and complaints receive by them.  They are the ones given the job to ensure the protection of the rights and financial benefits of the copyright owners.  They are given the job to look after the protection of the people’s rights too and their campaign against pirates, infringers and criminal syndicates.

            CONCLUSION

In my own opinion, yes, there are certainly practical application of the

amended law but it remains to be seen that the infringement shall be always be no limit because there are certain provisions of the law on the said amended that are not conducive to us as end users.  Regarding Jailbreaking for example, like me, I bought all my gadgets at a very expensive costs coming all from Singapore and yet I don’t approve such Jailbreaking and Rooting are example so decompilation, the process of removing the vendor imposed limitations on tablets, mobile devices and other electronic gadgets.  Because, like us consumers, we always wanted that all the applications downloaded should have its security features, now, becoming not illegal per se opened itself in the prying eyes of those criminally infested minds of infringers and pirates.  But then, not being illegal as what others had discussed in their bloggs too, this jailbreaking and decompilation may be in violation also of what operating system terms of use and thus as what had been discussed to us by Atty Guerrero, it shall therefore void the warranty of our gadgets.  Imagine the costs of each gadgets, phones, tablets that we acquire then, if it will open its doors to people who just have to settle for free downloadable.  Another thing is that it shall be advantageous to us students because we can acquire more knowledge of the free services that we may now have because we can search anything and watch anything, download anything we want, as long as these shall be for our personal use only.  These will definitely help us students in their research for our concerns in the study of law.  Whatever this amended law has, it shall benefit each and everyone in whatever we do but it shall be practical in the sense that it shall be accessible for us to search for all the important things we need in the net without the fear of infringing the copyright rights of the owners. 

1.  RA 10372 An Act Amending Certain Provisions of RA 8293

2. “FAQ’s on the Amendments to the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines”

    At:http://www.gov.ph/2014/05/25/faqs-on-the-amendments-to-the-intellectual- -property-code-of –the-phillippines/

3. Intellectual Property Code Sec 190 (b)
4. raisa robles / Copyright owners have more rights than heinous crime victims with

Congres IP Code changes

at: 2014/05/26

“MAGNA CARTA FOR INTERNET FREEDOM, HOW CAN THIS SENATE BILL NO. 53 BE IMPROVED?”

The Senate Bill No. 53 which was introduced to us to promote Internet freedom all over the Philippines.  These Bill included efforts in increasing public awareness of online censorship, developing and providing circumvention technologies that allow users access to blocked sites and censored information, protecting sites from distributed denial of service attacks, and offering Internet knowledge training for the society.

            This Bill seeks to whether and how furthering the freedom to connect and be open can empower individuals, public officials, government, government offices, private offices, to make the government accountable to its citizens and private individuals accountable to the government and its officials as well, and thus it shall integrate citizens like us into giving recommendations to improve such Bill.

            In order to make improvements and recommendations to the said Bill, we are inclined to read further the said Bill and answer these questions, we shall examined how access to information online may affect freedom of assembly, freedom of expression, and to cast our meaningful vote in the coming elections because of such internet freedom introduced in the social media forum, in which it shall define the dimensions of political freedom, and internet freedom.  Individuals we therefore shall focus who may benefit from Internet Freedom: Internet users, net users and cyber activists.

            First shall be the media, who is the primary source of information and who only occasionally browse the web and rarely check the emails unlike us the individual citizens. The second shall be the net users, which comprises those for whom the Internet has become the integral part of their daily activities, in which like us, we do regularly browse online news sources, ideas, bloggs, tweets, messages, posts daily and actively engage in online discourse. The last shall be the cyber activists, those who use the internet to mobilize people or individuals behind a specific concept, ideas, bloggs, and specific cause or to advance a specific agenda.

            The mobilizing potential of the Internet worldwide was severely curtailed some countries tight censorship of online content, in which some countries banned the use of Face book, Twitter, Google and other social medias. In this case, I found such measures of which evidencing that the Internet had visible impact on political freedoms and individual freedoms to voice out and air their views and opinions through this social medias.

            The expansion of social media and mobilization ahs sought to improve the quality of service providers. The empowerment provided by the Internet was not uniform across different segments of our societies.  More individuals were likely to respond to social pressures from better educated and more affluent individuals, while ignoring similar demands from the poorer, rural citizens, a poorer, less developed province who raised similar environmental concerns on the use of the Internet freedom.

            Perhaps, Internet freedom may lead to uneven expansion of voice, vote and assembly across the different segments of society because more influential groups will also be more likely to have connection to the Internet.

            So how can we Improve the Magna Carta for Internet Freedom now, , well , we have constantly joined the chorus of the voice of the people from all walks of  life and all over the world in calling upon all governments to uphold the right of all individuals to use information and communications technologies such as the Internet without fear of any curtailment of our rights.

            Up to this era, in the introduction of the Magna Carta for Internet Freedom, we commit to the continuing struggle for the advancement of human rights, and support the calls for the movement for Internet Freedom in the Philippines such as the SB 53 known as the MCIF or the Magna Carta for Internet Freedom:

1.       Further Study and enhancement of the Cyber crime Law

2.       Individuals, Private Citizens should have the proper participation in the manifestation and introduction in the policies which shall seek and govern or regulate the internet, to which shall safeguard the internet freedom

3.       The acknowledgement and respect of the private sector of our human rights.

These proponents shall adhere to the democracy in the introduction and acceptance

of the will of the people towards globalization and Internet freedom.  We shall be aware of the constant change in the ITC world, introduction of different social medias in which there should be proper filtering of those and such enhancement should be part of the Improvements in the MCIF. This MCIF has broadened our awareness with what was wrong with Republic Act No. 10175.  We are then brought together in our expertise in the technology, our advocacy of our civil rights and constitutional rights and what we call advocacy of freedom.

            The Magna Carta for Internet Freedom ( MCIF ) are narrow, specific and clear in what they seek to prohibit.  The MCIF restricts not only the conduct necessary to prevent the wrongdoings we want to prevent,  This shall be what to be expected, this what is required of a law, any law, that affects our most and fundamental freedoms.

            To enact a law affecting us, by the use of technology but such we are all aware o the penalties of crimes distinctive of the point.  A proponent of law on the internet and ICT cannot exist in a vacuum; the protection and promotion of rights and freedoms requires a more incorporating approach than what is defined in the Cyber crime Prevention Act.

            The Four Important Pillars of the Magna Carta for Internet Freedom are Rights, Governance, Development and Security.

            The MCIF Rights promotes civil and political rights and it upholds and promotes Constitutional guarantees in cyberspace, that the Constitution is our foundation as citizens of the Philippines and equally as Filipino netizens in cyberspace.  Our rights online are our rights offline.

            The MCIF Governance provides for ICT governance that is anchored on Constitutional principles.  It shall make it clear that the state shall take full responsibility to ensure that the governance of the Philippine ICT framework in keeping with the ideals and aspirations of the Filipino people. It shall be through transparency and open governance advocacy of the administration which is well represented in the MCIF.

           

            The MCIF Development promotes the development of ICT in the Philippines.  The use of the Internet and ICT enabled the productivity of our country and other neighboring country as well in which we deal of and it thus created more jobs for the people or citizens of the Philippines.  This Internet and ICT has boosts our connectivity to the employment growth rate and advancement.

            The MCIF Security protects the people both online and offline.  Whether the threats come from the evils of the cyberspace or any internet actors and actresses.  The MCIF provides the mandate and the means for our leaders in the society to defend each and everyone from the threats present in the cyberspace.  With the leveling of the playing field that cyberspace grants, we must also learn how to defend our country and we shall all have the ability to defend ourselves in the cyberspace battlefield.

            The MCIF takes a big leap in the recognition of our rights, our need for our country to advance economically and our need and desire for more faster and reliable ICT services as what we pay for the broadband connection, well worth of the pay we adhere, our leaders in which we voted to thrusts for transparency and open governance to all government entities specifically the Department of Justice and the Supreme Court, to keep us safe and protected from the people n the cyberspace. 

            The MCIF as per experience and what was discussed in our class by Atty Bernes Guerrero, it is true that some of our data are being used to their advantage, specifically our personal data.  The list of Improvements in which I had cited, that individually as private citizens should be protected from this data gathering most specifically when we apply for bank accounts, internet connections, cable connections, cellular connections, applications in our loans, that these shall not be given to their affiliates.  Restrict them from ensuing any promotions and then manipulating us from any unbearable questions and answers from this ignorant call center agents who kept on disturbing our peace in this world of ours.  How many times in a day would each and everyone of us received calls, messages, spasm, in our email and cell number and even our private lines offering all sorts of promotions.

            We should introduce the system that numbers or any contact details should be secured from people or affiliates of such companies like banks, government entities, private institutions, so as to allow our privacy and security in which sometimes will harm us individually and even our family and family members from syndicates and cyberspace criminal.

            We should also study and further enhance the proper system and the advantages of the Cyber crime Law from the MCIF.  We should look on the sections on the provisions of the law that may be repealed so as that we could be more aware of the redundancy of the said provisions. 

            We should be given the proper acknowledgment that we should participate in the crafting of the law.  Be involved in the manifestation of any additional mandate, provisions to enhance the MCIF and that be given the opportunity that will really evolve the true need of our rights, freedom, security and protection in the cyberspace.  Because we are the ones who are more inclined in the usage of the internet in our daily lives.  We always spend almost more than what should we devote in searching, rather we are always aware in chatting, browsing from time to time in our social medias like the face book, twitter, instagram, viber, we chat etc.  

The MCIF guaranteed a host of other freedoms.  Thus the Senate Bill 3327 or also know as the Magna Carta for Internet Freedom.

As per Senator Santiago, it has been involved by a group of software designers, IT specialists, academics, bloggers, engineers, lawyers, human rights advocates were all involved in the drafting of the said MCIF and thus it had been formulated the draft bill through enormous discussions on the social media forums like the Face book groups

, emails, googles, and twitter.

            In the RA 10175, as per the right to privacy and the constitutional guarantee against illegal search and seizure through allowing the warrant less real time collection while the MCIF on the other hand guarantees the right against illegal searches and seizures.

            The MCIF ensures due process by providing strict guidelines for any collection of any data, including the securing of warrants, obligating notifications. And limiting seizure to data and excluding physical property.

            The MCIF mandates government agencies to provide security for the data they collect from citizens to ensure their right to privacy.  In the RA 10175, where the government may have a website or network blocked or restricted without due process of law, to which should be specifically taken down into more study in order that this should be taken in the improvement and it thus section or clause is not covered by the MCIF.  This is one of the important points to which there’s a need to introduce this in the MCIF.

            The MCIF provides for court proceedings in cases where websites or networks are to be taken down and prohibits censorship of content without a court order.  This will provide a proper venue or jurisdiction on the said issues and will therefore declog our judicial then. 

            The MCIF prohibits double jeopardy while the RA 10175 allows it through prosecution of offenses committed against its provisions and prosecution of offenses committed against the Revised Penal Code and special laws, even though the offenses are from a single act.

            It shall therefore be concluded that as per initial introduction of the MCIF to the people and upon subsequent discussions by our teacher Atty Bernes Guerrero with regards to the pros and cons of the Republic Act 10175, as a law student, whose main concern is the upliftment of our Internet Freedom and through which magnified by the provisions in the MCIF, it shall be said and pronounced that RA 10175is too broad and there certain provisions which as discussed to us were violative of our rights, meaning constitutional rights such as the freedom of speech, right to privacy, right to reasonable searches and seizures and the most controversial among all other sections is the Online Libel which is therefore as I see it to be vague.  This said MCIF is the first law to be crafted through crowd sourcing by which using the social media and tapping people on the internet for their voluntariness to execute their views and opinions in the said law via Face books groups, Google, Twitter, Bloggs, emails, and data’s collected from what I have said people in the ICT, web developers, lawyers, bloggers, internet groups, software designers, information technology experts, academics, engineers, and human rights advocates who contributed with the said senator to draft the said MCIF.

            Our country needs a more effective cyber laws because information and communications technology and the Internet are the grounds for the economic development of our country as well as the globalization, or rather worldwide too.

            The business  process outsourcing industry, the information technology outsourcing industry and all other outsourcing industries have contributed so much to the growth of our country in terms of revenue and had contributed in the growth of our domestic products worldwide through the internet.  So it must be cited that cyber law should be further be enhanced, studied, cultivated because in everyday’s process in our lives, we are growing each day through our system of technology.  There should be researchers that would further examined the development of new ideas, programs, provisions of the laws that will benefit each and everyone, and thus be guarded from people who are very much manipulative of the system of technology through hacking, bullying, and all other means to extract data and money from innocent being here in our country and those from our neighboring countries as well.

______________________________________________________________________________

Sources/ Researches : Magna Carta For Phillippine Internet Freedom ( Full Text Pdf )

                Our rights online and offline by the ABS-CBS News

                Web Founder Berners Lee call for online of the MCIF

                 Discussion from Technology and The Law Under RA 10175 by Atty. Guerrero

                  Pros Cons of the MCIF by Sunstar