1on 1 cybersex chat online
The intentional acquisition, use, misuse, transfer, possession, alteration, or deletion of identifying information belonging to another, whether natural or juridical, without right: Provided: that if no damage has yet been caused, the penalty imposable shall be one (1) degree lower. x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x G. Section 4(b)(3) of the Cybercrime Law Section 4(b)(3) provides: Section 4. The following acts constitute the offense of cybercrime punishable under this Act: x x x x b) Computer-related Offenses: x x x x (3) Computer-related Identity Theft. Relevant to any discussion of the right to privacy is the concept known as the "Zones of Privacy." The Court explained in "In the Matter of the Petition for Issuance of Writ of Habeas Corpus of Sabio v. Mutuc,14 it ruled that the right to privacy exists independently of its identification with liberty; it is in itself fully deserving of constitutional protection. SABARRE, JR., DERVIN CASTRO, ET AL., Petitioners, vs. CASAMBRE, Executive Director of the Information and Communications Technology Office, NONNATUS CAESAR R. For example, supposing there exists a well known billionaire-philanthropist named "Julio Gandolfo," the law would punish for cyber-squatting both the person who registers such name because he claims it to be his pseudo-name and another who registers the name because it happens to be his real name. OCHOA, JR., Executive Secretary, SENATE OF THE PHILIPPINES, represented by SENATE PRESIDENT JUAN PONCE ENRILE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, represented by SPEAKER FELICIANO BELMONTE, JR., LEILA DE LIMA, Secretary of the Department of Justice, LOUIS NAPOLEON C. Petitioners claim that Section 4(a)(6) or cyber-squatting violates the equal protection clause12 in that, not being narrowly tailored, it will cause a user using his real name to suffer the same fate as those who use aliases or take the name of another in satire, parody, or any other literary device.
203335, 11 February 2014 ♦ Decision, Abad [J] ♦ Concurring and Dissenting Opinion, Sereno [J] ♦ Concurring and Dissenting Opinion, Carpio [J] ♦ Dissenting and Concurring Opinion, Leonen [J] ♦ Separate Concurring Opinion, Brion [J] Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURTManila EN BANC G. Petitioners claim that Section 4(b)(3) violates the constitutional rights to due process and to privacy and correspondence, and transgresses the freedom of the press. The intentional or reckless alteration, damaging, deletion or deterioration of computer data, electronic document, or electronic data message, without right, including the introduction or transmission of viruses. Section 4(a)(3) of the Cybercrime Law Section 4(a)(3) provides: Section 4. The following acts constitute the offense of cybercrime punishable under this Act: (a) Offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems: x x x x (3) Data Interference. They accomplish this by sending electronic viruses or virtual dynamites that destroy those computer systems, networks, programs, and memories. The Court has in a way found the strict scrutiny standard, an American constitutional construct,1 useful in determining the constitutionality of laws that tend to target a class of things or persons. Notably, there are also those who would want, like vandals, to wreak or cause havoc to the computer systems and networks of indispensable or highly useful institutions as well as to the laptop or computer programs and memories of innocent individuals. Section 4(c)(3) on Unsolicited Commercial Communications; h. Section 5 on Aiding or Abetting and Attempt in the Commission of Cybercrimes; j. Section 7 on the Prosecution under both the Revised Penal Code (RPC) and R. Petitioners contend that Section 4(a)(1) fails to meet the strict scrutiny standard required of laws that interfere with the fundamental rights of the people and should thus be struck down.
And because linking with the internet opens up a user to communications from others, the ill-motivated can use the cyberspace for committing theft by hacking into or surreptitiously accessing his bank account or credit card or defrauding him through false representations. Section 15 on Search, Seizure and Examination of Computer Data; q. Section 19 on Restricting or Blocking Access to Computer Data; s. Section 24 on Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center (CICC); and u. Some petitioners also raise the constitutionality of related Articles 353, 354, 361, and 362 of the RPC on the crime of libel.