review for tech and the law

8/10/2019 Review for Tech and the Law

1/22

1

POINTERS

Limitation on Copyright (the whole chapter) Sections 184 -190 Creative Commons and GNU-GPL Libel Law

Concept and terminologies like participatory panopticon and sousveillance Topics discussed in blogs: Blackberry, net neutrality, etc.

I. LIMITATIONS ON COPYRIGHT

SEC. 184. Limita t ions on Copyrigh t

184.1. Notwithstanding the provisions of Chapter V, the following acts shall not constituteinfringement of copyright:

(a) the recitation or performance of a work, once it has been lawfully made accessible tothe public, if done privately and free of charge or if made strictly for a charitable or religiousinstitution or society; (Sec. 10(1), P.D. No.49)

(b) The making of quotations from a published work if they are compatible with fair useand only to the extent justified for the purpose, including quotations from newspaper articles andperiodicals in the form of press summaries: Provided, That the source and the name of theauthor, if appearing on the work, are mentioned; (Sec. 11, third par., P.D. No. 49)

(c) The reproduction or communication to the public by mass media of articles on currentpolitical, social, economic, scientific or religious topic, lectures, addresses and other works ofthe same nature, which are delivered in public if such use is for information purposes and hasnot been expressly reserved: Provided, That the source is clearly indicated; (Sec. 11, P.D. No.49)

(d) The reproduction and communication to the public of literary, scientific or artisticworks as part of reports of current events by means of photography, cinematography orbroadcasting to the extent necessary for the purpose; (Sec. 12, P.D. No. 49)

(e) The inclusion of a work in a publication, broadcast, or other communication to thepublic, sound recording or film, if such inclusion is made by way of illustration for teachingpurposes and is compatible with fair use: Provided, That the source and of the name of theauthor, if appearing in the work, are mentioned;

(f) The recording made in schools, universities, or educational institutions of a workincluded in a broadcast for the use of such schools, universities or educational institutions:

Provided, That such recording must be deleted within a reasonable period after they were firstbroadcast: Provided, further, That such recording may not be made from audio visual workswhich are part of the general cinema repertoire of feature films except for brief excerpts of thework;

(g) The making of ephemeral recordings by a broadcasting organization by means of itsown facilities and for use in its own broadcast;

(h) The use made of a work by or under the direction or control of the Government, by


2/22

2

the National Library or by educational, scientific or professional institutions where such use is inthe public interest and is compatible with fair use;

(i) The public performance or the communication to the public of a work, in a placewhere no admission fee is charged in respect of such public performance or communication, bya club or institution for charitable or educational purpose only, whose aim is not profit making,subject to such other limitations as may be provided in the Regulations; (n)

(j) Public display of the original or a copy of the work not made by means of a film, slide,television image or otherwise on screen or by means of any other device or process: Provided,That either the work has been published, or, that original or the copy displayed has been sold,given away or otherwise transferred to another person by the author or his successor in title;and

(k) Any use made of a work for the purpose of any judicial proceedings or for the givingof professional advice by a legal practitioner.

184.2. The provisions of this section shall be interpreted in such a way as to allow the workto be used in a manner which does not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and doesnot unreasonably prejudice the right holder's legitimate interest.

SEC. 185. Fair Use of a Copyri ght ed Wor k

185.1. The fair use of a copyrighted work for criticism, comment, news reporting, teachingincluding multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, research, and similar purposes is notan infringement of copyright. Decompilation, which is understood here to be the reproduction ofthe code and translation of the forms of the computer program to achieve the inter-operability ofan independently created computer program with other programs may also constitute fair use.In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is fair use, the factors to

be considered shall include:

(a) The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercialnature or is for non-profit education purposes;

(b) The nature of the copyrighted work;

(c) The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted workas a whole; and

(d) The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

185.2 The fact that a work is unpublished shall not by itself bar a finding of fair use if suchfinding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

SEC. 186. Wor k of Arc hitectu re

Copyright in a work of architecture shall include the right to control the erection of anybuilding which reproduces the whole or a substantial part of the work either in its original form or


3/22

3

in any form recognizably derived from the original; Provided, That the copyright in any suchwork shall not include the right to control the reconstruction or rehabilitation in the same style asthe original of a building to which the copyright relates. (n)

SEC. 187. Reprod uct ion of Publ is hed Work

187.1. Notwithstanding the provision of Section 177, and subject to the provisions ofSubsection 187.2, the private reproduction of a published work in a single copy, where thereproduction is made by a natural person exclusively for research and private study, shall bepermitted, without the authorization of the owner of copyright in the work.

187.2. The permission granted under Subsection 187.1 shall not extend to the reproductionof:

(a) A work of architecture in form of building or other construction;

(b) An entire book, or a substantial past thereof, or of a musical work in which graphics

form by reprographic means;

(c) A compilation of data and other materials;

(d) A computer program except as provided in Section 189; and

(e) Any work in cases where reproduction would unreasonably conflict with a normalexploitation of the work or would otherwise unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of theauthor.(n)

SEC. 188. Reprog raphic Reprodu ct ion by L ibrar ies

188.1. Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection 177.6, any library or archive whoseactivities are not for profit may, without the authorization of the author of copyright owner, makea single copy of the work by reprographic reproduction:

(a) Where the work by reason of its fragile character or rarity cannot be lent to user in itsoriginal form;

(b) Where the works are isolated articles contained in composite works or brief portionsof other published works and the reproduction is necessary to supply them; when this isconsidered expedient, to person requesting their loan for purposes of research or study insteadof lending the volumes or booklets which contain them; and

(c) Where the making of such a copy is in order to preserve and, if necessary in theevent that it is lost, destroyed or rendered unusable, replace a copy, or to replace, in thepermanent collection of another similar library or archive, a copy which has been lost, destroyedor rendered unusable and copies are not available with the publisher.


4/22

4

188.2. Notwithstanding the above provisions, it shall not be permissible to produce avolume of a work published in several volumes or to produce missing tomes or pages ofmagazines or similar works, unless the volume, tome or part is out of stock; Provided, Thatevery library which, by law, is entitled to receive copies of a printed work, shall be entitled, whenspecial reasons so require, to reproduce a copy of a published work which is considered

necessary for the collection of the library but which is out of stock. (Sec. 13, P.D. 49a)

SEC. 189. Reproduct ion of Com puter Program

189.1. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 177, the reproduction in one (1) back-upcopy or adaptation of a computer program shall be permitted, without the authorization of theauthor of, or other owner of copyright in, a computer program, by the lawful owner of thatcomputer program: Provided, That the copy or adaptation is necessary for:

(a) The use of the computer program in conjunction with a computer for the purpose,and to the extent, for which the computer program has been obtained; and

(b) Archival purposes, and, for the replacement of the lawfully owned copy of thecomputer program in the event that the lawfully obtained copy of the computer program is lost,destroyed or rendered unusable.

189.2. No copy or adaptation mentioned in this Section shall be used for any purpose otherthan the ones determined in this Section, and any such copy or adaptation shall be destroyed inthe event that continued possession of the copy of the computer program ceases to be lawful.

189.3. This provision shall be without prejudice to the application of Section 185 wheneverappropriate. (n)

SEC. 190. Impo rtation fo r Personal Purpo ses

190.1. Notwithstanding the provision of Subsection 177.6, but subject to the limitation underthe Subsection 185.2, the importation of a copy of a work by an individual for his personalpurposes shall be permitted without the authorization of the author of, or other owner ofcopyright in, the work under the following circumstances:

(a) When copies of the work are not available in the Philippines and:

(i) Not more than one (1) copy at one time is imported for strictly individual use only;or

(ii) The importation is by authority of and for the use of the Philippine Government; or

(iii) The importation, consisting of not more than three (3) such copies or likenesses inany one invoice, is not for sale but for the use only of any religious, charitable, or educationalsociety or institution duly incorporated or registered, or is for the encouragement of the fine arts,or for any state school, college, university, or free public library in the Philippines.


5/22

5

(b) When such copies form parts of libraries and personal baggage belonging to personsor families arriving from foreign countries and are not intended for sale: Provided, That suchcopies do not exceed three (3).

190.2. Copies imported as allowed by this Section may not lawfully be used in any way toviolate the rights of owner the copyright or annul or limit the protection secured by this Act, andsuch unlawful use shall be deemed an infringement and shall be punishable as such withoutprejudice to the proprietors right of action.

190.3. Subject to the approval of the Secretary of Finance, the Commissioner of Customs ishereby empowered to make rules and regulations for preventing the importation of articles theimportation of which is prohibited under this Section and under treaties and conventions towhich the Philippines may be a party and for seizing and condemning and disposing of thesame in case they are discovered after they have been imported. (Sec. 30, P.D. No. 49)

II. CREATIVE COMMONS

Can CC give legal advice about its licenses or help with CC license enforcement?

No. We are not permitted to provide legal advice or legal services to assist anyone withenforcing Creative Commons licenses. We are not a law firm. We're much like a legal self-helpsite that offers free form-based legal documents for you to use however you see fit.

However, we do maintain a list of lawyers and organizations who have identified themselves asbeing willing to advise clients about CC licensing issues. Please note that CC does not provide

referral services, and that we do not necessarily endorse or recommend anyone on this list forany particular client or circumstance. Our international network of CC affiliates may also be agood resource for further information (but not legal advice) about CC licenses in a particular

jurisdiction. Contact information of our affiliates is located on each jurisdiction's page .

Is use X a violation of the Noncommercial clause of the licenses?

Our noncommercial licenses (BY-NC , BY-NC-SA , BY-NC-ND ) prohibit uses that are " primarilyintended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation. "Whether or not a use is or is not commercial will depend on the specifics of the situation and theintentions of the user, as stated in the definition. In our experience, most of the time whether ause is permitted is pretty clear, and known conflicts are relatively few considering the popularityof the NC licenses. As with all license terms, however, there will always be use cases that arechallenging to categorize as commercial or noncommercial. CC cannot help you determine whatis and is not commercial use. If you are unsure, we suggest that you either contact the licensorfor clarification or search for works licensed under a CC license that permits commercial uses(BY, BY-SA , BY-ND ).

Does my use constitute a derivative work or an adaptation?
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC_Friendly_Lawyershttp://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC_Friendly_Lawyershttp://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC_Friendly_Lawyershttp://creativecommons.org/internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/internationalhttp://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC_Friendly_Lawyers


6/22

6

It depends. A derivative work is a work that is based on another work but is not an exact,verbatim copy. What this precisely means is a difficult legal question. In general, a translationfrom one language to another or a film version of a book are examples of derivative works.Under Creative Commons core licenses, syncing music in timed -relation with a moving image isalso considered to be a derivative work.

All Creative Commons licenses allow the user to exercise the rights permitted under the licensein any format or media. This means, for example, that under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported license you can copy the work from a digital file toa print file, as long as you do so in a manner that is consistent with the terms of that license.

Can CC give me permission to use a CC-licensed work that I found?

No. Creative Commons licenses are offered free of charge to the public. There is no registrationrequired to use a CC license, nor do we attempt to maintain any type of registry. We generallyhave no direct knowledge of who is using the licenses or even for what (though we do havesome indirect knowledge of usage via various search engines). We have no way of contactingthe authors of CC-licensed works, nor do we offer any rights clearing services.

CC licenses haven't been ported to my jurisdiction (country). What can I do?

Every CC license is intended to be effective on a worldwide basis, whether "ported" to a specific jurisdiction or not. If the licenses have not yet been ported to your jurisdiction, we recommendthat you simply use the Unported versions of our licenses. CC's Unported licenses were createdusing standard terms from the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and other international treaties related to copyright and intellectual property.

If you would like to help adapt the licenses to your jurisdiction, you might consider collaborating

with us on the license porting process: International Overview The Porting Process . If you wouldlike to contribute to this project, please contact Creative Commons International:[email protected] .

Can I license software using CC licenses?

We do not recommend it. Creative Commons licenses should not be used for software. Westrongly encourage you to use one of the very good software licenses which are alreadyavailable. We recommend considering licenses made available by the Free SoftwareFoundation or listed at the Open Source Initiative . Unlike our licenses, which do not makemention of source or object code, these existing licenses were designed specifically for use with

software.

Creative Commons ha s wrapped some free software/open source licenses with a human -readable "Commons Deed" and machine-readable metadata. You may use these "wrapped"software licenses to take advantage of the Creative Commons human-readable document aswell as the machine-readable metadata while still licensing your work under an establishedsoftware license. It is important to note that CC has not altered these software licenses in any
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Literary_and_Artistic_Workshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Literary_and_Artistic_Workshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Literary_and_Artistic_Workshttp://wiki.creativecommons.org/International_Overviewhttp://wiki.creativecommons.org/International_Overviewhttp://wiki.creativecommons.org/International_Overviewmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.fsf.org/http://www.fsf.org/http://www.fsf.org/http://www.fsf.org/http://www.opensource.org/http://www.opensource.org/http://www.opensource.org/http://www.opensource.org/http://www.fsf.org/http://www.fsf.org/mailto:[email protected]://wiki.creativecommons.org/International_Overviewhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Literary_and_Artistic_Workshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/


7/22

7

way, but has simply bundled human- and machine-readable explanations of the licenses alongwith the original license text. Examples: GNU GPL , GNU LGPL , BSD .

How do I change/remove the CC search option built into the Firefox browser?

Mozilla has included Creative Commons in Firefox's search function along with search optionsfor Google, Amazon, and other popular sites. See Mozilla features.

If you want to remove a particular search option, click on the logo that appears in the search box(the CC logo, or the Google logo, for example). You will see a pull down menu that allows you touse your mouse to select a different search provider. Choosing "Manage search engines" allowsyou to add or remove search engines of your choice, such as Flickr and Wikipedia.

To switch between search providers through the keyboard, start by clicking inside the searchbox, then hold down the Ctrl key (or the Apple/Command key on a Mac) and press the up arrowa few times. You should see the Google logo. To change to other providers, you can press Ctrl(or Apple) + down. More information on the Firefox search is available on our wiki.

How do I properly attribute a Creative Commons licensed work?

All current CC licenses require that you attribute the original author(s). If the copyright holderhas not specified any particular way to attribute them, this does not mean that you do not haveto give attribution. It simply means that you will have to give attribution to the best of your abilitywith the information you do have. Generally speaking, this implies five things:

If the work itself contains any copyright notices placed there by the copyright holder, youmust leave those notices intact, or reproduce them in a way that is reasonable to themedium in which you are re-publishing the work.

Cite the author's name, screen name, user identification, etc. If you are publishing on theInternet, it is nice to link that name to the person's profile page, if such a page exists.

Cite the work's title or name, if such a thing exists. If you are publishing on the Internet, itis nice to link the name or title directly to the original work.

Cite the specific CC license the work is under. If you are publishing on the Internet, it isnice if the license citation links to the license on the CC website.

If you are making a derivative work or adaptation, in addition to the above, you need toidentify that your work is a derivative work i.e., This is a Finnish translation of the

[original work] by [author]. or Screenplay based on [original work] by [author].

In the case where a copyright holder does choose to specify the manner of attribution, inaddition to the requirement of leaving intact existing copyright notices, they are only able torequire certain things. Namely:

They may require that you attribute the work to a certain name, pseudonym or even anorganization of some sort.
http://creativecommons.org/license/cc-gpl/http://creativecommons.org/license/cc-gpl/http://creativecommons.org/license/cc-gpl/http://creativecommons.org/license/cc-lgpl/http://creativecommons.org/license/cc-lgpl/http://creativecommons.org/license/cc-lgpl/http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BSD/http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BSD/http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BSD/http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/features.htmlhttp://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/features.htmlhttp://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/features.htmlhttp://wiki.creativecommons.org/Firefox_and_CC_Searchhttp://wiki.creativecommons.org/Firefox_and_CC_Searchhttp://wiki.creativecommons.org/Firefox_and_CC_Searchhttp://wiki.creativecommons.org/Firefox_and_CC_Searchhttp://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/features.htmlhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/BSD/http://creativecommons.org/license/cc-lgpl/http://creativecommons.org/license/cc-gpl/


8/22

8

They may require you to associate/provide a certain URL (web address) for the work.

If you are interested to see what an actual license ("legalcode") has to say about attribution, youcan use the CC Attribution 3.0 Unported license as an example. Please note that this is only anexample , and you should always read the appropriate section of the specific license in question... usually, but perhaps not always, section 4(b) or 4(c):

Creative Commons is a nonprofit corporation dedicated to making it easier for people to shareand build upon the work of others, consistent with the rules of copyright.

We provide free licenses and other legal tools to mark creative work with the freedom thecreator wants it to carry, so others can share, remix, use commercially, or any combinationthereof.

Creative Commons is a nonprofit organization

We work to increase the amount of creativity (cultural, educational, and scientific content) in the

commons the body of work that is available to the public for free and legal sharing, use,repurposing, and remixing.

CC provides free, easy-to-use legal tools

Our tools give everyone from individual creators to large companies and institutions a simple,standardized way to grant copyright permissions to their creative work. The Creative Commonslicenses enable people to easily change their copyright terms from the default of all rightsreserved to some rights reserved.

Some Rights Reserved

Creative Commons defines the spectrum of possibilities between full copyright and the publicdomain. From all rights reserved to no rights reserved . Our licenses help you keep yourcopyright while allowing certain uses of your work a some rights reserved copyright .

CC Licenses work alongside copyright

Creative Commons licenses are not an alternative to copyright. They work alongside copyright,so you can modify your copyright terms to best suit your needs. Weve collaborated withintellectual property experts all around the world to ensure that our licenses work globally .

Our other legal tools and resources

For those creators wishing to opt out of the copyright altogether, Creative Commons helps themdo so by providing tools that allow you to place your work as squarely as possible within thepublic domain a no rights reserved alternative to copyright.

Your Support
http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/http://creativecommons.org/international/http://creativecommons.org/international/http://creativecommons.org/international/http://creativecommons.org/publicdomainhttp://creativecommons.org/publicdomainhttp://creativecommons.org/publicdomainhttp://creativecommons.org/publicdomainhttp://creativecommons.org/publicdomainhttp://creativecommons.org/publicdomainhttp://creativecommons.org/international/http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/


9/22

9

Creative Commons today is alive and thriving thanks to the generous and continued support ofpeople like you. Spread the word about CC to your friends and family or donate and help buildthe commons.

History of Creative Commons

Founding

Founded in 2001 with the generous support of the Center for the Public Domain , CC is led by aBoard of Directors comprised of thought leaders, education experts, technologists, legalscholars, investors, entrepreneurs and philanthropists.

Creative Commons licenses

In December 2002, Creative Commons released its first set of copyright licenses for free to thepublic. Creative Commons developed its licenses inspired in part by the Free SoftwareFoundations GNU General Public License (GNU GPL) alongside a Web application platform

to help you license your works freely for certain uses, on certain conditions; or dedicate yourworks to the public domain.

In the years following the initial release, Creative Commons and its licenses have grown at anexponential rate around the world. The licenses have been further improved, and ported to over50 jurisdictions .

Science

Since 2005, Creative Commons has undertaken projects to build commons-based infrastructurefor science through identifying and lowering unnecessary barriers to research, crafting policyguidelines and legal agreements, and developing technology to make research, data andmaterials easier to find and use.

Education

Creative Commons also works to minimize legal, technical, and social barriers to sharing andreuse of educational materials , with dedicated projects in this field since starting in 2007.

Global infrastructure for sharing

Creative Commons licenses, public domain tools, and supporting technologies have becomethe global standard for sharing across culture, education, government, science, and more.

III. GNU GPL

The GNU General Public License (GNU GPL or simply GPL ) is the most widely used freesoftware license , originally written by Richard Stallman for the GNU project .
http://support.creativecommons.org/http://support.creativecommons.org/http://support.creativecommons.org/http://www.law.duke.edu/cspd/http://www.law.duke.edu/cspd/http://www.law.duke.edu/cspd/http://creativecommons.org/about/people/boardhttp://creativecommons.org/about/people/boardhttp://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5668http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5668http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5668http://creativecommons.org/internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/sciencehttp://creativecommons.org/sciencehttp://creativecommons.org/sciencehttp://creativecommons.org/educationhttp://creativecommons.org/educationhttp://creativecommons.org/educationhttp://creativecommons.org/about/who-uses-cchttp://creativecommons.org/about/who-uses-cchttp://creativecommons.org/about/who-uses-cchttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_licensehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_licensehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_licensehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_licensehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallmanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallmanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallmanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_projecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_projecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_projecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_projecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallmanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_licensehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_licensehttp://creativecommons.org/about/who-uses-cchttp://creativecommons.org/educationhttp://creativecommons.org/sciencehttp://creativecommons.org/internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/5668http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/http://creativecommons.org/about/people/boardhttp://www.law.duke.edu/cspd/http://support.creativecommons.org/


10/22

10

The GPL is the first copyleft license for general use, which means that derived works can onlybe distributed under the same license terms. Under this philosophy, the GPL grants therecipients of a computer program the rights of the free software definition and uses copyleft toensure the freedoms are preserved, even when the work is changed or added to. This is indistinction to permissive free software licenses , of which the BSD licenses are the standard

examples.

The text of the GPL is not itself under the GPL. The license's copyright disallows modification ofthe license. Copying and distributing the license is allowed since the GPL requires recipients get"a copy of this License along with the Program" .[5] According to the GPL FAQ, anyone can makea new license using a modified version of the GPL as long as he or she uses a different namefor the license, doesn't mention "GNU", and removes the preamble, though the preamble can beused in a modified license if permission to use it is obtained from the Free Software Foundation (FSF).

The GPL was written by Richard Stallman in 1989 for use with programs released as part of the

GNU project. The original GPL was based on a unification of similar licenses used for earlyversions of GNU Emacs , the GNU Debugger and the GNU C Compiler .[6] These licensescontained similar provisions to the modern GPL, but were specific to each program, renderingthem incompatible, despite being the same license .[7] Stallman's goal was to produce onelicense that could be used for any project, thus making it possible for many projects to sharecode.

As of August 2007, the GPL accounted for nearly 65% of the 43,442 free software projectslisted on Freshmeat ,[8] and as of January 2006, about 68% of the projects listed onSourceForge.net .[9] Similarly, a 2001 survey of Red Hat Linux 7.1 found that 50% of the sourcecode was licensed under the GPL [10] and a 1997 survey of MetaLab , then the largest free

software archive, showed that the GPL accounted for about half of the software licensedtherein .[11] Prominent free software programs licensed under the GPL include the Linux kernel and the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC). Some other free software programs, (MySQL is aprominent example) are dual-licensed under multiple licenses, often with one of the licensesbeing the GPL.

Some observers believe that the strong copyleft provided by the GPL was crucial to the successof GNU/Linux, giving the programmers who contributed to it the confidence that their work wouldbenefit the whole world and remain free, rather than being exploited by software companies thatwould not have to give anything back to the community .[12]

The second version of the license, version 2, was released in 1991. Over the following 15 years,some members of the FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) community came to believe thatsome software and hardware vendors were finding loopholes in the GPL, allowing GPL-licensedsoftware to be exploited in ways that were contrary to the intentions of the programmers. Theseconcerns included tivoization (the inclusion of GPL-licensed software in hardware that willrefuse to run modified versions of its software); the use of unpublished, modified versions ofGPL software behind web interfaces; and patent deals between Microsoft and GNU/Linux and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copylefthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copylefthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copylefthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_programhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_programhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_programhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Software_Definitionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Software_Definitionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Software_Definitionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_free_software_licenseshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_free_software_licenseshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_free_software_licenseshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenseshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenseshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenseshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software_Foundationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software_Foundationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software_Foundationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Emacshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Emacshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Emacshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Debuggerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Debuggerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Debuggerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Compiler_Collectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Compiler_Collectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-history_of_gpl-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-history_of_gpl-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-history_of_gpl-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-gplv3conf2stallman-before-gnu-gpl-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-gplv3conf2stallman-before-gnu-gpl-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-gplv3conf2stallman-before-gnu-gpl-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freshmeathttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freshmeathttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SourceForge.nethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-8http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-8http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-8http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Linuxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Linuxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Linuxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibibliohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibibliohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibibliohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Compiler_Collectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Compiler_Collectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Compiler_Collectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MySQLhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MySQLhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MySQLhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-licensinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-licensinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-licensinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copylefthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copylefthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copylefthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_communityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_communityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_communityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tivoizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tivoizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tivoizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsofthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsofthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsofthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsofthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tivoizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_communityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copylefthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-licensinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MySQLhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Compiler_Collectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibibliohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Linuxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-8http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SourceForge.nethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freshmeathttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-gplv3conf2stallman-before-gnu-gpl-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-history_of_gpl-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Compiler_Collectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Debuggerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Emacshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software_Foundationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenseshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_free_software_licenseshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Software_Definitionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_programhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft


11/22

11

Unix distributors that may represent an attempt to use patents as a weapon against competitionfrom GNU/Linux.

Version 3 was developed to attempt to address these concerns. It was officially released onJune 29, 2007 .[13]

IV. LIBEL LAW

Citing various court decisions, abogadamo.com lists the elements of libel in the Philippines:

Imputation of a discreditable act or condition to another

Publication of the imputation

Identity of the person defamed

Existence of malice

The website also lists down a possible defense against libel:

In every criminal prosecution for libel, the truth may be given in evidence to the court and if itappears that the matter charged as libelous is true, and, moreover, that it was published withgood motives and for justifiable ends, the defendants shall be acquitted.

But, there is also an exception:

every defamatory imputation is p resumed to be malicious, even if it be true; if no goodintention and justifiable motive for making it is shown.

According to a very informative interview posted by Juned, potentially severely.

Juned interviewed Alex Villafania, who previously worked for Inquirer.net and is now finishinghis graduate studies. The money quote about blogging and libel:

Still, bloggers can still enjoy their freedom. but to avoid legal inconveniences, i would suggestthat bloggers, on a broader sense, should stick to ethical standards of writing, just as they haveto follow the standards of grammar and spelling. It is not one for a blogger to destroy thereputation of another person without duly presenting the right evidence. Bloggers are alsocitizens and as such, must exercise responsibility in their actions. There are many rules that arebeing developed among blogging communities but one important rule is to be accountable foryour statements.

What Constitutes Libel Online?

An important question no doubt, since the answer can help Filipinos online avoid a lot of trouble

The Warrior Lawyer does a great job of answering the question in laymans terms (after adisclaimer regarding lawyerly advice, of course):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-gpl3launch-12http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-gpl3launch-12http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-gpl3launch-12http://baratillo.net/?p=41http://baratillo.net/?p=41http://baratillo.net/?p=41http://thewarriorlawyer.com/2007/02/20/libel-on-the-internet-under-philippine-law/http://thewarriorlawyer.com/2007/02/20/libel-on-the-internet-under-philippine-law/http://thewarriorlawyer.com/2007/02/20/libel-on-the-internet-under-philippine-law/http://baratillo.net/?p=41http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#cite_note-gpl3launch-12


12/22

12

If you call someone a scum-sucking, slimeball, swindling pimp, even if this is fairly accurate, andpost it online, you may be sued for making libelous statements.

Of course, its a bit more technical than that, as TWL explains. For a statement to be libelous:

it must be defamatory

it must be malicious

it must be given publicity

the victim must be identifiable

INTERNET LIBEL

First, the disclaimer. This is not intended as lawyerly advice. Neither does it refer a specific caseor circumstance. Much less can this be considered as an offer to provide legal services or toadvocate anything. Its just one persons opinion on a matter of increasing intere st to bloggersand other denizens of cyberspace: what constitutes internet libel in the context of Philippinelaws.

How is libel defined under Philippine laws ? Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code defines libelas a public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or anyact, omission, condition, status or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit orcontempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.

For an imputation then to be libelous, the following requisites must concur: (a) it must bedefamatory; (b) it must be malicious; (c) it must be given publicity; and (d) the victim must beidentifiable.

If you call someone a scum-sucking, slimeball, swindling pimp, even if this is fairly accurate, andpost it online, you may be sued for making libelous statements.

Defamatory words are those calculated to induce the hearers or readers to suppose andunderstand that that the person or persons against whom they were uttered were guilty ofcertain offenses, or are sufficient to impeach their honesty, virtue or reputation, or to hold theperson or persons up to public ridicule. Philippine law also presumes every defamatoryimputation to be malicious, even if true, if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it isshown (Article 254 of the Revised Penal Code). Malice exists when there is an intentional doingof a wrongful act without just cause.

The libel must be given publicity, circulated or publicized. Postings in a forum, message boardor blog can certainly be considered as publication. Lastly, the victim or offended party must beidentifiable.

Continuation of Libel on the Internet Under Philippine Law Part 1

What would be the liability of service providers for libelous acts committed by clients ?
http://thewarriorlawyer.com/2007/02/20/libel-on-the-internet-under-philippine-law/http://thewarriorlawyer.com/2007/02/20/libel-on-the-internet-under-philippine-law/http://thewarriorlawyer.com/2007/02/20/libel-on-the-internet-under-philippine-law/http://thewarriorlawyer.com/2007/02/20/libel-on-the-internet-under-philippine-law/


13/22

13

Under Republic Act no. 8792, otherwise known as theElectronic Commerce Act, a party or person acting as a service provider incurs no civil orcriminal liability in the making, publication, dissemination or distribution of libelous material if: a)the service provider does not have actual knowledge, or is not aware of the facts orcircumstances from which it is apparent that making, publication, dissemination or distribution of

such material is unlawful or infringes any rights; b) the service provider does not knowinglyreceive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity; c) the service providerdoes not directly commit any infringement or other unlawful act and does not induce or causeanother person or party to commit any infringement or other unlawful act and/or does not benefitfinancially from the infringing activity or unlawful act of another person or party (Section 30, inrelation to Section 5, E-Commerce Law)

Hence, a service provider should not be held liable if he has no actual knowledge of the libel,does not benefit financially from the unlawful act or does not directly commit the libelous act orinduce someone to do so. Of course, once the service provider gains actual knowledge of thelibel, timely steps must be taken, within the service providers authority, to remove th e offending

material by warning the perpetrator and, if all else fails, terminating the offenders account. Byacting speedily on the matter, the service provider shows good faith and that it does notcondone the libelous acts.

A fundamental sense of fairness and simple good manners and right conduct is usually enoughto keep you, a good netizen, out of trouble.

Libel Law in the Philippines

Under Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, libel is defined as a public andmalicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission,

condition, status or circumstance tending to discredit or cause the dishonor or contempt of anatural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead. Thus, the elements oflibel are: (a) imputation of a discreditable act or condition to another; (b) publication of theimputation; (c) identity of the person defamed; and, (d) existence of malice. [Daez v. Court ofAppeals, G.R. No. 47971, 31 October 1990, 191 SCRA 61, 67]

In libel cases, the question is not what the writer of an alleged libel means, but what the wordsused by him mean. Jurisprudence has laid down a test to determine the defamatory character ofwords used in the following manner, viz:

Words calcu lated to induce suspicion are sometimes more effective to destroy reputation thanfalse charges directly made. Ironical and metaphorical language is a favored vehicle for slander.

A charge is sufficient if the words are calculated to induce the hearers to suppose andunderstand that the person or persons against whom they were uttered were guilty of certainoffenses, or are sufficient to impeach their honesty, virtue, or reputation, or to hold the person orpersons up to public ridicule. . . . [Lacsa v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 161 SCRA 427(1988) citing U.S. v. O'Connell, 37 Phil. 767 (1918)]


14/22

14

An allegation is considered defamatory if it ascribes to a person the commission of a crime, thepossession of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status orcircumstances which tends to dishonor or discredit or put him in contempt, or which tends toblacken the memory of one who is dead.

There is publication if the material is communicated to a third person. It is not required that theperson defamed has read or heard about the libelous remark. What is material is that a thirdperson has read or heard the libelous statement, for a mans reputation is the estimate in whichothers hold him in, not the good opinion which he has of himself. [Alonzo v. Court of Appeals,241 SCRA 51 (1995)]

On the other hand, to satisfy the element of identifiability, it must be shown that at least a thirdperson or a stranger was able to identify him as the object of the defamatory statement. In thecase of Corpus vs. Cuaderno, Sr. (16 SCRA 807) the Supreme Court ruled that in order tomaintain a libel suit, it is essential that the victim be identifiable (People vs. Monton, L-16772,November 30, 1962) , although it is not necessary that he be named (19 A.L.R. 116) . In an

earlier case, the high court also declared that defamatory matter which does not reveal theidentity of the person upon whom the imputation is cast, affords no ground of action unless it beshown that the readers of the libel could have identified the personality of the individualdefamed. (Kunkle vs. Cablenews-American and Lyons 42 Phil. 760) .

This principle has been recognized to be of vital importance, especially where a group or classof persons, as in the case at bar, claim to have been defamed, for it is evident that the larger thecollectivity, the more difficult it is for the individual member to prove that the defamatory remarksapply to him. ( Cf. 70 ALR 2d. 1384) .

PRESUMPTION OF MALICE:

The law also presumes that malice is present in every defamatory imputation. Thus, Article 354of the Revised Penal Code provides that:

Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it be true, if no good intentionand justifiable motive for making it is shown, except in the following cases:

1. A private communication made by any person to another in the performance of any legal,moral or social duty; and

2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any comments or remarks, of any judicial,legislative or other official proceedings which are not of confidential nature, or of any statement,

report or speech delivered in said proceedings, or of any other act performed by public officersin the exercise of their functions.

Paragraph 2 aforequoted refers to a qualifiedly privileged communication, the character of whichis a matter of defense that may be lost by positive proof of express malice on the part of theaccused. Once it is established that the article is of a privileged character, the onus of provingactual malice rests on the plaintiff who must then convince the court that the offender was


15/22


16/22

16

shown. There is malice when the author of the imputation is prompted by personal ill-will or spiteand speaks not in response to duty but merely to injure the reputation of the person who claimsto have been defamed. Truth then is not a defense, unless it is shown that the matter chargedas libelous was made with good motives and for justifiable ends.

V. PARTICIPATORY PANOPTICON OR SOUSVEILLANCE

The Participatory Panopticon, or Sousveillance = the conscious capture of processesfrom below, by individual participants

Discussion

James Cascio

"The idea of the emerging participatory panopticon scares a lot of people. That's not surprising;after all, there are numerous ways in which a world in which millions of us carry always-on,mobile networked recorders could lead to invasions of privacy, harassment of the powerless,and an increased coarsening of public discourse. But if we accept the notion that theparticipatory panopticon is a likely consequence of otherwise desirable improvements tocommunication and information technologies, it becomes incumbent upon us to think of ways touse it as a tool for good." (http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/004069.html )

Participation Capture, Sousveillance, Panoptical surveillance

Sousveillance is the conscious capture of processes from below, by individual participants;surveillance is from the top down, while participation capture is inscribed in the very protocols ofcooperation and is therefore an automatic inscription of what we are doing:

In English, on the emergence of the Participatory Panopticon :

"Soon -- probably within the next decade, certainly within the next two -- we'll be living in a worldwhere what we see, what we hear, what we experience will be recorded wherever we go. Therewill be few statements or scenes that will go unnoticed, or unremembered. Our day to day liveswill be archived and saved. Whats more, these archives will be available over the net forrecollection, analysis, even sharing.

And we will be doing it to ourselves. This won't simply be a world of a single, governmental BigBrother watching over your shoulder, nor will it be a world of a handful of corporate siblings

training their ever-vigilant security cameras and tags on you. Such monitoring may well exist,probably will, in fact, but it will be overwhelmed by the millions of cameras and recorders in thehands of millions of Little Brothers and Little Sisters. We will carry with us the tools of our owntransparency, and many, perhaps most, will do so willingly, even happily. I call this world theParticipatory Panopticon." (http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/002651.html ;)
http://p2pfoundation.net/Sousveillancehttp://p2pfoundation.net/Sousveillancehttp://p2pfoundation.net/Sousveillancehttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/004069.htmlhttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/004069.htmlhttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/004069.htmlhttp://p2pfoundation.net/Sousveillancehttp://p2pfoundation.net/Sousveillancehttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/002651.htmlhttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/002651.htmlhttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/002651.htmlhttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/002651.htmlhttp://p2pfoundation.net/Sousveillancehttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/004069.htmlhttp://p2pfoundation.net/Sousveillance


17/22

17

Michael Zimmer

" Surveillance, of course, implies the watching over of subjects from above, with an explicitpower relationship between the watchers and those placed under its gaze. Trying to describesurveillance as peer -to- peer suggests a flattening of the power relationship that is counter toits very definition. Similarly, the notion of a participatory panopticon is at the same timeredundant and contradictory. Foucault revealed how panoptic power becomes internalized bythe subjects, thus, they necessarily participate in their own subjugation. Yet the top -downpower relationship within the panoptic structure remains. The participation by the subjects doesnot make them equal with the watchers. Yet the informational voyeurism associated with Web2.0 seems to imply a balance between the users: one shares their data streams in order toimprove the overall worth of the network, coupled with the presumption that theyll be able toobserve and lever age others streams as well.

This notion resembles that of equiveillance, a state of equilibrium between the top -down powerof surveillance, and the resistant bottom-up watching of sousveillance. Yet, this notion implies

merely a balance in access to surveillance information, and is focused more on how to reachsome kind of harmonious relationship with our rising surveillance society. With the informationalvoyeurism of Web 2.0, however, the goal isnt to resist or come to terms with the power yieldedby traditional surveillance, but rather to participate in a widespread and open sharing of themundane details of ones daily life. To give ones peers a glimpse into ones own personaluniverse." (http://michaelzimmer.org/2007/05/29/privacy-and-surveillance-in-web-20-unintended-consequences-and-the-rise-of-%e2%80%9cnetaveillance%e2%80%9d/ )

A View on How Panopticon affects or infects the Philippines

By Maria Gracia Patricia Bolos

Brief History of Panopticon

Pan, of Greek etymology, meaning all. Optic or opticon, of Greek etymology, meaning seeing.Thus the word panopticon came into being, a noun of New Latin expression which means aroom for the exhibition of novelties .1

Originally, panopticon is a type of prison building designed by English philosopher and socialtheorist Jeremy Bentham in 1785. The concept of the design is to allow an observer to observe(-opticon) all (pan-) prisoners without the prisoners being able to tell whether they are beingwatched, thereby conveying what one architect has called the sentiment of an invisibleomniscience. 2

The architectural figure incorporates a tower central to an annular building that is divided intocells, each cell extending the entire thickness of the building to allow inner and outer windows.The occupants of the cells are thus backlit, isolated from one another by walls and subject toscrutiny both collectively and individually by an observer in the tower who remains unseen.Toward this end, Bentham envisioned not only Venetian blinds on the tower observation portsbut also mazelike connections among tower rooms to avoid glints of light or noise that mightbetray the presence of an observer.
http://michaelzimmer.org/2007/05/29/privacy-and-surveillance-in-web-20-unintended-consequences-and-the-rise-of-%e2%80%9cnetaveillance%e2%80%9d/http://michaelzimmer.org/2007/05/29/privacy-and-surveillance-in-web-20-unintended-consequences-and-the-rise-of-%e2%80%9cnetaveillance%e2%80%9d/http://michaelzimmer.org/2007/05/29/privacy-and-surveillance-in-web-20-unintended-consequences-and-the-rise-of-%e2%80%9cnetaveillance%e2%80%9d/http://michaelzimmer.org/2007/05/29/privacy-and-surveillance-in-web-20-unintended-consequences-and-the-rise-of-%e2%80%9cnetaveillance%e2%80%9d/http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_0_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_0_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_0_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_1_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_1_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_1_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_1_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_0_53http://michaelzimmer.org/2007/05/29/privacy-and-surveillance-in-web-20-unintended-consequences-and-the-rise-of-%e2%80%9cnetaveillance%e2%80%9d/http://michaelzimmer.org/2007/05/29/privacy-and-surveillance-in-web-20-unintended-consequences-and-the-rise-of-%e2%80%9cnetaveillance%e2%80%9d/


18/22

18

Bentham derived the idea from the plan of a factory designed for easy supervision, and hisdesign was intended to be cheaper than that of the prisons of his time, as it required less staff.

As the watchmen cannot be seen, they need not be on duty at all times, effectively leaving thewatching to the watched .3

He primarily wanted such idea of the building for observation of the people within it to determinethe problem and determine the solution from such circumstances. The essence of it consists,then, in the centrality of the inspectors situation, combined with the well -known and mosteffectual contrivances for seeing without being seen .4 An advantage of such is whateverpurposes the plan may be applied to, particularly where it is applied to the severest and mostcoercive purposes, is, that the under keepers or inspectors, the servants and subordinates ofevery kind, will be under the same irresistible control with respect to the head keeper orinspector, as the prisoners or other persons to be governed are with respect to them .5 Helikewise stated that the influence of this plan not less beneficial to what is called liberty, than tonecessary coercion; not less powerful as a control upon subordinate power, than as a curb todelinquency; as a shield to innocence, than as a scourge to guilt .6 This kind of proposition that

he has states as an advantage the unawareness of those being observed, thus, making themact naturally, without preparations and open instantaneously to the view of the observer.

Today, many modern prisons are built in a podular design influenced by the Panopticondesign, in intent and basic organization if not in exact form. As compared to traditionalcellblock designs, in which rectangular buildings contain tiers of cells one atop the other infront of a walkway along which correctional officers patrol, modern prisons are oftendecentralized and contain triangular or trapezoidal-shaped housing units know n as pods ormodules designed to hold between sixteen and fifty prisoners each. In these designs, cells arelaid out in three or fewer tiers arrayed around either a central control station or a desk whichaffords a single correctional officer full view of all cells within either a 270 or 180 field of view.Control of cell doors, Closed Circuit Television monitors, and communications are all conductedfrom the control station. The correctional officer, depending on the level of security andsegregation, may be armed with non-lethal and lethal weapons to cover the pod as well.Increasingly, meals, laundry, commissary items and other goods and services are dispatcheddirectly to the pods or individual cells. These design points, whatever their deliberate orincidental psychological and social effects, serve to maximize the number of prisoners that canbe controlled and monitored by one individual, reducing staffing; as well as restricting prisonermovement throughout the prison as tightly as possible .7 Monetary advantage is very much afactor to States which have very high level of criminal tendencies and low national income onthe other hand. A cost effective way of enabling peace and order for the State, at the same time,

lesser tax paid by the people are used in maintaining the same purpose.Constitutional Limitations and Special Laws

Section 5, Article II, 1987 Philippine Constitution

The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty, and property, and promotionof the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings ofdemocracy.
http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_2_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_2_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_2_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_3_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_3_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_3_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_4_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_4_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_4_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_5_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_5_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_5_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_6_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_6_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_6_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_6_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_5_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_4_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_3_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_2_53


19/22

19

The above cited law reiterates the principle of the State to protect its people, whether they beprisoners, politicians, laymen, tycoons, whoever, as long as they sojourn or live in the PhilippineIslands. It is of utmost importance that citizens recognize the protection that the State isaffording them. Otherwise they would not appreciate whatever means employed for achievingthe purpose. In accordance with this, the individual citizens must be secured in their own

person. Though the changes in technology would most likely impair that security, the Stateshould implement laws for the protection of it. Thus implementing the Electronic Commerce Actor Republic Act 8792, and as part of the State policy:

Section 2, RA 8792

The State recognizes the vital role of information and communication technology in nationbuilding; xxx its obligation to facilitate the transfer and promotion of adaptation technology, toensure network security, connectivity and neutrality of technology for the national benefit; xxx

Not only will this afford protection to the citizens of the State but also to those who uses ourtechnology even if they are mere transient visitors of the country. With the rampantimprovement of technology in the world, we must arm ourselves with knowledge andadaptability to these sudden changes. Technology would never go idle again.

Right to Privacy Impaired by Technology

Everywhere we look people are very strict, if not obsessed, about their privacy. Not only in theirown homes but in everything they do in their lives and in everywhere they go. That is whyhousewives buy high quality curtains, not only to boast about it to her friends but to protect herfamily from the people outside their homes. That is why fathers fix fences around their houses,not only to show how good they are in making and fixing them, but to prevent uninvited peoplein trespassing in their property. That is why computer geniuses put spywares, anti-viruses,firewalls in their computer, not just because of the possible crash of their computers butbecause they want to protect the information they have in their computers. That is why theGovernment have military training for soldiers, not just because they are needed by a State butbecause they want the citizens to be protected in case of occupation or invasion.

But are these really enough to say that people or things we care about are protected of theirrights? Are these safety measures that we have now enough to say that no one can harm us orinvade our privacy? The right to privacy should be inviolable. It is one of the fundamental rightsof an individual. The right of privacy is well established in international law. The core privacyprinciple in modern law may be found in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 12which states:

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home orcorrespondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to theprotection of the law against such interference or attacks .8

The right to privacy is internationally recognized as a fundamental right, hence, respected allover the world. But with the consistent discovery of technology, are we really protected? Are wereally protected from other persons? Are we really protected from ourselves? Do we really
http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_7_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_7_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_7_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_7_53


20/22

20

protect ourselves or do we endanger it by opening up to technology? By technology, we do notonly pertain to hi-tech gadgets but also the usage of them.

Internet Usage

What is the internet? The Internet is a global system of interconnected computer networks thatinterchange data by packet switching using the standardized Internet Protocol Suite (TCP/IP). Itis a network of networks that consists of millions of private and public, academic, business,and government networks of local to global scope that are linked by copper wires, fiber-opticcables, wireless connections, and other technologies .9 Internet was created way back in 1969,during the Cold War, by the United States military. It was meant to be a nuke -proofcommunications network.

Today, the Internet spreads across the globe and consists of countless networks andcomputers, allowing millions of people to share information. Data that travels long distances onthe Internet is transferred on huge lines known collectively as the Internet backbone .10 Now,almost everybody or everyone in the world uses the internet regardless of whether they own acomputer or not. The internet can easily be accessed by anyone who wishes to use it. Peopleacquire information through it, they exchange correspondence using it, and they giveinformation through it as well. One may say that through the use of the internet, everyone wouldbe aware and up-to-date on information and current events, not only in the country they are in,but all over the world. Indeed, internet is an efficient tool for everyone. But it can also be in away destructive, depending on the person using it. Depending on the purpose for which it isbeing used, and depending on the intention of the person using it. In a way, it may be a helpfultool on one hand, a destructive mechanism on the other.

What happens when not only have the tools of documenting the world become democratized,

so too have the tools for manipulating our interpretations of reality?11

Most of us, if not all, arebecoming dependent on computer technology, specifically the cyberspace. Before the I LoveYou virus disseminated in cyberspace, most internet users upload their files, documents,pieces of information, and anything they want to be accessed anywhere that a computer and aninternet connection may likewise be accessed. Not knowing that by doing such, they makethemselves more prone to being hacked or their delicate, confidential or priceless intellectualproperty would be penetrated. True enough, those who are very mobile needs such feature totheir advantage. But we cannot wholly depend on this because with the unbridled developmentof technology everyday, one cannot say what would happen next. The information that you havekept classified would be in the headlines tomorrow. More so, the pictures or videos that youhave tried so hard to remain confidential would be part of a magazine the next few days. All of

these, done without your consent or even your knowledge which is a clear violation of yourrights. Not only desecration of your privacy but a besmirched reputation on top of it.

Participatory Panopticon Through Technology

In internet culture, participatory panopticon refers to the proliferation of photographic and videocontent accessible through the World Wide Web and other internet sources to the point that itcan be utilized as an up-to-date, authoritative source on all human activities. The term was
http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_8_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_8_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_8_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_9_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_9_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_9_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_10_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_10_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_10_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_9_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_8_53


21/22

21

coined in this context by futurist Jamais Cascio, co-founder of Worldchanging, specifically inregard to the participatory panopticon, an example of the implicit web in which the personalmedia of multiple individuals is synthesized into a more comprehensive, global picture. A betterterm for this concept is perhaps Participatory Big Brother which is more popular and can beunderstood instantly by a large number of people .12

If we look at the term in the view of Jeremy Bentham, it connotes that people volunteerthemselves to be prisoners, or rather be guinea pigs, for their own improvement or so that theymay be observed and given remedy afterwards. Would this approach really work? Would beingin a restricted environment really make people adapt or would the environment adapt to thepeople being restricted in it?

In the realm of information technology, the right of privacy has focused on the ability ofindividuals to control the collection and use of personal information held by others. A Germancourt has described this as the right of informational self-determination. This right is oftenarticulated as fair information practices and codified in civil law. At the national level, most

governments have a general right of privacy set out in their Constitutions. Privacy rights havealso been established by means of case law and enactments of legislatures .13

Most people think that panopticon does not exist in real life, or at least in their own world. But forso many people who enjoy blogging, social networks, chat, web hosting and the like, thesepeople are the most likely preys of information hacking or piracy. Persons who sign up for thesekinds of activities in the world wide web voluntarily give their information to the administrator ofsuch sites and create their own profile for other peoples viewing or just to comply with therequired information to create such profile. Without them knowing that the very fact that theyhave given up basic information may lead to further access of their confidential, if not vitalinformation that they keep. A very specific example of these sites is Facebook. Upon creation of

your account, the user tends to add up applications that he/she would be using or would betrying out. Every time you add up an application it would direct you to a page where it gives youthe option to either allow access to your information so the administrator may be able to workout and let you access the application. The bad thing about it is it allows access to your profileinformation, your network, your friends information and other pertinent information you haveprovided for the administrator. This simple adding up of the application may lead to your socalled piercing the veil of your right to privacy and your friends right to privacy. A clear andapparent violation of your rights without you knowing about it, or rather you participating in it orcondoning it by adding the application.

Blogging on the other hand, works the same way. By frequently ranting and raving about

everything under the sun or moon for that matter, lets not only your audience a piece of whatyou are but providing them information about you and your lifestyle or anything about you. Bythe frequent story telling that you love to do at the end of the day allows not only theadministrator access to your information but your give them the permission to publish such storyand broadcast it to your networks as well.

Not only is participatory panopticon seen in the web but also in television. Big Brother shows,Pinoy Big Brother here in the Philippines, is one of the very exquisite example of a television
http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_11_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_11_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_11_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_12_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_12_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_12_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_12_53http://techlaw.berneguerrero.com/2009/04/04/a-view-on-how-panopticon-affects-or-infects-the-philippines/#footnote_11_53


22/22

22

show about participatory panopticon. The contestants are confined in a house where their everyaction, every movement and every conversation that they will be having or are having aremonitored by cameras in every part of the house in all angles. Making them like the prisonersan d Big Brother their observer like in Benthams proposal. It is more like they are undersurveillance but they knew about it and are freely acting upon every situation that are imposed

upon them. The house where they live in has a confession room wherein they may withoutrestraint tell Big Brother about their thoughts, feelings and other opinions, in a way giving BigBrother information about them.

It was said that cameras lessen crimes as persons are thinking twice on whether to commit acrime because of the fear that they are being watched and of the fact that they know that theymay get caught. But what people who acquire or make use of CCTV camera or Closed-circuittelevision cameras dont know is that the same information that they gather in using suchgadget may be used against them or such gadget may be used against them. The CCTVcameras are frequently used in surveillance by the police to observe the probable criminals thatthey are hunting down. Now, it is still being used for observation not for catching criminals but

also for security purposes. Notwithstanding this, people who use the gadget may use it for theirown bad motives like a stalker who may use surveillance cameras or CCTV cameras to capturea glimpse of their victim.

Participatory panopticon is everywhere. It involves our lives, personality, identity, family, lifestyleand almost everything about us. It may create as well as destroy us depending on what motive itis to be used and depending on what purpose it will be used. Liability on participatorypanopticon cannot be imputed solely on the party gathering, collecting and using the informationbut may likewise be imputed to the information provided as well. People neglect the importanceof confidentiality. They demean the privacy that they have and treat it as if it is a commodity thatone may replace easily. Little did others know that participatory panopticon is a real problem.That peoples privacy is in danger. With the rise of different kinds of technology, you may neverknow when you are being watched either as a prey or as a predator. If individuals are the targetof the participatory panopticon more so should they be careful. But it would be more frighteningto think what if it is our government that is the prey? How can the government protect itself fromthis information gathering and such being used against us? What would happen now to thecitizens privacy under the protection of the government?

review for tech and the law

Documents