Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cybercrime Laws
Cybercrime Laws
8792
Electronic Commerce Act of 2000
Jurisdiction
1. Any violation committed by a Filipino national regardless of the place of commission
2. Any of the elements was committed within the Philippines or committed with the use of any computer system wholly or
partly situated in the country
3. When by such commission any damage is caused to a natural or juridical person who, at the time the offense was
committed, was in the Philippines.
Offenses under cybercrime courts
• Section 4 of RA 10175
a) Illegal access
b) Illegal interception
c) Data interference
d) System interference
e) Misuse of devices
f) Cyber-squatting
g) Computer-related forgery
h) Computer-related fraud
i) Computer-related identity theft
j) Cybersex
k) Child pornography
l) Online libel
Elements:
1. Interception of computer data
2. Computer data was transmitted to, from, or within a computer system, through a non public means including
electromagnetic emissions
3. Interception done through technical means
4. Interception was done without right
Exception: When it is your job to do so, and must be done in the course of employment.
Exception: Prohibited acts were done as part of an authorized testing of a computer system
Actual case:
a) ATM skimming device
b) Keylogger
Try “facbook.com” and see what will happen! What did Facebook do?
Example: Hack the system of LRA and forge documents to effect an illegal transfer of parcel of land.
Actual case: A was approached by B to join a certain modeling agency. B asked A to submit copies of her IDs
and greeting videos to be used for the latter’s alleged “audition.”
Without the knowledge of A, B used said IDs and videos to put up an online investment scam.
Many people were tricked and were able to send investment money to B. B then shared her
“earnings” to A as her “talent fees.”
Actual cases: Fake Facebook account case
Elements of Libel:
1. Allegation of a discreditable act or condition concerning another;
2. Publication of the charge;
3. Identity of the person defamed; and
4. Existence of malice.
Will one be liable for the non- commercial copying or reproduction of said photo or video?
• Yes. The mere copying or reproduction of said material will make one liable under the law regardless of the reason or
whether one profits or not from such act. Indeed, the mere showing of the material on one’s cellphone would violate the
law.
The persons in the photo knew and consented to the video recording or taking of the photo; can I reproduce, distribute, or
broadcast it?
• No. If the person merely consented to the taking of the photo or the video recording and did not give written consent for
its reproduction, distribution, and broadcasting, then anyone committing the said acts shall be held liable
Does RA 9995 cover peeping toms who do not take photo or video recording?
• No. It only covers situations where there was capturing, photographing, recording or copying of sexual acts or private
parts. • But may still be subjected to other civil or criminal cases.
PENALTY: RA 9995
• Penalty: 3 years to 7 years AND fine of P100,000.00 to 500,000.00
Prohibited Acts
1. Producing, using, trafficking in one or more counterfeit access devices;
2. Trafficking in one or more unauthorized access devices or access devices fraudulently applied for;
3. Using, with intent to defraud, an unauthorized access device;
4. Using an access device fraudulently applied for;
5. Possessing one or more counterfeit access devices or access devices fraudulently applied for
6. Producing, trafficking in, having control or custody of, or possessing device-making or altering equipment;
7. Inducing, enticing, permitting or allowing another to produce, use traffic counterfeit, unauthorized or fraudulently
applied access devices;
8. Multiple imprinting on more than one transaction record, sales slip or similar document;
9. Disclosing any information imprinted on the access devicewithout the owner’spermission;
10. Obtaining money or anything of value through the use of an access device, with intent to defraud or with intent to gain
and fleeing thereafter
11. Possessing, without authority, an access device or material where the access device is indicated;
12. Writing on sales slips approval numbers when no approval was given;
13. Effecting transaction with other’s access device
14. Soliciting without authority of issuer of access device
CZ V. PEOPLE (2017) • A---- De S--- C--- was found in possession of Citibank Visa credit card number 4539 7207 8677 7008,
which bore the name "G---- S-----." • He used the same credit card to purchase Ferragamo shoes worth US$363.00 at Duty
Free Fiesta Mall. Citibank Visa credit card number 4539 7207 8677 7008 was later proven to be a counterfeit access device.
Penalty:
a) Use: 10 to 12 years of imprisonment AND a fine of US$726.00 or Php37,752.00
b) Possession: 6 to 10 years of imprisonment AND a fine of Php10,000.00
Other Cybercrimes
Sextortion: Online Robbery
Online Privacy Issue
HELD:
It is suggested, that a profile, or even a post, with visibility set at "Friends Only" cannot easily, more so
automatically, be said to be "very private," contrary to petitioners’ argument.
No invasion of privacy by STC: Respondents were mere recipients of what were posted. They did not resort to any
unlawful means of gathering the information as it was voluntarily given to them by persons who had legitimate access to
the said posts.
Taken from:
SEMINAR ON CYBERCRIME LAWS Atty. Marco Polo E. Cunanan Public Attorney II, PAO San Fernando (P) District Lecturer,
Tarlac State University School of Law