CpE Laws and Professional Practice

Activity for Prelim/Midterm

Part I.

Scenario A
A parent who is working overseas called you and introduced himself as the father of a student
who is set to graduate in the following quarter. He asks if his son is on the list of graduating
students. He is also asking when and where the ceremony takes place so that he may schedule
in his company his vacation leave. Will you disclose the information or not? Defend your
answer.

Section from the Data Privacy Act: SEC. 16. Rights of the Data Subject

Answer:
I will only disclose the requested information over the phone under certain conditions like
verifying the caller’s identity, asking the student or the guardian's consent and record the phone
call for transparency. Since this is a phone call and there have been numerous cases of data
breaches during phone calls, the said conditions are a necessary precaution to protect the
sensitive personal information of our students. Verifying the caller's identity ensures that we are
only disclosing information to authorized individuals. Asking for the student or guardian's
consent aligns within the Rights of the Data Subject under Section 16 of the Data Privacy Act,
which emphasizes the individual's control over their personal data. Lastly, recording the phone
call allows us to maintain transparency and have a record of the steps taken to ensure
compliance with data protection regulations.

Scenario B
Vincent is a third-year Computer Engineering student. He is currently doing a research study
about the Counseling Services of the Office of Guidance and Counseling. He wants to conduct
an interview with the facilitators from the said office. He asked you if you could give the contact
information of the facilitators since you are friends with them since you volunteer to help them
with their activities on your free time. Do you think it is alright to give him the contact information
since it could be helpful to him for his research study?

Section from the Data Privacy Act: Section 12. Criteria for Lawful Processing of Personal
Information.

It is not appropriate to give the contact information of the facilitators especially if they are
not informed and did not give their consent. Based on the given scenario, there is a processing
of personal information since Vincent wants to collect the contact information of the facilitators.
The facilitators might be sensitive about their personal information that is why it is important to
be careful on handling personal information of other people. As someone who has access to
their information, I should protect and not disclose it without the facilitators being informed since
it will violate Section 12 which is Criteria for Lawful Processing of Personal Information. In
Section 12, it is stated that the processing of personal information shall be permitted only if not
otherwise prohibited by law. Although it is for research purposes and can be a good contribution
for the public, still, we should comply with the other provisions of the Data Privacy Act including
informing the facilitators about getting their contact information and its purpose. Since I am
Vincent’s friend, the best way that I can do to help him is by contacting the facilitators and inform
them about Vincent’s research study and ask if I can give their contact information so they can
talk about the said interview.

Scenario C
Diane is outside a restaurant in Batangas City around 10:00pm and was waiting for her brother
to pick her up. Unfortunately, she was hold upped and her bag was taken violently. She even
suffered minor bruises. The next day, she went to the restaurant. Since the restaurant have a
CCTV outside the restaurant, she requested access the CCTV footage which is in relation to the
incident. She wants to see if there is a way she can figure out who that person is and if she can
still recover her bag. She wanted to speak to the manager but was referred to the security
guard. She followed up on the request, but to no avail, there was no response. She then
threatened to make a scene in the restaurant if they do not grant her access. She was told that
because of the policy of the restaurant, that only authorized personnel only are allowed to
certain areas of the establishment. What should Dianne do?

Section from the Data Privacy Act: Section 16. Rights of the Data Subject.
The data subject is entitled to:
(a) Be informed whether personal information
pertaining to him or her shall be, are being or have
been processed

(c) Reasonable access to the contents of the data

that were processed, upon written request.
Answer:

Diane should assert her rights under the Data Privacy Act of 2012 by legally requesting
access to the CCTV footage from the restaurant management. According to Section 16 of the
act, individuals like Diane are entitled to know if their personal information is being processed,
granting her the right to obtain personal information, such as CCTV footage capturing her image
during the incident. Furthermore, Section 16 of the Data Privacy Act provides individuals with
the right to access processed data upon written request. This emphasizes Diane's right to this
information from the establishment, if she submits a formal request. This legal provision
provides Diane with a basis to demand access to the footage required to effectively resolve the
situation. If the restaurant unjustly declines her request, Diane may address the situation by
filing a complaint with the National Privacy Commission (NPC) and pursuing legal actions to
address the violation of her privacy rights. Diane can pursue justice and potentially reclaim her
stolen possessions by asserting her rights and taking use of available options under the law.

Part II. Current Events

The agents of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) raid the shop of an online seller for
allegedly selling overpriced fake designer bags. On Facebook, NBI agents raided a boutique of
designer bags over complaints of overprice and authenticity. The raid was conducted while the
online seller was doing a live selling. According to the Facebook post, the suspect was identified
as Paulito Ballano, who is the owner of a Business page named Direk Paul’s Classroom.
Ballano allegedly sells designer bags while the authenticity is not guaranteed. His bags cost
P12,000 to P80,000, which is overpriced although the bags are not authentic. The post also
exposed that Ballano’s customers are filing complaints against him due to his modus operandi.
What IT laws were violated by the said owner of the business page? Provide concrete reasons
why you think this/these law/laws were violated. State the section in the law that supports your
claim.

Answer: REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8293

Paulito Ballano's transgressions under the Intellectual Property Act, Republic Act No.
8293, unfold as a multifaceted infringement that goes beyond mere pricing irregularities. His
actions encompass a deliberate attempt to mislead his audience and customers by not only
overpricing products but also by distributing counterfeit items. This dual deception raises
concerns not only about the financial impact on consumers but also about the integrity of the
market and the violation of intellectual property rights.

Section 155 of the Intellectual Property Act serves as a legal lens through which the illicit
usage of counterfeit products, orchestrated by Ballano, comes into focus. This section not only
condemns such activities but also explicitly states that those engaging in these prohibited
actions will face legal consequences. By choosing to disregard the authenticity of the products
he sells, Ballano willingly exposes himself to legal repercussions, as outlined in this section.
Furthermore, Section 155 and its subsequent sections delve into the intricate web of trademark
laws, emphasizing the gravity of Ballano's violations in relation to the intellectual property rights
associated with these products.

The narrative of infringement continues with Section 168 of the Intellectual Property Act,
which specifically addresses the concept of "unfair competition." Ballano's actions fall squarely
within this definition, as he not only floods the market with counterfeit goods but also deceives
consumers by portraying these items as genuine designer products. This section sheds light on
the broader implications of his actions, going beyond the mere act of selling knock-off items and
extending into the erosion of the original owners' "goodwill" associated with their authentic
products.

In conclusion, while the Intellectual Property Act might not explicitly address the issue of
overpricing, it becomes evident that Paulito Ballano's conduct breaches far-reaching legal
boundaries. His decision to market and sell counterfeit designer bags not only violates
trademark laws but also undermines the trust and rights of unsuspecting consumers. The
elaborate framework of intellectual property regulations exposes the depth of Ballano's
misconduct, emphasizing the need for legal redress and protection of both consumers and the
integrity of intellectual property in the marketplace.