Arellano University School Law
TECHNOLOGY AND THE LAW
1st Semester – SY 2010
Atty. M. V. Guererro
Maramba, Divina Gracia M.
2007 – 0321
2nd Reaction Paper
Topic: Reaction on Net Neutrality Issues
Net neutrality simply put is free and open access to internet. It advocates the internet users’ freedom to: (i) access any web content they choose; and (ii) use any applications they choose, without restrictions or limitations imposed by the service provider. Included in this freedom is access any website free of charge, no payment, no charge, no monetary consideration for every downloads or uploads and on communication methods such as VoIP among others.
However, much as we are enjoying free access to the web there some groups who wanted to put an end to the said net neutrality by regulating and putting restrictions on the use of internet.
The author supports net neutrality but subject to regulation. It should be a neutral internet where there may be several levels of access which should be charged more than what the users are currently paying but such charges must be standard to all the users and not dependent on which service provider is being used by the user. To avoid discrimination on the level of access offered by different service provider there must be a standard service package that every service provider must offer so that the internet users were assured that though they have different service providers or network operator all of them can access on the same web level.
Note: The above discussion/reaction was made for academic purposes only.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Reaction paper No. 1
Arellano University School Law
TECHNOLOGY AND THE LAW
1st Semester – SY 2010
Atty. M. V. Guererro
Maramba, Divina Gracia M.
2007 – 0321
1st Reaction Paper
Topic: Reaction Paper on the Ban of Blackberry Phone in Dubai and Saudi Arabia
With the advent of Y2K (Year 2000), the people’s way of life have changed. Some may have change drastically, while others change but not as drastic as the others. The changes in life that the author claims is evident not only on a person’s way or standard of living but clearly manifested on the latest “toy” that a person is now playing or toying around with. The author fondly called the latest gadgets as “toy” or “a person’s personal furniture”, because that gadget became something that a person can live without but they can not live comfortably without. This toy’s were the latest gadgets that modern/latest technology has brought about, the same gadgets that facilitate so many things in a person’s life.
To illustrate, before people used telephone to talk to someone and used snail mail to send mail or telegraph if its of urgent nature because there are some things which a can’t be done through telephone alone. It will take a while to send the message across and to get a reaction from the receiver on the said message. Nowadays this exchanging of message thing can all be done anywhere in less than an hour using only one means which is a telephone, not an ordinary wire telephone but a wireless mobile telephone.
It is not just sending messages that this “toy” can do; this amazing toy can also be used in doing several things which formerly is a task of a personal assistant. It can also access other things such but not limited to banking transactions, trading transactions and any other transactions as long as the service provider for the phone services and the model unit of the mobile phone has all the applications that can access to those services.
Several manufacturers of mobile phones kept on improving their phone features to maintain if not to get a higher percentage in the market share of mobile phone fanatics and/or dependents. The maker of Blackberry phones being one of them. Indeed their phone is a very powerful tool when it comes to wireless access or services. It is truly having your own personal assistant and having your own office desk and files at your finger tips.
However, there are still some countries which do not fully appreciate this amazing technology simply because they view that certain feature of this “toy” represents a threat to their nation’s security. Saudi Arabia and Dubai among others felt threatened by the power of the accessibility of this phone and pose to ban the said mobile phone brand in their respective country.
In a democratic nation like the Philippines there are several Constitutional provisions of a person’s right including the freedom to communicate. These constitutional rights gave recognition to the things that a Filipino citizen has a right to buy such is not an absolute freedom. If there were matters that the exercise of such right will be a threat to the nation’s security the State has the right to regulate the exercise of such right but following the due process provided by the same Constitution.
The author born and bred in this democratic nation fully understand the fear and apprehension of Saudi Arabia and Dubai government in allowing certain feature of Blackberry to be used in their land. The manifestation of there is associated with terrorist attack which is very common with Muslim dominated countries such as theirs. Their intent in planning to pose a ban on the gadget is to ensure that no terrorist will be able to access to any information in their nation.
The apprehension of a nation of being attacked by terrorist group is not exclusive to the said 2 nations. This is a common of fear of every nation. It is the believe of the author that posing a ban on using Blackberry or any other brand of mobile phone in one’s nation will ensure that there will be no terrorist attack or any attack to that nation. If it is a fear on a national security which can be easily access through web or via computer programs, it will not be secured by simply putting a ban on communication gadgets. A nation must adopt other security measure on the dissemination of information through internet or web.
The features of a mobile phone whatever brand it may be was not made by its manufacturer with the intent of putting harm into a person’s life nor put a nation into a peril. It may be observed that these communication gadgets manufacturers’ intent is to come up with the most advance gadget ever created. Advance features which will make a person’s life easy and which will bring joy to the user upon owning this latest “toy”. A nation should not ban it’s use because it is a personal thing bought and owned by a person to meet his business or personal requirements. What a nation should do if there is a threat to this gadgets or “modern toys” is to merely regulate it manner of using and not total phobition.
NB: the above post was psted for academic purposes only"
TECHNOLOGY AND THE LAW
1st Semester – SY 2010
Atty. M. V. Guererro
Maramba, Divina Gracia M.
2007 – 0321
1st Reaction Paper
Topic: Reaction Paper on the Ban of Blackberry Phone in Dubai and Saudi Arabia
With the advent of Y2K (Year 2000), the people’s way of life have changed. Some may have change drastically, while others change but not as drastic as the others. The changes in life that the author claims is evident not only on a person’s way or standard of living but clearly manifested on the latest “toy” that a person is now playing or toying around with. The author fondly called the latest gadgets as “toy” or “a person’s personal furniture”, because that gadget became something that a person can live without but they can not live comfortably without. This toy’s were the latest gadgets that modern/latest technology has brought about, the same gadgets that facilitate so many things in a person’s life.
To illustrate, before people used telephone to talk to someone and used snail mail to send mail or telegraph if its of urgent nature because there are some things which a can’t be done through telephone alone. It will take a while to send the message across and to get a reaction from the receiver on the said message. Nowadays this exchanging of message thing can all be done anywhere in less than an hour using only one means which is a telephone, not an ordinary wire telephone but a wireless mobile telephone.
It is not just sending messages that this “toy” can do; this amazing toy can also be used in doing several things which formerly is a task of a personal assistant. It can also access other things such but not limited to banking transactions, trading transactions and any other transactions as long as the service provider for the phone services and the model unit of the mobile phone has all the applications that can access to those services.
Several manufacturers of mobile phones kept on improving their phone features to maintain if not to get a higher percentage in the market share of mobile phone fanatics and/or dependents. The maker of Blackberry phones being one of them. Indeed their phone is a very powerful tool when it comes to wireless access or services. It is truly having your own personal assistant and having your own office desk and files at your finger tips.
However, there are still some countries which do not fully appreciate this amazing technology simply because they view that certain feature of this “toy” represents a threat to their nation’s security. Saudi Arabia and Dubai among others felt threatened by the power of the accessibility of this phone and pose to ban the said mobile phone brand in their respective country.
In a democratic nation like the Philippines there are several Constitutional provisions of a person’s right including the freedom to communicate. These constitutional rights gave recognition to the things that a Filipino citizen has a right to buy such is not an absolute freedom. If there were matters that the exercise of such right will be a threat to the nation’s security the State has the right to regulate the exercise of such right but following the due process provided by the same Constitution.
The author born and bred in this democratic nation fully understand the fear and apprehension of Saudi Arabia and Dubai government in allowing certain feature of Blackberry to be used in their land. The manifestation of there is associated with terrorist attack which is very common with Muslim dominated countries such as theirs. Their intent in planning to pose a ban on the gadget is to ensure that no terrorist will be able to access to any information in their nation.
The apprehension of a nation of being attacked by terrorist group is not exclusive to the said 2 nations. This is a common of fear of every nation. It is the believe of the author that posing a ban on using Blackberry or any other brand of mobile phone in one’s nation will ensure that there will be no terrorist attack or any attack to that nation. If it is a fear on a national security which can be easily access through web or via computer programs, it will not be secured by simply putting a ban on communication gadgets. A nation must adopt other security measure on the dissemination of information through internet or web.
The features of a mobile phone whatever brand it may be was not made by its manufacturer with the intent of putting harm into a person’s life nor put a nation into a peril. It may be observed that these communication gadgets manufacturers’ intent is to come up with the most advance gadget ever created. Advance features which will make a person’s life easy and which will bring joy to the user upon owning this latest “toy”. A nation should not ban it’s use because it is a personal thing bought and owned by a person to meet his business or personal requirements. What a nation should do if there is a threat to this gadgets or “modern toys” is to merely regulate it manner of using and not total phobition.
NB: the above post was psted for academic purposes only"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)