The Computer Crime Act is getting a redo as many claimit fails to stop cybercrime and stifles innovation.
Cybercrime has emerged as a critical threat to the modern world. But legislation to control it has lagged far behind the technology. Lacking global recognised standards and joint efforts, experiments in most nations and regions have proved costly and futile.
Last week the Philippines Supreme Court again stopped the government from enforcing its cybercrime law,which has aroused fierce debates since its passage last year because it would severely curb internet freedoms.
At the same time, the Iraqi parliament responded to a campaign launched by activists against a proposed law known as the Cybercrimes Act that would levy heavy punishments on those who circulate information pertaining to national security.
Last week strong concerns were voiced when the European Commission threw out its plan to impose strict data breach reporting rules by energy providers, banks and hospitals, saying their reputations may be damaged if they were to report online attacks and security breaches.
All these moves brought harsh comments on the internet, as increased red tape and bureaucracy rarely solve network security flaws.
Users were very suspicious of governments implementing new rules limiting computing freedoms, with one comment noting that governments fear the public using technology in ways they don’t understand.
Thai authorities are now working to remedy the damage created by their controversial computer law. The 2007 Computer Crime Act (CCA) has mostly failed to accomplish its goal of combating computer crime, instead harming unintended victims because of the law’s ambiguities and implementation,according to a study by Thammasat University.
The study, titled “Computer Crime?”, reports from July 2007 to December 2011 the CCA was used to block 81,213 webpages. The majority were blocked for lese majeste rather than computer crimes.
Gp Capt Anudith Nakornthap, the information and communication technology minister, acknowledged any cybercrime law will be imperfect. He said a new CCA draft that eliminates loopholes and deals with updated technology has been completed.
“We will have a public hearing soon and ask for cabinet approval before seeking a legal opinion from the Council of State. Finally, parliamentary approval is needed,” he said.
Chaichana Mitrpant, an assistant executive director of the Electronic Transactions Development Agency,said there is no doubt a computer crimes law is needed, but acknowledged problems with the current CCA.The agency assists Thai authorities in monitoring websites and servers.
“From our studies, phishing sites that are online for over 74 hours result in losses of over US$4 million. Cybercrimes occur every day and everywhere,and that’s why we need a law,” he said.
Mr Chaichana, a former official of the National Electronics and Computer Technology Centre, said the CCA has been plagued with problems since its implementation in 2007.”In particular,section 14 has been interpreted and used improperly,” he said.
Section 14 of the CCA says the import of pornography for public access,forged data or information “related with an offence against the Kingdom’s security under the Criminal Code” is punishable by up to five years in jail and fines of up to 100,000 baht.
Webmasters, media outlets and activists have generally been critical of the CCA for its harsh penalties and curbs on freedom of expression.
While the US, various European countries and Singapore all allow political parties and politicians to use information technology and social net-works like Facebook and Twitter as election campaign tools and to communicate with the public, in Thailand these networks are strictly controlled and regulated by the state, with content filtered before being publicly disseminated, said the report.
Businesses questioned whether the law is effective in deterring cybercrime at all, which is a huge problem worldwide. The European Network and Information Security Agency reports cybercrime affects 1 million victims each day, with economic losses amounting to US$380 billion each year.
One consequence has been to stifle innovation, causing economic losses due to its severe controls and ambiguous enforcement, say some critics.
Multinationals operating in Thailand such as Google, Yahoo and eBay have occasionally expressed their concerns regarding attempts to impose restrictions on internet traffic in Thailand, claiming that it may compromise Thailand’s growth potential.
Ann Lavin, head of Southeast Asia policy and government affairs for Google, said section 15 of the CCA was the reason why the global search giant stopped localising its popular YouTube video service in the country.
Section 15 states any “service provider intentionally supporting or con-senting” to an offence using a computer system under their control would also be subject to the same penalties as the offender themselves.
Mrs Lavin added the decision not to localise YouTube has hurt the chances of Thai content creators to benefit from advertising revenues.
Regulatory uncertainty also affects overall investment and the business environment. The consultancy Booz & Company concluded in its report that “intermediary liabilities” were a critical factor in investment decisions.
Questions regarding the CCA and dealing with potential liability mean added legal costs for small entrepreneurs and start-up companies.
The Thammasat researchers reached similar conclusions.
“The law requires business operators to shoulder additional expenses and legal liabilities. This has no effect on big media companies, but does affect operators of user-generated content websites and smaller websites,”the report said.
Many website operators, to comply with the CCA, choose either to selfcensor their content or seek other means to bypass the law, such as hosting their content abroad.”This problem affects the overall ICT business [in Thailand],” the report said.
Reference :
Zhang Qi. A Cyberocracy of Dunces. Bangkok Post (TECHNOLOGY). ฉบับวันที่ 13 กุมภาพันธ์ พ.ศ. 2556.– ( 36 Views)
