Tuesday, July 11, 2006

conVIRGINS: taste the possibilities


Convergence is the brainchild of innovation. Or sheer boredom.
Don't you just enjoy watching the home tv shopping network? Here's a food processor that slices, dices, peels, crisscuts and mashes. But wait!There's more! You can use it make your favorite egg salad without the hassle of peeling off the shell! All THAT for the low low LOW price of $4.99! The Japanese are an even more amusing lot. Which people in their right mind can think of inventing an umbrella that extends down to the ankles? A person with that same frame of mind also invented the internet.

Originally conceptualized as a defense network in the United States, the internet evolved into usenet groups for sharing information, and further evolved into the state where it is now: a global village, a world unto itself, cyberspace --- where you can do virtually what you do in real life. You can talk to people, order pizza, drive, watch your favorite show, own a pet and even... *gasp* fall in love!
Much like how cultures have a tendency to melt into each other (taglish, bollywood, latino rap, boondocks, michael jackson--he's black, he's white), convergence (in its techie sense) is an interlacing of technologies, --- a blurring of boundaries. New uses have been discovered for seemingly incompatible inventions. Take our favorite topic in class -- VoIP... calls made through phone lines from circuit switched to internet protocol. Revolutionary! Another case in point: p2p file sharing (napster, limewire, gnutella) from exchanging files to downloading bootleg music to a backdoor portal for hacking. Still revolutionary.
With the creation of a virtual world also came the infirmities of the real world--cybercrime. Despite that downside to the shiny concept of convergence, technology still evolves at a rapid pace (don't you just regret buying that laser disc player? Hehe), and its benefits outweigh its disadvantages. With the internet, we see technology imitating life imitating technology. Do you know that scientists say it may be possible for ODORS to be sent through the internet? Now THAT is convergence. Ü
In the immortal words of Madonna..."Like a virgin, touched for the very first time. Like a virgin... when your heart beats, next to mine..."What has that got to do with CONVERGENCE? Well, nothing really... at least to our knowledge. Who knows, perhaps somewhere, somehow, someone... out of sheer boredom or a flash of inspiration, may know all along.

Tuesday, July 04, 2006

Oops there goes another rubber tree plant


The UNCITRAL model law, a suggested "pattern" for electronic commerce laws of participating countries, emphasizes the need for wide application and media-neutrality in order to cover all factual situations--- present and future--- wherein the electronic commerce law can apply. This intent is understandable given the rapid rate of growth and obsolescence of technology. However, UNCITRAL's wide application policy may run risks of being vague and overbroad, and thus, may not always facilitate the ease of international transactions.
And experience only teaches us that an overbroad law may be distorted in such a way that its application may run counter to its objectives. Case in point: no one expected the United States to take unilateral action on Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, without UN's approval. And yet, in declaring a first-strike policy and adopting preemptive hostile action, the US found loopholes in the law to justify its unprovoked aggression. If the UN Security Council, the body governing international relations regarding force and warfare barely addressed the US' "good faith" interference, then one can hardly blame us for being skeptical about the broad application of the Model Law.
Section 37 of the E-Commerce Act of the Philippines, perhaps in keeping with this wide-application policy, provides for an interpretation which gives due regard to the law's international origin and need to promote uniformity in its application. Given its all-encompassing language, this clause seems to share the same infirmities of vagueness and overbreadth of the Model Law. It is also potentially conflicting, since even though it encourages wide application --- thereby espousing uniformity among nations, --- it also acknowledges each country's prerogative in enacting its own laws according to State policy.
The provision regarding the application of general principles of international law is nothing new. Weeks from the start of the first day of class, any freshman law student can tell you that general principles of international law form part of the law of the land. Our fear, unfounded as it may seem, is that we might be sacrificing our own state objectives all in the name of uniformity of application . Perhaps in our haste to conform to international laws, much of our ideals and independence as a nation have been compromised. Moreover, one cannot entirely brush away the pessimism borne of experience, that other countries might not necessarily follow the Model Law, given due regard to locally enacted laws.
There is nothing wrong with the desire to be bridged with legal systems and societies of differing technologies seamlessly, but as a rule, the country's E-Commerce law must be tailor-made to the many peculiarities attendant to its circumstances, and with enough safeguards to be in keeping with international standards as well. The Model Law should therefore, at best, serve as a mere framework for any country.
Anyway, the Electronic Commerce law is relatively new. There is no established jurisprudence yet on the matter. As for now, we can only hope that we don't end up being steamrolled by the objectives of the Model Law.