AmberCutie's Forum
An adult community for cam models and members to discuss all the things!
Chaturbate banned the Philippines
- Thread starter nzhere
- Start date
-
** WARNING - ACF CONTAINS ADULT CONTENT **Only persons aged 18 or over may read or post to the forums, without regard to whether an adult actually owns the registration or parental/guardian permission. AmberCutie's Forum (ACF) is for use by adults only and contains adult content. By continuing to use this site you are confirming that you are at least 18 years of age.
- Status
From what I've read, the Philipines is the worst? Better than nothing, I think. I don't really believe studios should exist now that all these micro-lending institutions have cropped up all over the world. You can borrow money to get a computer, internet connection and a cam and pay it back as you earn off of it.
Mia, the big issues with the Philippine studios, as has been pointed out in other threads, are (in no particular order):
1: Recycling accounts while using old information for new models.
2. Fake documentation for models, especially those that are obviously underage.
3. Models doing things that are explicitly against the rules for the sites they are on (defecation, urination, couple cams on non-couples sites, etc.)
4. Using obviously underage models.
I don't know about Thailand studios.
As to the Romanian studios, they often recycle accounts to new models, but also update the new information. The only supposed problem with the Romanian studios is persistent rumors of credit card scams or money laundering. But, I don't think there has ever been any verifiable evidence of those rumors.
1: Recycling accounts while using old information for new models.
2. Fake documentation for models, especially those that are obviously underage.
3. Models doing things that are explicitly against the rules for the sites they are on (defecation, urination, couple cams on non-couples sites, etc.)
4. Using obviously underage models.
I don't know about Thailand studios.
As to the Romanian studios, they often recycle accounts to new models, but also update the new information. The only supposed problem with the Romanian studios is persistent rumors of credit card scams or money laundering. But, I don't think there has ever been any verifiable evidence of those rumors.
Yes since today...a new law was passed.
Philippines passes law that criminalises cybersex
The Philippines, which has historically never filtered online activity, has passed an act that outlaws a long list of offences including cybersex and libel, at the same time handing the government powers to block site access.
President Benigno Aquino III has signed the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 -- which criminalises a wide range of cyber activities from hacking and identity theft to cybersquatting and spamming -- and announced the launch of the Office of Cybercrime. It is, however, the vague terms used to outlaw cybersex and the update of the Revised Penal Code to criminalise libel communication via computers or "any other similar means which may be devised in the future", that is of most concern. Like Acta and Ceta, the act is seeking to control and curtail certain cyber behaviour through criminalisation -- unlike Acta or Ceta, it is targeting nearly any cyber activity it can think of, referencing them with some of the vaguest terminology imaginable and thus leaving potential innocent parties open to investigation and action.
Cybersex crimes, which could result in imprisonment of between six and ten years or a fine of between around £3,000 and £15,000, are defined as: "The wilful engagement, maintenance, control, or operation, directly or indirectly, of any lascivious exhibition of sexual organs or sexual activity, with the aid of a computer system, for favour or consideration". There are a few problems with the terms used here. This part of the act (which also covers child pornography) is designed to combat the Philippines' huge problem with people trafficking and individuals being forced into cybersex activities for the profit of a ringleader.
According to the country's Department of Social Welfare and Development, 60,000 to 600,000 street children are victims of child prostitution. However, if the act is designed to combat this problem, the use of the term "wilful" is problematic. Victims of the crimes in question are by no means "wilful", so the term is either included for other purposes or could potentially leave real victims vulnerable to criminal charges. It suggests mutually willing participants, not just those coerced to take part in profitable applications, could be considered criminally liable. The terms "for favour and consideration" are also vague -- it is not directly talking about partaking in cybersex for money, and so could be used to target ordinary people with no involvement in the sex trade.
While "Unsolicited Commercial Communications" are given three get out of jail free clauses that moderate the enforcement of the law, the libel entry, along with the cybersex one, has none. It simply adds it to the roster of other, traditional means of communications that could result in criminal punishment. The United Nations Human Rights Commission has already deemed the Philippines' libel laws "excessive" in the past, calling on it to implement reform of a system that is "incompatible with the freedom of expression protected under international human rights law". Rather than heeding this call, the government has instead opted to cast penalties for online libel "one degree higher than provided for by the… libel committed in traditional media".
Furthermore, in the recent Philippines case of Lacsa v. Intermediate Appellate Court, the definition of libel became even broader and more subject to interpretation, by extending it to include inference, irony and ridicule: "Words calculated to induce suspicion are sometimes more effective to destroy reputation than false charges directly made. Ironical and metaphorical language is a favoured vehicle for slander. A charge is sufficient if the words are calculated to induce the hearers to suppose and understand that the person or persons against whom they were uttered were guilty of certain offenses, or are sufficient to impeach their honesty, virtue, or reputation, or to hold the person or persons up to public ridicule."
It seems the act's libel clause was also hastily added to the roster at the last minute by Senator Vicente Sotto III, who says it will make the public "more cautious online".
In contrast, ruling on the Freedom of Information act has been dragging. The International Federation of Journalists said it is "greatly concerned that the inclusion of online content in the act could be used to curtail freedom of expression online. We are further concerned that the government of the Philippines continues to delay the passing of the FOI bill, which clearly stands against their stated commitment to press freedom."
Sotto, who has repeatedly been lambasted online for allegedly plagiarising his speeches, said a few weeks before the act was passed or the libel inclusion mentioned: "There are groups who are professional faultfinders who have nothing to do but sit in front of their computers and dig for faults… once the cybercrime bill is enacted into law, they will be accountable for what they say or write."
Philippine blogger Raïssa Robles commented: "Libel was never in the Senate and House versions of the cybercrime bill prepared by the respective committees of both chambers. The section on libel therefore never underwent any congressional public hearing… The inclusion of libel was never reflected in any piece of legislative document that was made publicly available."
Robles' concerns reflect those of the general public -- the "cut and paste" law does not take into account any of the nuances of online communication versus traditional. "Can the one who 'shares' or 'likes' on Facebook or re-tweets on Twitter the offending piece now be held liable for libel? Can someone who posts a comment agreeing with the alleged libellous material also be sued?" writes Robles. Indeed, the law makes no effort to differentiate between bloggers, domain owners or site moderators -- meaning anyone could be at risk.
Raymond Palatino, a representative for the Kabataan Partylist (the only youth party list in the Philippines congress) called the law "a step backward in our long-term aim of decriminalising libel" and warned that it could be used to control free speech and reign in government criticism.
"Under this law, politicians can easily file charges against 'hostile and combative' critics and witnesses by claiming that virtual protesters have threatened their life and property. Censorship will lead to repression once an activist or reform advocate has been labelled a cybercriminal.
"Woe to the National Bureau of Investigation agent and the Department of Justice prosecutor who will be swamped with cybercrime cases filed by showbiz actors, politicians, business tycoons, and other untouchables who want to punish their online critics. Instead of dealing with cyberwarfare, our agents will be investigating online libel."
The Burgos Media Centre shares the sentiment, responding to the passing of the act with this statement: "The presence of the decayed idea of libel in the crimes enlisted in the bill may be used to attack not only the cyberpress members but also to the progressive netizens like activists and political bloggers. Through this law, the Trapos [traditional politicians] can now easily file charges against critics by claiming that cyber journalists have threatened their life and property."
Philippines passes law that criminalises cybersex
The Philippines, which has historically never filtered online activity, has passed an act that outlaws a long list of offences including cybersex and libel, at the same time handing the government powers to block site access.
President Benigno Aquino III has signed the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 -- which criminalises a wide range of cyber activities from hacking and identity theft to cybersquatting and spamming -- and announced the launch of the Office of Cybercrime. It is, however, the vague terms used to outlaw cybersex and the update of the Revised Penal Code to criminalise libel communication via computers or "any other similar means which may be devised in the future", that is of most concern. Like Acta and Ceta, the act is seeking to control and curtail certain cyber behaviour through criminalisation -- unlike Acta or Ceta, it is targeting nearly any cyber activity it can think of, referencing them with some of the vaguest terminology imaginable and thus leaving potential innocent parties open to investigation and action.
Cybersex crimes, which could result in imprisonment of between six and ten years or a fine of between around £3,000 and £15,000, are defined as: "The wilful engagement, maintenance, control, or operation, directly or indirectly, of any lascivious exhibition of sexual organs or sexual activity, with the aid of a computer system, for favour or consideration". There are a few problems with the terms used here. This part of the act (which also covers child pornography) is designed to combat the Philippines' huge problem with people trafficking and individuals being forced into cybersex activities for the profit of a ringleader.
According to the country's Department of Social Welfare and Development, 60,000 to 600,000 street children are victims of child prostitution. However, if the act is designed to combat this problem, the use of the term "wilful" is problematic. Victims of the crimes in question are by no means "wilful", so the term is either included for other purposes or could potentially leave real victims vulnerable to criminal charges. It suggests mutually willing participants, not just those coerced to take part in profitable applications, could be considered criminally liable. The terms "for favour and consideration" are also vague -- it is not directly talking about partaking in cybersex for money, and so could be used to target ordinary people with no involvement in the sex trade.
While "Unsolicited Commercial Communications" are given three get out of jail free clauses that moderate the enforcement of the law, the libel entry, along with the cybersex one, has none. It simply adds it to the roster of other, traditional means of communications that could result in criminal punishment. The United Nations Human Rights Commission has already deemed the Philippines' libel laws "excessive" in the past, calling on it to implement reform of a system that is "incompatible with the freedom of expression protected under international human rights law". Rather than heeding this call, the government has instead opted to cast penalties for online libel "one degree higher than provided for by the… libel committed in traditional media".
Furthermore, in the recent Philippines case of Lacsa v. Intermediate Appellate Court, the definition of libel became even broader and more subject to interpretation, by extending it to include inference, irony and ridicule: "Words calculated to induce suspicion are sometimes more effective to destroy reputation than false charges directly made. Ironical and metaphorical language is a favoured vehicle for slander. A charge is sufficient if the words are calculated to induce the hearers to suppose and understand that the person or persons against whom they were uttered were guilty of certain offenses, or are sufficient to impeach their honesty, virtue, or reputation, or to hold the person or persons up to public ridicule."
It seems the act's libel clause was also hastily added to the roster at the last minute by Senator Vicente Sotto III, who says it will make the public "more cautious online".
In contrast, ruling on the Freedom of Information act has been dragging. The International Federation of Journalists said it is "greatly concerned that the inclusion of online content in the act could be used to curtail freedom of expression online. We are further concerned that the government of the Philippines continues to delay the passing of the FOI bill, which clearly stands against their stated commitment to press freedom."
Sotto, who has repeatedly been lambasted online for allegedly plagiarising his speeches, said a few weeks before the act was passed or the libel inclusion mentioned: "There are groups who are professional faultfinders who have nothing to do but sit in front of their computers and dig for faults… once the cybercrime bill is enacted into law, they will be accountable for what they say or write."
Philippine blogger Raïssa Robles commented: "Libel was never in the Senate and House versions of the cybercrime bill prepared by the respective committees of both chambers. The section on libel therefore never underwent any congressional public hearing… The inclusion of libel was never reflected in any piece of legislative document that was made publicly available."
Robles' concerns reflect those of the general public -- the "cut and paste" law does not take into account any of the nuances of online communication versus traditional. "Can the one who 'shares' or 'likes' on Facebook or re-tweets on Twitter the offending piece now be held liable for libel? Can someone who posts a comment agreeing with the alleged libellous material also be sued?" writes Robles. Indeed, the law makes no effort to differentiate between bloggers, domain owners or site moderators -- meaning anyone could be at risk.
Raymond Palatino, a representative for the Kabataan Partylist (the only youth party list in the Philippines congress) called the law "a step backward in our long-term aim of decriminalising libel" and warned that it could be used to control free speech and reign in government criticism.
"Under this law, politicians can easily file charges against 'hostile and combative' critics and witnesses by claiming that virtual protesters have threatened their life and property. Censorship will lead to repression once an activist or reform advocate has been labelled a cybercriminal.
"Woe to the National Bureau of Investigation agent and the Department of Justice prosecutor who will be swamped with cybercrime cases filed by showbiz actors, politicians, business tycoons, and other untouchables who want to punish their online critics. Instead of dealing with cyberwarfare, our agents will be investigating online libel."
The Burgos Media Centre shares the sentiment, responding to the passing of the act with this statement: "The presence of the decayed idea of libel in the crimes enlisted in the bill may be used to attack not only the cyberpress members but also to the progressive netizens like activists and political bloggers. Through this law, the Trapos [traditional politicians] can now easily file charges against critics by claiming that cyber journalists have threatened their life and property."
And then there's this: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012 ... -cybersex/
It is sad, however, sites like Chaturbate have no control over laws that may affect them if they were to continue allowing models from the Philippines to work on the site. I am sorry that this has happened. A lot of girls do not deserve to be kicked off strictly for being from the Philippines, but the law covers other countries as well, in the sense that the site owners could be fined or imprisoned. Chaturbate has to take action to prevent their downfall. I am unsure what else to say, so I will leave this here for discussion.
It is sad, however, sites like Chaturbate have no control over laws that may affect them if they were to continue allowing models from the Philippines to work on the site. I am sorry that this has happened. A lot of girls do not deserve to be kicked off strictly for being from the Philippines, but the law covers other countries as well, in the sense that the site owners could be fined or imprisoned. Chaturbate has to take action to prevent their downfall. I am unsure what else to say, so I will leave this here for discussion.
I was kind of expecting that with the law change. Did they post about it or send an email?
I'm wondering what sites which focus exclusively on Philippine models are going to do...
I'm wondering what sites which focus exclusively on Philippine models are going to do...
One of my fovorite models on MFC is from the Phillipines.
I hope that MFC is not banning all models.
I am not a lawyer but my understanding is that MFC has to follow US laws and they could simply ignore the laws of other countries.
The same when you order something from the US what is illegal in for example Europe. But of course no business wants bad press so not sure how MFC will act.
It seems that the "free" internet will slowly disappear with busybodies finding all the time new potential problems that need to be regulated.....
Maybe it goes the way like with the war on drugs, with prisons filling up with lawbreakers related to internet crimes, like camming...
I hope that MFC is not banning all models.
I am not a lawyer but my understanding is that MFC has to follow US laws and they could simply ignore the laws of other countries.
The same when you order something from the US what is illegal in for example Europe. But of course no business wants bad press so not sure how MFC will act.
It seems that the "free" internet will slowly disappear with busybodies finding all the time new potential problems that need to be regulated.....
Maybe it goes the way like with the war on drugs, with prisons filling up with lawbreakers related to internet crimes, like camming...
nzhere said:Shaun__ said:
What law would a site based in the U.S be breaking?
If you break another countries law, they can request extradition if they have diplomatic relations with the country you are in. For someone so worried about rule breaking you should know this stuf.
From what I've heard regarding Ro, the credit card issue is true - which is why members are not allowed. Nothing to do with models or studios.
So credit card skimming is a significant issue with regards to fraud and credit card crime. Many of the gangs appear to use Eastern European countries as locations from which to utilise the stolen data. In other words, skimmed in the UK, data transferred to another country, and used in Romania etc.
So from what I understand MyFreeCams has blocked Romanian IP address range from visiting the website. Or certainly from becoming premium. There are, of course, ways around everything (VPN's with IP addresses of foreign countries are fairly easy to come by - though to use bandwidth you'd have to pay for the VPN and they'll get closed down at some point).
As for the "Tipped via crime" sort of telltale tattle - any reversals due to credit card fraud see money taken from the model who received the tokens are they not? So depending upon how rapidly it is caught, I imagine the fraud involving the models is relatively low. Especially since repeated fraud with one model would be blindingly obvious to MFC and they'd ban them (for costing them money).
So credit card skimming is a significant issue with regards to fraud and credit card crime. Many of the gangs appear to use Eastern European countries as locations from which to utilise the stolen data. In other words, skimmed in the UK, data transferred to another country, and used in Romania etc.
So from what I understand MyFreeCams has blocked Romanian IP address range from visiting the website. Or certainly from becoming premium. There are, of course, ways around everything (VPN's with IP addresses of foreign countries are fairly easy to come by - though to use bandwidth you'd have to pay for the VPN and they'll get closed down at some point).
As for the "Tipped via crime" sort of telltale tattle - any reversals due to credit card fraud see money taken from the model who received the tokens are they not? So depending upon how rapidly it is caught, I imagine the fraud involving the models is relatively low. Especially since repeated fraud with one model would be blindingly obvious to MFC and they'd ban them (for costing them money).
So, you are saying that:Zoomer said:
1 - there is a huge credit card fraud in Romania
2 - those credit cards are used on mfc
3 - the "Tipped via crime" is relative low
Conclusion: Romanian men are criminal perverts !
We did already know that Romanian women are fucking hot, now we know what the Romanian men are!
I think tipped via crime is low because they're blocked But yes. Undoubtedly to be blocked it must have meant tipped crime was high, meaning scams used to be an issue.
I wouldn't be surprised if its the same for many areas. The cards get cloned in Eastern Europe. It may be that in Eastern Europe it's easier to use (i.e. signature verification is easy with cloned card - you sign it, and lack of security cameras may mean less likelihood of being caught). However, to say Romanian men is a little misleading. Criminal gangs may find it easier to operate due to lax controls or poor policing/high levels of corruption. I think it is an issue for many countries in the area. Ro (from memory) is not in the EU, and one reason from memory is the concern over corruption.
But not positive
But yes. Undoubtedly to be blocked it must have meant tipped crime was high, meaning scams used to be an issue.I wouldn't be surprised if its the same for many areas. The cards get cloned in Eastern Europe. It may be that in Eastern Europe it's easier to use (i.e. signature verification is easy with cloned card - you sign it, and lack of security cameras may mean less likelihood of being caught). However, to say Romanian men is a little misleading. Criminal gangs may find it easier to operate due to lax controls or poor policing/high levels of corruption. I think it is an issue for many countries in the area. Ro (from memory) is not in the EU, and one reason from memory is the concern over corruption.
But not positive
Zoomer,
to the CC use in Ro.. they have found a work around by using the stolen CC to purchase untraceable gift cards that load with whatever cash advances were available from the cards... Stolen and purchased within minutes. That was told to me by a 'somewhat shady' Ro studio boss roughly 2 years ago. Actually I find the blatant guffawing by so many members about crooked or involved studios or girls a bit disconcerting... Take your head out of the sand people. It is a fact it happens whether you want to believe it or not.
Ro is indeed part of the EU but several other countries have actively protested their inclusion.
to the CC use in Ro.. they have found a work around by using the stolen CC to purchase untraceable gift cards that load with whatever cash advances were available from the cards... Stolen and purchased within minutes. That was told to me by a 'somewhat shady' Ro studio boss roughly 2 years ago. Actually I find the blatant guffawing by so many members about crooked or involved studios or girls a bit disconcerting... Take your head out of the sand people. It is a fact it happens whether you want to believe it or not.
Ro is indeed part of the EU but several other countries have actively protested their inclusion.
Ro is part of the EU but is not part of the Schengen Area, my country (The Netherlands) is one of the countries that is keeping Ro out of Schengen. Corruption was one of the reasons for this, but nowadays the political situation in Ro is also given as reason.Zoomer said:
So cam-girl sites are now illegal in Phillipines. Now what? Scores of young women are now out of work and those who continue will be driven underground where they could be at risk of even more exploitation (and the risk of being arrested).
I generally disagree with laws that ban things like this. It might sound like a good idea in theory but in practice it could be a bad idea.
Have laws stopped people smoking weed? Have laws stopped under 18s drinking alcohol on the street?
Law-makers like to think banning something will be a deterrent but IMO banning something just makes it a forbidden fruit people will want even more. IMO People like being naughty and feeling like they are able to break the law.
I generally disagree with laws that ban things like this. It might sound like a good idea in theory but in practice it could be a bad idea.
Have laws stopped people smoking weed? Have laws stopped under 18s drinking alcohol on the street?
Law-makers like to think banning something will be a deterrent but IMO banning something just makes it a forbidden fruit people will want even more. IMO People like being naughty and feeling like they are able to break the law.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
