This case has been cited 6 times or more.
|
2014-02-18 |
ABAD, J. |
||||
| Roth v. United States[241] sheds light on the relationship between sex and obscenity, and ultimately, cybersex as defined in Rep. Act No. 10175 and obscenity:However, sex and obscenity are not synonymous. Obscene material is material which deals with sex in a manner appealing to prurient interest. The portrayal of sex, e.g. in art, literature and scientific works, is not itself sufficient reason to deny material the constitutional protection of freedom of speech and press. Sex, a great and mysterious motive force in human life, has indisputably been a subject of absorbing interest to mankind through the ages; it is one of the vital problems of human interest and public concern.[242] | |||||
|
2014-02-18 |
ABAD, J. |
||||
| Second, there is no requirement that the "work depicts or describes in a patently offensive way sexual conduct"[237] properly defined by law. Instead, it simply requires "exhibition of sexual organs or sexual activity"[238] without reference to its impact on its audience. | |||||
|
2014-02-18 |
ABAD, J. |
||||
| Third, there is no reference to a judgment of the "work taken as a whole"[239] and that this work "lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific" value. Rather, it simply needs to be "lascivious."[240] | |||||
|
2014-02-18 |
ABAD, J. |
||||
| There can be no more direct way of curtailing spamming and its deleterious effects than by prohibiting the "transmission of commercial electronic communication with the use of computer system which seek to advertise, sell, or offer for sale products and services",[314] unless falling under any of the enumerated exceptions, as Section 4(c)(3) does. The preceding discussion has clearly demonstrated the extent to which spamming engenders or otherwise facilitates vexation, intrusions, larceny, deception, violence, and economic damage. Spamming represents a hazard, and its riddance will entail the concomitant curtailment of the perils it entails. | |||||
|
2014-02-18 |
ABAD, J. |
||||
| Section 4(c)(3) is phrased in a manner that is sufficiently narrow. It is not a blanket prohibition of the "transmission of commercial electronic communication with the use of computer system which seek to advertise, sell, or offer for sale products and services."[315] Quite the contrary, it recognizes instances in which commercial information may be validly disseminated electronically. It provides multiple instances in which such communications are not prohibited. | |||||