The freedoms of press and of the speech at play here, from the Front Page Sections, translated…
The settlement of the car wreck involving a professor and a student from Chenggong University did not reach a settlement agreement, the student was angered, and posted his complaints, three men saw and followed the student’s lead, the online news media also posted the article…in the end, the student apologized to the professor, and that, was over for him, but for the rest of the online community, they were all made to pay a fine.
The assistant professor, Lai from Chenggong University had a fender bender with a student, Mao, and they did not reach a settlement agreement, Mao posted his thoughts of anger online, called the instructor, a “failure of society”, some members of the online community chimed in, and, the news media from online didn’t cross check the references, and reported on the story, the professor sued them all, and the courts mandated that those who chimed in must pay the professor.
But because after Mao posted an apology online later on, he wasn’t sued, but Kuo, Wu, and Chen who’d joined the ranting after they read the postings were all mandated by the Tainan District Courts to pay $10,000N.T. each; and the online news media was mandated to pay $400,000N.T.; none of them filed for appeals. The man, Cheng who reposted the article, in the first trial, the judge found him not guilty, Lai went for an appeal, and the appeal found Cheng guilty of libel and slander, and said that he must pay $50,000N.T. and that he must post an apology online, but he can still appeal.
The reason why the Tainan Highest Subsidiary Courts stated that Cheng must pay was because afterwards, Mao had apologized online, which proved that the article was not true; Cheng claimed, that he was only reposted news, that there was NO way he could’ve know the truth about the car wrecks, and that he’d never meant to damage the female instructor’s reputations, but, before he’d posted, he didn’t cross check with the source, and he’d posted damaging things about Lai too.
The legal realm stated, that there are a ton of article online that are considered badmouthing about others, but, nobody checks the facts, and, some of the online community would chime in, without knowing, that they’d broken the laws. The judge said, that toward the uncertain facts, if one used rash words, then, it would be considered libel and slander, damaging someone else’s reputations.
The verdict pointed out, that Lai and Mao had a fender bender in May of 2011, the very next year, they failed to reach a settlement in July, that same night, Mao had posted, “So there IS such atrocious instructor”, with “It’s damaging to Chenggong University that you and your husband both teach there, it’s such shame”, along with some other words of bad thoughts.
Kuo, Wu, and Chen saw the postings, and started chiming in, left the messages on the discussion boards; and, an online news media, without cross checking the references, a few days later, posted the headline of “Chenggong University Student Got His Leg Broken, the Professor Who Ram Her Car into Him Was Arrogant”, and, Cheng had reblogged the news, and, Lai sued them all.
Lai believed, that when the two of them were talking about settling, she had the faith to settle, but because Mao wanted too much, that, was why the deal wasn’t made, that it wasn’t because she wasn’t willing to pay at all; her reputations were damaged by the ranting of the members of the online community as well as the online news media, she’d decided to find justice for herself.
And that just shows, unless you’re there, you shouldn’t REBLOG, REPOST, or POST something that’s only hearsay, because it would be libel and slander, if what you believe happened didn’t actually happen and the reason why the student who’d posted the statement wasn’t fined was because he was merely exercising his right to free speech!
