这人渣怎么当缩头乌龟了?泼妇骂街的劲头哪儿去了?
你就是见到皇家骑警就害怕,你马上要见真的皇家骑警.了 😁 😁 😁 😁 😁 😁
呱呱呱, 你这冒牌"皇家骑警"缩头乌龟了!
呱呱呱, 你这冒牌"皇家骑警"泼妇骂街!
网站不是伤人,泄愤的工具
Internet is not a tool for those who intend to harm
南茜 (Nancy Jin)(2009-04-03 下午02:39),
拥有博客、帖子、论坛的网站为网民们提供了一个强有力的自由发表评论的平台,同时,它们也会成为受骗客户,牢骚满腹的员工、被出卖的合伙人抒发不满、甚至故意伤害他人的工具。
Web bloggers, on-line bulletin boards, and Internet forums that provide a powerful platform for free expression could also become a tool for misled clients, disgruntled employees, and betrayed partners to release their frustrations, as well as a means for those who intend to harm others.
当某一特大诈骗案曝光后,各种谣言,暗示,指控往往会随着网络而蔓延,盛行。“XYZ公司刊登虚假广告,伪造公司财政报告”,以及“某人帮助XYZ公司欺骗客户”等网贴都很引人注目,能吸引大批读者,提高点击率。
The internet thrives on rumors, innuendo and allegations, particularly when a high profile fraud case is exposed. Postings such as “XYZ Corporation engages in misleading advertising, commits accounting fraud,” and “Jane Doe is a cheat who helped XYZ defrauding clients, etc” are catchy comments that attract many visitors like magnet and retain their attention.
代表《多伦多星报》及CBC的布雷克律师行著名媒体律师Tony Wong表示:”这些网络言论,不论其是否旨在故意损害他人声誉,都可能使发帖者负有诽谤他人的法律责任。”
“These online comments, regardless of whether they tend to injure the reputation of another person, may expose the poster to liability for defamation,” said Tony Wong, a prominent libel lawyer of Blakes, who represents the Toronto Star and CBC.
但可用来攻击他人、也可用来发泄不满的互联网是一把双刃剑。虽然互联网作为一种全新的表达工具为人们提供了自由言论的机会,但这种自由信息也让人们开始呼吁对其内容进行管制。
Using the internet as a tool to harm or release frustration is a double-edged sword. While Internet empowers freedom of expression by providing individuals with new means of expression, the free flow of Information has raised calls for content regulation.
Tony Wong律师表示:“虽说界限较难划清,但在言论自由保护与维护个人名誉之间还是有所区别。根据传统,加拿大的法律更偏向于维护个人声誉。”
“Although it is difficult, there is a line to be drawn between protection of freedom of expression on one hand and protection of personal reputation on the other. In Canada, the line has historically been drawn in favor of protection of reputation over freedom of expression,” said Wong.
Tony Wong律师表示:“根据加拿大法律,定义诽谤的标准相对较低。如果在一个思维正常的人看来,所发表言论对某人不利,法庭就可能会认为这一言论具有诽谤性,认定言论中的内容为虚构,并要求发表言论的一方证实其言论的真实性。但美国法律则不同,被控诽谤的原告必须去证明该言论并非属实。”
“Under Canadian law, the threshold of what is defamatory is relatively low. If a statement tends to cause a reasonable person to think ‘less’ of the subject of the statement, then a court will likely find it to be defamatory, which is presumed to be false and the onus is on the party making the statement to prove that it is true. However the contrary is the case in the United States, where libel plaintiff must prove the statement is false,” said Wong.
如果一个网贴谴责社区一名生意人而未指名道姓,从发帖者到网站是否要对诽谤负有法律责任?发帖者在不指名道姓的情况是否可避免诽谤之嫌?
If a website posting makes allegations against a businessperson in the community without directly naming the person, are the poster and the website liable for defamation? Can the poster avoid defaming a person by not using the person’s name?
Wong律师表示,事实上,即便在论坛或者博客里没有指明道姓,发贴者也难逃诽谤之责。
In fact, an individual cannot necessarily avoid defaming a person by not using that person’s name in a post or blog, according to Wong.
“根据加拿大法律,即使未直呼其名,法庭考虑的是一名具正常思维能力的人是否会明白该言论所指。在某些情况下,一个人可以在不暴露名字的时候通过其他信息被他人所识别,这些信息包括此人的工作、地址、相关的公开声明或公开的成就、或者上述信息的综合等。”
“Under Canadian law, the question that a court will consider is whether the person defamed would be identifiable to a reasonable person even in the absence of his/her name. In some cases, a person can be identified through characteristics other than his/her name, such as person’s job, address, relative public statements or public accomplishments, or any combination of the preceding,” said Wong.
如果发帖者仅仅是传播谣言或指控,是否有诽谤之嫌?
Is there any risk of defamation if a poster is simply repeating a rumor or allegation?
Wong律师表示:“从诽谤角度讲,如果你传播带有诽谤性质的谣言,你可能会受到诽谤起诉。仅仅因该谣言四起,并不意味着你就可以随便传播…… 据说某某是儿童性侵犯者,与称某某是儿童性侵犯这同样会伤害某某的声誉。而其他传播谣言者尚未受到起诉并非意味着你不会受到法律指控。”
“From a defamation standpoint, if you repeat a defamatory rumor, you may expose yourself to a defamation claim. Just because a rumor has become widespread does not mean that you are free to repeat it…To say that there is a rumor that John Doe is a child molester would harm his reputation in the same way as saying that John Doe is a child molester. The fact that other people who have spread the rumor have not been sued does not mean that you cannot be sued,” said Wong.
一般来讲,网贴所涉及的各方人士,从其发贴子的人到网站本身,都对发布带有诽谤性质的信息负有潜在法律责任。尽管在很多情况下,事实与公平言论将会是网络言论的主要辩护理由,很多网站在意识到他们的法律责任后都会认真的监管网贴,并会即时删除诽谤内容。
In general, all parties involved -- from the originator to the website that hosts the comments -- can be held potentially liable for the publication of defamatory information. While in most cases, truth and fair comment will be the main defences for comments or statements made on the internet, realizing their legal liabilities, many websites diligently screen their postings and promptly delete defamatory comments.
Tony Wong律师表示,为网上诽谤指控提供的辩护依据为该言论的真实性,加拿大法庭近来更偏袒那些为了大众利益写文章的记者,前提是该记者在准备、写稿和发稿时认真负责,包括向所涉及故事的人物收集观点,依靠可靠消息来源、给当事人合理的机会去发表言论,采取合理步骤核对信息的真实性。这些都是记者被告诽谤时强有力的辩护,即使这些报道可能存在某些失误。
While the defence to an online defamation claim resides in its truth, Canadian courts recently recognized that a story related to a matter of public interest written by a responsible journalist who prepares, writes and publishes a story responsibly -- who obtains comments from those involved in the story, who has relied on credible sources, who has taken reasonable steps to verify information, etc., and who gives people involved a reasonable opportunity to comment has a strong defence against defamation claims, even if the story contains some error, said Wong.
编注一:本文根据《大中报》的发表过的文章编辑。
编注二:如果你认为有任何社区、社会和生活问题需要大中报回答或调查,请将你的问题细节以传真(416-504-4928)或电邮([email protected])发给大中报。你可以匿名为本报提供调查线索,但调查线索应包括当事人的联系电话或地址、发生问题的时间及地址等信息。为了保证故事的真实性,如果调查涉及你本人,除非有特别的原因,你必须同意你的真实姓名用在将在大中报发表的调查报告中。
唐炜臻:组建律师团 告媒体和证监会