Will
you be held liable for "Liking" an openly defamatory statement,
"Commenting" on it, or "Sharing" it with others on Facebook
and Twitter?
- The Supreme Court held that only the author of the offending online article is liable.
- blog service provider like Yahoo and Internet service providers and content providers like Globe, Smart, Sun Cellular, Google, Facebook, Twitter and Internet Café are not liable.
JOSE JESUS M. DISINI, JR., et al., vs. THE SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, et
al.,
G.R. No. 203335.February 11, 2014
ABAD, J.:
Section 5 of
the Cybercrime Law
Section 5
provides:
Sec. 5. Other Offenses. — The following acts shall
also constitute an offense:
(a) Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of
Cybercrime. – Any person who willfully abets or aids in the commission of any
of the offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.
The Supreme Court has
declared this provision as null and void as it "encroaches on freedom
of speech" for it "generates a chilling effect on those who
express themselves through cyberspace posts, comments and other messages."
Aiding or abetting has of
course well-defined meaning and application in existing laws. When a person
aids or abets another in destroying a forest, smuggling merchandise into
the country, or interfering in the peaceful picketing of laborers, his
action is essentially physical and so is susceptible to easy assessment as
criminal in character. These forms of aiding or abetting lend themselves to the
tests of common sense and human experience.
But,
when it comes to certain cybercrimes, the waters are muddier and the line of
sight is somewhat blurred. The idea of "aiding or abetting"
wrongdoings online threatens the heretofore popular and unchallenged dogmas of
cyberspace use.
Two
of the most popular sites are Facebook and Twitter
if the post is made available to the public, meaning to everyone and not
only to his friends, anyone on Facebook can react to the posting, clicking any
of several buttons of preferences on the program's screen such as
"Like," "Comment," or "Share." "Like"
signifies that the reader likes the posting while "Comment" enables
him to post online his feelings or views about the same, such as "This is
great!" When a Facebook user "Shares" a posting, the original
"posting" will appear on his own Facebook profile, consequently
making it visible to his down-line Facebook Friends.
Twitter, on the other hand, is an internet social networking and
microblogging service that enables its users to send and read short text-based
messages of up to 140 characters. These are known as "Tweets."
Microblogging is the practice of posting small pieces of digital content—which
could be in the form of text, pictures, links, short videos, or other media—on
the internet. Instead of friends, a Twitter user has "Followers,"
those who subscribe to this particular user's posts, enabling them to read the
same, and "Following," those whom this particular user is subscribed
to, enabling him to read their posts. Like Facebook, a Twitter user can make
his tweets available only to his Followers, or to the general public. If a post
is available to the public, any Twitter user can "Retweet" a given
posting. Retweeting is just reposting or republishing another person's tweet
without the need of copying and pasting it.
In the cyberworld, there are many actors: a) the blogger who originates
the assailed statement; b) the blog service provider like Yahoo; c) the
internet service provider like PLDT, Smart, Globe, or Sun; d) the internet café
that may have provided the computer used for posting the blog; e) the person
who makes a favorable comment on the blog; and f) the person who posts a link
to the blog site. Now, suppose Maria (a
blogger) maintains a blog on WordPress.com (blog service provider). She needs
the internet to access her blog so she subscribes to Sun Broadband (Internet
Service Provider).
One day, Maria posts on her internet account the statement that a
certain married public official has an illicit affair with a movie star. Linda,
one of Maria's friends who sees this post, comments online, "Yes, this is
so true! They are so immoral." Maria's original post is then multiplied by
her friends and the latter's friends, and down the line to friends of friends
almost ad infinitum. Nena, who is a stranger to both Maria and Linda, comes
across this blog, finds it interesting and so shares the link to this
apparently defamatory blog on her Twitter account. Nena's "Followers"
then "Retweet" the link to that blog site.
Pamela, a Twitter user, stumbles upon a random person's
"Retweet" of Nena's original tweet and posts this on her Facebook
account. Immediately, Pamela's Facebook Friends start Liking and making Comments
on the assailed posting. A lot of them even press the Share button, resulting
in the further spread of the original posting into tens, hundreds, thousands,
and greater postings.
The question is: are online postings such as "Liking" an
openly defamatory statement, "Commenting" on it, or
"Sharing" it with others, to be regarded as "aiding or
abetting?" In libel in the physical world, if Nestor places on the office
bulletin board a small poster that says, "Armand is a thief!," he
could certainly be charged with libel. If Roger, seeing the poster, writes on
it, "I like this!," that could not be libel since he did not author
the poster. If Arthur, passing by and noticing the poster, writes on it,
"Correct!," would that be libel?
No, for he merely expresses
agreement with the statement on the poster. He still is not its author.
Besides, it is not clear if aiding or abetting libel in the physical world is a
crime.
But suppose Nestor posts the blog, "Armand is a thief!" on a
social networking site. Would a reader and his Friends or Followers, availing
themselves of any of the "Like," "Comment," and
"Share" reactions, be guilty of aiding or abetting libel? And, in the
complex world of cyberspace expressions of thoughts, when will one be liable
for aiding or abetting cybercrimes? Where is the venue of the crime?
Except for the original author of the assailed statement, the rest (those
who pressed Like, Comment and Share) are essentially knee-jerk
sentiments of readers who may think little or haphazardly of their response
to the original posting. Will they be liable for aiding or abetting? And,
considering the inherent impossibility of joining hundreds or thousands
of responding "Friends" or "Followers" in the criminal
charge to be filed in court, who will make a choice as to who should go to jail
for the outbreak of the challenged posting?
x x
Of
course, if the "Comment" does not merely react to the original
posting but creates an altogether new defamatory story against Armand like
"He beats his wife and children," then that should be considered an
original posting published on the internet. Both the penal code and the
cybercrime law clearly punish authors of defamatory publications. Make no mistake, libel
destroys reputations that society values. Allowed to cascade in the internet,
it will destroy relationships and, under certain circumstances, will generate
enmity and tension between social or economic groups, races, or religions,
exacerbating existing tension in their relationships.
1 Comments
Welcome!
ReplyDelete