Abstract
The characteristics of the Internet such as decentralization, anonymity and transnationality have made the Internet become a popular communication media nowadays, as well as the hotbeds of the cybercrimes. Meanwhile there is a substantial growing trend in the rise of defamation lawsuits on the Internet in recent years, highlighting the conflicts of personal reputation and the fundamental right of freedom of expression in cyberspace more than ever. Given the use of the Internet to communicate with others or express personal opinions often unconsciously against the law, it will be very beneficial to understand what kind of impacts on Taiwan’s criminal law the Internet brings. In considering of the controversy of the defamatory statements over the Internet, this article will focus on how the anonymity, decentralization, low cost of using the Internet, and transnationality affect the Internet speech, to present the particularity of defamatory statements in cyberspace and hope to figure out the standard of handling the defamation lawsuits on the Internet. Furthermore, the emerging issues of defamation in cyberspace from the perspective of American law were also explored. These issues include discussing whether clicking “Like” on a Facebook page or repost others articles constitute defamatory statements or not, and introducing section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) which contains a broad immunity for “Good Samaritan” content filter, not only to analysis whether Internet Service Providers (ISP) should be held liable for the torts and crimes of the individuals who use their servers, but also discuss whether ISPs should be responsible for filtering indecent or offensive material, and their obligation of deleting inappropriate content from the courts’ point of view in Taiwan. Additionally, due to the popularity of griping speech on the Internet, there is a growing trend of businesses and professionals suing consumers who griped about them online. This article will also introduce the concept of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) in order to examine whether these cases constitute SLAPP or not.