Slashdot Mirror
Japanese Court Orders Google To Remove Negative Reviews From Google Maps
An anonymous reader writes: As reported by TechCrunch, the Japenese Chiba District Court issued a preliminary injunction forcing Google to delete two anonymous reviews for a medical clinic. Although negative, neither review violates Google policies. "The decision is based on a defamation suit from the clinic, a key part of which included an affidavit from the doctor who interacted with the anonymous reviewers and denied their claims." And here is the key part: "The court ruled that Google not only removes the content in Japan, but across the entire globe too." Google is currently considering it's options including an appeal.
This appears to be more of a bringing "internet way" closer to how things are done in real life.
As in if someone anonymously puts up a poster on private land that defames you, you actually get to challenge it in court and if it's found to be libel it's taken down.
This is censorship in the same way as "not allowing libel" is censorship.
This appears to be more of a bringing "internet way" closer to how things are done in real life.
As in if someone anonymously puts up a poster on private land that defames you, you actually get to challenge it in court and if it's found to be libel it's taken down.
This is censorship in the same way as "not allowing libel" is censorship.
No, if a poster is found to be libel in Japan, it is not taken down elsewhere.
In this case, it is protected speech in the US because it is opinions that the reviewers believe to be true. If it is still not allowed under Japanese law, that is fine; I've never heard them accused of supporting Free Speech. But the idea that it would be taken down in the US is, well, "insane."
Lawyer here.
Based on your spelling of "honour," I am assuming you are not a U.S. citizen.
Under U.S. law (with some exceptions under the libel laws of various states), a statement of opinion is per se not libel, as long as it does not express factually inaccurate information. Whether the utterance is anonymous or not, and whether the person making the statement shows up to "defend themselves" has no bearing on whether a statement is libel.
Japanese defamation law is somewhat different in that even true statements can be found civilly and criminally defamatory if it damages the victim's reputation and is not in the public interest. But even in this case, the fact that a statement is defamation (not libel - Japanese law makes no distinction between types of defamation, despite the language used in TFA) is a product of the type of statement and intent and has nothing to do with whether the person "showed up in court."
And no, Google should not take down the reviews in other countries. Japan's courts absolutely do not have jurisdiction to enforce this in any other country other than Japan, and Google would have to be a bunch of idiots to cave to this court, since it would only embolden other courts, not only in Japan, but in every other country in the world, to attempt similar shenanigans.