A Review of the Controversy between Supporting Internet Censorship and Advocating Online Freedom of Speech

Abstract

自從網際網路成為新興傳播媒介以來，它便成為許多個人及非傳媒組織的發言工具，而且得以用便利、廉價的方式發揮言論與訊息散播的功能，這種現象已經顛覆了傳統的媒體與言論自由的觀念。本文針對網路新科技下的個人傳播行為、網路媒介上的言論自由、以及現有法律適用性的議題加以探討，同時以一宗在台灣發生的網路毀謗訴訟官司與判決作為案例說明。如作者提出，既有的法律並沒有考慮到網路言論的不同特質，故無法適切的發揮規範網路言論的功能，舊有的毀謗法律對於所謂網路的不合法言論又過於嚴苛，故如何具體地保障網路言論自由而又適當的加以規範，正是作者在本文所提出的省思之處。

This paper explores the contradictory interrelationship between cyber-laws and cyber-liberties by focusing on one of the crucial legal issues pertaining to online freedom of speech in Taiwan-the legitimacy and appropriateness of decriminalization of online defamation. Utilizing an online libel lawsuit as an example, the present paper interprets the appropriateness of applying the criminal defamation law to punish unlawful online expression. From the free speech perspective, this paper specifically deals with two centered questions: 1) Should online libel be a cyber-crime? 2) Is it legitimate and/or appropriate to apply the criminal defamation (libel) law to the cyberspace context? This paper claims that it is either unnecessary or inappropriate to treat the online wrongful or unlawful expression as a criminal crime. Despite the fact that the ease of Internet access offers encouragement to those who believe that more voices should be heard in democracy’s ”marketplace of ideas,” at the same time, individuals have to be responsible for their words in the cyberspace as well as in the real world. Since the conflict between advocacy of online freedom of expression and supporting for Internet censorship has no easy solutions and is likely to continue as technologies, social and political contexts change; rather than strictly censoring online expressions, one of the practicable ways to resolve this challenge is to balance between cyberspace promise of free speech and essential censorship of objectionable contents.