To all you libelous slanderers, who keep on commenting to my posts, who are either friends or relatives of my ex-wife, please be informed of this Law that I am posting here. May this educate you. Please also take note that your comments are very well kept safe on akismet’s spam box (ready to be made public at the click of a button) and that I know exactly where you are and I can very well identify you even through all those proxy addresses and ISP redirects you and your proxies used. Good thing that I am not as childish as you people and I know better than get intimidated by your funny childish acts hahahaha. You people are so ridiculous, really, to be honest, your posts make me and my friends laugh hahahaha. damn, you really suck. hahaha!
This is but a friendly reminder from this Blog and it’s author. Make no mistake, this is not a threat. hehe 🙂
Unless some loyal friends out there decide to make a move for me. have a nice day. 🙂
From Manila with Love,
– Julian Javier, His Family, and Friends 🙂
There are also several versions of this law for different jurisdictions and for different countries.
You can never escape the long arm of the law if the law wishes to pursue you. 🙂
I’ll be letting Akismet take care of your malicious and libelous comments and starting today, I’ll be ignoring all of it. haha go knock yourselves out, suckers!!! hahaha t(^_^t)
By the way, thanks to those books I have read in the library in my early high school days that I am aware of this and thank you to my kind friends from law who had the fine idea of posting this. ciao! 😉
First, the disclaimer. This is not intended as lawyerly advice. Neither does it refer a specific case or circumstance. Much less can this be considered as an offer to provide legal services or to advocate anything. It’s just one person’s opinion on a matter of increasing interest to bloggers and other denizens of cyberspace: what constitutes internet libel in the context of Philippine laws.
How is libel defined under Philippine laws ? Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code defines libel as “a public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead”.
For an imputation then to be libelous, the following requisites must concur: (a) it must be defamatory; (b) it must be malicious; (c) it must be given publicity; and (d) the victim must be identifiable.
If you call someone a scum-sucking, slimeball, swindling pimp, even if this is fairly accurate, and post it online, you may be sued for making libelous statements.
Defamatory words are those calculated to induce the hearers or readers to suppose and understand that that the person or persons against whom they were uttered were guilty of certain offenses, or are sufficient to impeach their honesty, virtue or reputation, or to hold the person or persons up to public ridicule. Philippine law also presumes every defamatory imputation to be malicious, even if true, if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it is shown (Article 254 of the Revised Penal Code). Malice exists when there is an intentional doing of a wrongful act without just cause.
The libel must be given publicity, circulated or publicized. Postings in a forum, message board or blog can certainly be considered as publication. Lastly, the victim or offended party must be identifiable.
What would be the liability of service providers for libelous acts committed by clients ?
Under Republic Act no. 8792, otherwise known as the
Electronic Commerce Act, a party or person acting as a service provider incurs no civil or criminal liability in the making, publication, dissemination or distribution of libelous material if: a) the service provider does not have actual knowledge, or is not aware of the facts or circumstances from which it is apparent that making, publication, dissemination or distribution of such material is unlawful or infringes any rights; b) the service provider does not knowingly receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity; c) the service provider does not directly commit any infringement or other unlawful act and does not induce or cause another person or party to commit any infringement or other unlawful act and/or does not benefit financially from the infringing activity or unlawful act of another person or party (Section 30, in relation to Section 5, E-Commerce Law)
Hence, a service provider should not be held liable if he has no actual knowledge of the libel, does not benefit financially from the unlawful act or does not directly commit the libelous act or induce someone to do so. Of course, once the service provider gains actual knowledge of the libel, timely steps must be taken, within the service provider’s authority, to remove the offending material by warning the perpetrator and, if all else fails, terminating the offender’s account. By acting speedily on the matter, the service provider shows good faith and that it does not condone the libelous acts.
A fundamental sense of fairness and simple good manners and right conduct is usually enough to keep you, a good netizen, out of trouble.