Internet Issues

The legal procedure for identifying anonymous posters is the first step in addressing online defamation.

The revised Provider Liability Limitation Act (effective October 2022) streamlined the formerly two-stage process into a single court proceeding (Disclosure Order Cases). The court can now order both content providers and ISPs to disclose sender information simultaneously, with provision orders (Art. 15) compelling information sharing between providers.

Previous two-stage process (still available): (1) Provisional injunction against site administrator for IP address disclosure; (2) Lawsuit against ISP for subscriber information disclosure.

Cost estimate: Attorney fees of ¥300,000-700,000 depending on complexity and whether overseas providers are involved.

Timeline: New system: 6 months to 1 year. Old two-stage process: 1 to 1.5 years.

Critical timing: ISP access logs are typically retained for only 3-6 months. Prompt attorney consultation and log preservation measures are essential upon discovering defamatory posts.

Multiple removal methods exist, with selection depending on urgency and circumstances.

1. Direct request to site administrator: Report via platform tools (X/Twitter, Instagram, YouTube). Simplest first step.

2. Takedown notice (PLLA Art. 3-2): Formal written request using the Telecom Services Association template. The site administrator queries the poster and removes content if no objection within 7 days.

3. Provisional injunction (Civil Preservation Act Art. 23-2): Court-ordered removal for urgent cases or when administrators refuse voluntary removal. Decisions typically issued in 1-2 months. Security deposit: ¥100,000-300,000.

4. Search result removal: Google and other search engines may be ordered to remove results when privacy harm outweighs public interest (Supreme Court Decision, January 31, 2017). However, the threshold for removal is set high.

5. Google Maps reviews: Factually false or business-obstructing reviews can be removed through Google reporting or legal procedures.

Online defamation can be addressed through both criminal and civil channels.

Criminal defamation (Penal Code Art. 230): Publicly disclosing facts that damage a person's reputation. Crucially, truth is NOT a defense by itself. Penalty: up to 3 years imprisonment or ¥500,000 fine. Requires victim's complaint.

Defense (Art. 230-2): Exempt if the matter (1) relates to public interest, (2) is solely for public benefit, and (3) is proven true (or reasonably believed to be true).

Insult (Art. 231): Publicly insulting someone without stating specific facts. Penalty increased by 2022 amendment (prompted by the Hana Kimura case) to up to 1 year imprisonment or ¥300,000 fine.

Civil defamation (Civil Code Art. 709/710): Expressions that lower social evaluation causing damage. Typical damages: ¥500,000-1,000,000 for individuals; ¥500,000-3,000,000 for corporations. Attorney fees may be partially recoverable (typically about 10% of the awarded amount).

Privacy rights: Although not codified in statute, case law protects against disclosure of: (1) private facts or information that could be perceived as factual, (2) matters a reasonable person would not want published, and (3) information not yet publicly known.

Doxxing: Publishing someone's name, address, phone number, or workplace without consent constitutes a privacy violation and grounds for damages.

Personal Information Protection Act: Data controllers are generally prohibited from providing personal data to third parties without consent (Art. 27). The 2022 amendment introduced criminal penalties applicable to individuals in certain cases.

Right of publicity/portrait rights: Publishing someone's photograph without consent is actionable as a portrait right violation.

The Revenge Porn Prevention Act (2014) criminalizes non-consensual distribution of intimate images.

Criminal offenses: Distribution to unspecified persons (Art. 3-1): up to 3 years imprisonment or ¥500,000 fine. Providing to specific persons for distribution purposes (Art. 3-2): up to 1 year imprisonment or ¥300,000 fine.

Removal: Under the PLLA, site administrators may remove revenge porn content without the standard 7-day waiting period for poster consultation (Art. 3-2-2).

Support resources: Police (#9110), Safer Internet Association (SIA) — provides free deletion request assistance for domestic and international sites, Legal Aid (0570-078374).

Evidence preservation: Save URLs, timestamped screenshots, and poster information. Early action before further dissemination is critical.

Requirements: Using another's copyrighted work — blog posts, photos, illustrations, videos, music — without permission through reproduction (Copyright Act Art. 21) or public transmission (Art. 23).

Response options: (1) Direct cease-and-desist to infringer; (2) Platform reporting (DMCA notice for US-based platforms); (3) Sender disclosure request to identify infringer; (4) Damages claim (Art. 114 provides presumption rules for calculating damages); (5) Injunction (Art. 112); (6) Criminal complaint (Art. 119: up to 10 years imprisonment or ¥10M fine).

Fair use/quotation (Art. 32-1): Published works may be quoted in accordance with fair practices and within legitimate scope for reporting, criticism, or research purposes. Source attribution is required (Art. 48).