manipulating Internet search results should be subject to imprisonment of up to one
year and a fine up to KRW 10 million. 50 The proposed addition of the crime of ‘‘cyber
defamation’’ would punish those who openly insult others through the Internet with
up to two years’ imprisonment or a KRW 10 million fine. 51
The South Korean government also pursued an approach similar to its regulation of
other emergent forms of harmful or illegal content—by deputizing private actors such
as portals, bulletin boards, and other Internet content providers (ICPs) to actively
police slanderous content. While legislation would compel them to set up constant
in-house monitoring functions, 52 many of Korea’s Internet portals also implemented
their own measures to curb postings considered to violate privacy. For example, Naver
created a simplified process for users to immediately block ‘‘groundless rumors or
postings.’’ 53
In China, where it is common for dissidents and activists to be charged with subversion and other crimes involving national security for criticizing government officials
online, 54 authorities have also begun levying criminal defamation charges against
those who accuse them of corruption. A few cases of alleged online defamation publicized in Spring 2009 implicated not only the freedom of expression, but also people’s
right to criticize and make suggestions to any state organ, rights both guaranteed in the
constitution. 55 After petitions and other attempts to protect concerned farmers’ legal
rights had failed, Wu Baoquan and Wang Shuai were detained for their online criticism
of land seizures for commercial development pushed through by local government officials, in which farmers were inadequately compensated after being forced off their
land. 56 Wu Baoquan was tried twice for criminal defamation and ultimately had his
sentence increased to two years, although the same court that affirmed his conviction
decided to review his case in April 2009. 57 Wang Shuai was detained on March 6, 2009,
and released on bail only after signing a written confession. 58
Since 2007, when its bloggers (now over a million strong) reportedly began discussing sensitive topics ranging from government corruption and foreign relations to
HIV/AIDS, 59 Vietnam has steadily been refining its legal framework for online activity
to bring social media firmly under control.
Article 12 of the Law on Information Technology defines illegal content by proxy,
by prohibiting the use of digital information for the purposes of opposing the state
or undermining the ‘‘all-peoples unity bloc’’; inciting violence, propagating wars of
aggression, sowing hatred among nations and peoples or obscenity, depravation,
crime, social evils or superstition; undermining the nation’s fine traditions and customs; revealing state secrets or other secrets provided for by law; distorting, slandering,
or offending the prestige of organizations or the honor, dignity, or prestige of citizens;
and advertising for or propagating goods or services banned by law. 60 Implementing
regulations added ‘‘sowing hatred and conflict between ethnic groups and nations’’ to
the list of prohibited acts. 61
Asia Overview
415
year and a fine up to KRW 10 million. 50 The proposed addition of the crime of ‘‘cyber
defamation’’ would punish those who openly insult others through the Internet with
up to two years’ imprisonment or a KRW 10 million fine. 51
The South Korean government also pursued an approach similar to its regulation of
other emergent forms of harmful or illegal content—by deputizing private actors such
as portals, bulletin boards, and other Internet content providers (ICPs) to actively
police slanderous content. While legislation would compel them to set up constant
in-house monitoring functions, 52 many of Korea’s Internet portals also implemented
their own measures to curb postings considered to violate privacy. For example, Naver
created a simplified process for users to immediately block ‘‘groundless rumors or
postings.’’ 53
In China, where it is common for dissidents and activists to be charged with subversion and other crimes involving national security for criticizing government officials
online, 54 authorities have also begun levying criminal defamation charges against
those who accuse them of corruption. A few cases of alleged online defamation publicized in Spring 2009 implicated not only the freedom of expression, but also people’s
right to criticize and make suggestions to any state organ, rights both guaranteed in the
constitution. 55 After petitions and other attempts to protect concerned farmers’ legal
rights had failed, Wu Baoquan and Wang Shuai were detained for their online criticism
of land seizures for commercial development pushed through by local government officials, in which farmers were inadequately compensated after being forced off their
land. 56 Wu Baoquan was tried twice for criminal defamation and ultimately had his
sentence increased to two years, although the same court that affirmed his conviction
decided to review his case in April 2009. 57 Wang Shuai was detained on March 6, 2009,
and released on bail only after signing a written confession. 58
Since 2007, when its bloggers (now over a million strong) reportedly began discussing sensitive topics ranging from government corruption and foreign relations to
HIV/AIDS, 59 Vietnam has steadily been refining its legal framework for online activity
to bring social media firmly under control.
Article 12 of the Law on Information Technology defines illegal content by proxy,
by prohibiting the use of digital information for the purposes of opposing the state
or undermining the ‘‘all-peoples unity bloc’’; inciting violence, propagating wars of
aggression, sowing hatred among nations and peoples or obscenity, depravation,
crime, social evils or superstition; undermining the nation’s fine traditions and customs; revealing state secrets or other secrets provided for by law; distorting, slandering,
or offending the prestige of organizations or the honor, dignity, or prestige of citizens;
and advertising for or propagating goods or services banned by law. 60 Implementing
regulations added ‘‘sowing hatred and conflict between ethnic groups and nations’’ to
the list of prohibited acts. 61
Asia Overview
415