After visiting a Taichung beef noodle restaurant in July 2008, where she had dried noodles and side dishes, Liu wrote that the restaurant served food that was too salty, the place was unsanitary because there were cockroaches and that the owner was a “bully” because he let customers park their cars haphazardly, leading to traffic jams.This brilliant ruling will surely be cited by free speech advocates everywhere as the judges have done a wonderful job protecting free speech. This is the kind of ruling that should be trumpeted around the world, so the greatness of the Taiwan Court system is manifest for all nations to see. Truly this is a wise and humane judgement. I bow to the superior wisdom of these black-robed gods. Now that this judgment has been made, I will never again feel a chill in the air of freedom in Taiwan!
The restaurant’s owner, surnamed Yang (楊), learned about Liu’s blog post from a regular customer, and filed charges against her, accusing her of defamation.
The Taichung District Court ruled that Liu’s criticism of the restaurant exceeded reasonable bounds and sentenced her to 30 days in detention, a ruling that Liu appealed.
The High Court found that Liu’s criticism about cockroaches in the restaurant to be a narration of facts, not intentional slander.
However, the judge also ruled that Liu should not have criticized all the restaurant’s food as too salty because she only had one dish on her single visit.
Additional foreign blogger commentary from the Writing Baron, Lao Ren Cha, Echo, and OzSoapbox. These benighted souls clearly lack the acuity to see the unabashed greatness of this key ruling, to grasp its unalloyed goodness, how it has made their lives freer and safer in every way. Go back to your Cheeto-clogged, pajama-strewn basements!
UPDATED: Longtime commenter M says she got 30 days, suspended.
____________
Daily Links:
- Grass-Mud-Horse lexicon (thanks, Marc).
- The Bushman does a Neiwan grill party: looks like a blast.
- Don't sell betel nut to Chinese, says DOH.
- Taiwan's Museum of Alien Studies. Please tell me this is a joke.
- China warns US over South China Sea.
- China attempts to shore up Jason Hu of Taichung, lure Taiwanese SME's to special industrial zone just across the Strait.
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.
Man, it's in Taichung, I am worrying about you guys ---
ReplyDeleteI always take a picture to prove how salty noodles are. That lawyer at the end of the article was brilliant.
ReplyDeleteShe didn't get 30 days in jail, she got a 30 day sentence, suspended for two years. The English language news reports mistranslated the original Chinese.
ReplyDeleteStill, it is ridiculous that a case like this should be dealt with under criminal law. Surely it should be a matter for the civil courts.
Taiwan never fought for democracy and they never know what freedom of speech is.
ReplyDeleteSome redneck states in US have food disparagement law that might have jailed/fined Oprah Winfrey for her hamburger comment.
ReplyDeleteAnon:"Taiwan never fought for democracy and they never know what freedom of speech is."
ReplyDeleteThat's pretty ignorant to Taiwan's history.
"Taiwan never fought for democracy and they never know what freedom of speech is."
ReplyDeleteRemarkable display of ignorance to Taiwan's history.
It shows how superficial the democracy is in Taiwan. The civil liberty in Taiwan is still in the age of Fuhrer Chang Kai Shek.
ReplyDeleteTurton, have you thought of writing some negative restaurant reviews.
ReplyDeleteHey Guys,
ReplyDeleteI had heard about this and have a few key points that are easy to overlook.
First off, it sounds like the blogger is being punished for saying noodles were too salty.
In the above post, the judge defends her statements about cockroaches and criticizes her statements about the noodles being too salty...
But what was she really guilty of? Deflimation, right?
I seem to remember reading that she made some rude comments about the owner, calling him a bully or something like that.
Could it be possible that we're not reading the bloggers post and are making assumptions based on a vague statement of the facts? Maybe she's not being punished for her noodle comments, but for what she said about the owner on a personal level.
Can anyone who's read the official ruling and the original post comment?
Hi Tim, check out my new article,
ReplyDelete"More on the speech freedom case of a food blogger",
http://echotaiwan.blogspot.com/2011/07/more-on-speech-freedom-case-of-food.html