Libel vs Non- libel

[Neal]

Recently I have been told that the posting of FACTS is libelous on another board. I know the difference between libel, and being a person of principle, I decided to cut amiable relations with the other board when the post was deleted.

In order that I may make the distinction known for the other board owner as well as any other person looking for a definition, libel is when you accuse someone of something and you cannot prove it and an item being non libelous is when you accuse someone of something that happened to you, not a third person and you can prove it. The problem that occurs sometimes on a board is that a person makes an accusation that cannot or will not back it up just in case a suit.

[Khor tose]

I don't know whether this should be a PM to you, or I should post it as a reply to your above message. So feel free to remove this is it violates any board rules. I too believed that you could be sued for saying anything bad about any business or person, and challenged the board owner on this issue. Well the old board owner, a lawyer, came on and set me straight. Read down and another board owner who is not a lawyer then challenged the old board owner. So I guess with each individual board it is totally up to the owner what they want to allow, so I am glad you are taking the more liberal position.

http://www.gaythailand.com/forums/topic ... her-sites/ (http://www.gaythailand.com/forums/topic/8267-links-to-other-sites/)

[Neal]

Thank you for your response. In the past I have been accused unjustly for working hand in hand with other boards. I have a mind of my own and make decisions on my own and other boards can work hand in hand all they want, I will continue to make decisions on my own based on my own feelings and concerns. It is a policy of this board not to out a person as this is an annonymous board. I am sorry if everyone does not agree with every decision I make and you are certainly welcome to discuss it with me via PM. Who knows, I may reverse it or not.
Thank you and please continue to have a great time on the board.

[Geezer]

I read the Thai law years ago and understand that the applicable law is not libel, but defamation.

Defamation is defined as anything which harms a person's reputation or financial situation. Whether the defamation be true or false is immaterial in Thai law.

[Geezer]

Mea culpa. I have found several websites which essentially say the following:

Civil defamation in Thailand is defined under the Thai Civil and Commercial Code as a statement made contrary to the truth which is asserted or circulated as a fact which is injurious to the reputation or credit of another or his earnings or prosperity in any other manner.
http://www.thailandlaw.org/defamation-in-thailand/

I guess I'll have to surrender my jailhouse lawyer license.

[Up2U]

Mea culpa. I have found several websites which essentially say the following:

Civil defamation in Thailand is defined under the Thai Civil and Commercial Code as a statement made contrary to the truth which is asserted or circulated as a fact which is injurious to the reputation or credit of another or his earnings or prosperity in any other manner.
http://www.thailandlaw.org/defamation-in-thailand/

I guess I'll have to surrender my jailhouse lawyer license.

It's interesting to continue reading the same article:

Criminal Defamation

Defamation as a criminal act in Thailand is defined by the Thai Criminal Code as a statement made by a person who imputes anything to another in a manner which is likely to impair the reputation of the latter or to expose him to hatred or contempt. Under the same Code, such person is liable for an imprisonment up to two years or he can be ordered by the court to pay a fine of 200,000 Baht or may be both.

Burden of Proof and Available Defenses

In Thailand, it is not the duty of the victim or the prosecution that the statement made by the defendant is false. Hence, the burden of proof lies on the defendant to prove that his statements are true. The defense that the defendant did not know his statements to be false is not acceptable in Thailand. Regardless of the truthfulness or falsehood of the statement, once it became a source of an injury which caused damage to the victim, the defendant is liable. Also, although the defendant proves that his statement is true, he still has the burden of proving to the court the propriety of such statement. Nevertheless, the defendant may set up a defense that the statement was made by him in good faith to the person who he believes to be entitled to such information or has interest thereof. Statements made in court by the parties as well as their lawyers do not constitute defamation. Also, expressions of an opinion made in good faith are not considered as defamatory especially so when it is intended to protect legal interest, to comment on actions of an official under official capacity or to provide a fair comment to any person.


If a owned a Website I would everything possible to avoid being dragged into Court especially by someone with deep-pockets.

[RichLB]

I have been assured that in Thailand truth is not a defense against libel. It makes no sense to me, but that is apparently the law.

[Up2U]

I have been assured that in Thailand truth is not a defense against libel. It makes no sense to me, but that is apparently the law.

Yep.

" Regardless of the truthfulness or falsehood of the statement, once it became a source of an injury which caused damage to the victim, the defendant is liable".

[Neal]

While I appreciate your comments, I think I will keep the policy of the board as is and rely on the professional wisdom and advice of my Thai attorneys.
As stated in the rules, no ones identity may be revealed and no false accusations may be made.
Thank you

[RichLB]

While I appreciate your comments, I think I will keep the policy of the board as is and rely on the professional wisdom and advice of my Thai attorneys.
As stated in the rules, no ones identity may be revealed and no false accusations may be made.
Thank you

Determining the veracity of another's claim may be difficult. In terms of a business, I seem to recall it was quite clear who was being maligned. I rarely pay attention to slam posts, but I'd hate to see the owner/moderator become involved in a serious legal hassle. I urge you to reconsider your policy about allowing derogatory posts .

Like all things on a chat / message board there's probably a fine line that needs to be walked as I don't know about the rest of you but the idea of a sterile board where true and genuine opinions can't be shared amoungst "friends" would be a very sad place indeed and if you think about it lots of us pass comment / criticism about many people and places on a regular basis on here i.e oh such and such a hotel was crap as the rooms were tiny, dirty, noisy, the manger has rude, the bar staff / owner ignored us, the mamasan was far to pushy, the waiter removed the tip out of the folder, the erotic show was crap or even they HAD an erotic show ( when she shouldn't have) etc etc - and it's those pieces of information and conversation that make the board interesting and generate debate and discussion

So whilst OF COURSE it goes without saying that no one should or should be allowed to blatantly libel some one I believe it's ultimately up to the moderator to make that call on their board ( and I'm not talking about either of the two board owners involved here, I mean generally) and should a poster keep posting blatantly libellous comments then they should be warned and even banned if it's causing a risk to the owner, but if it's in the normal course of comment and conversation and can on the whole be taken as "fair comment" and especially perhaps from a known member with a track record in not being intentionally outrageous then I guess that's up to the individual board owner to decide how far they want to sterilise their own board and so then watch their membership list rise or decline accordingly based on their on going decisions on such matters.

[Neal]

Rich we are not advocating anyone who attempts to reveal anyones identity and we are not allowing anyone to lie about someone on this board so I really dont know what you are on about. :dontknow: I am talking about a problem where something was posted and there were FACTS about a company and the way they behaved and conducted business and those facts were removed and a comment of excellence was allowed to remain without a person being able to explain their experiences. If you wish to read that everything in Thailand is perfect and that you can use all these people because they are excellent and not hear about other experiences, well then you can do that. If you want to hear pros and cons about service techs and all, then that is what I personally may comment on so that my readers can make informed decisions.

[RichLB]

If you want to hear pros and cons about service techs and all, then that is what I personally may comment on so that my readers can make informed decisions.
Of course I want to hear the pros and cons about businesses in Thailand. My concern is that the quirks of Thai laws make sharing the cons problematic. It is rare that defamation laws are ever brought to court, but it does happen. Just be aware of the risk you are taking.

[UncleSam]

I admit that I didn't follow this matter closely on either board, and so I may have missed something. What I don't understand is why DaBoss didn't post the topic here on his own board rather than hauling the coal to New Castle so GB could dump it?

[Neal]

One final time. This was a topic and current thread on GB and not here. I responded to where the discussion was.