NHK 'Digital Tattoo' Episode 4: IT Technology and Law

The NHK Saturday drama “Digital Tattoo” is a drama featuring a lawyer as the protagonist, dealing with the theme of defamation and rumor damage on the internet. As the lawyer responsible for the original idea of the drama, I will explain the legal procedures and IT techniques that appear in the drama.

https://monolith.law/reputation/nhkdrama-degitaltatoo-03[ja]

In episode 4, the story revolves around the protagonist, lawyer Iwai’s daughter, Saki Iwai (played by Erika Karata), whose photos taken at a love hotel with her boyfriend are inadvertently published on the internet. Saki Iwai, who won a university beauty pageant and had an informal job offer as a female announcer from the TV station “Toyo TV”, causes a “flame war” on the internet due to the photo being uploaded.

In relation to this story, I will explain the methods to delete such “flame wars” and the measures taken by lawyer Iwai to corner the “culprit” in the end.

Removal due to Violations of Privacy and Defamation

“Are you okay, Saki? It seems like something serious is happening on the internet.”
“I’m at Saki’s apartment right now, but she’s not here. What on earth is she doing? She’s making a fool of herself.”
“Making a fool of herself? Don’t you mean she’s being made a fool of?”
(omitted)
“Uncle, did you think Saki was at fault too?”

NHK Saturday Drama “Digital Tattoo” Episode 4

In the context of dealing with defamation and rumor damage on the internet, the argument structure is to “claim that the problematic post violates a certain right of the client and demand the removal (or identification) of the post”. This “certain right” is, in practical terms, approximately 60% the right to reputation, 20% the right to privacy (with the remaining 20% being various other rights). And there is a significant difference between the “right to reputation” and the “right to privacy”.

• Right to Reputation: In principle, only “falsehoods” can be removed. Truths cannot be removed.
• Right to Privacy: Can be removed regardless of whether it is true or not.

Conditions for Defamation to be Established

Defamation, simply put, is established when:

• A certain fact (specific matter) is made public,
• That fact lowers the client’s reputation, and
• That fact is false.

…The actual requirements are a bit more complex, but simply put, it is as stated above. The “fact” mentioned here refers to a “specific matter”, regardless of whether it is true or not.

https://monolith.law/reputation/defamation[ja]

Conditions for Violation of Privacy Rights to be Established

On the other hand, violation of privacy rights, simply put, is established when:

• It is a matter of private life, and
• It is a matter that one would not normally want to be made public.

…Again, the actual requirements are a bit more complex.

https://monolith.law/reputation/privacy-invasion[ja]

Violation of Privacy Rights can be Established Regardless of Truth

However, an important difference is that in the case of violation of privacy rights, the “matter” written in the post subject to removal, etc., can be either true or false. Furthermore, there is no need to clarify “whether it is true or not” in the claim or lawsuit. Saki Iwai, although she has received a job offer as a female announcer, is still a university student, and a female announcer is not a public figure like a politician, but an employee of a company. There is no doubt that her relationships, etc., fall under “privacy”.

(As a post on the internet)
“Heh, she’s so promiscuous. Did she win her job offer by sleeping around?”

NHK Saturday Drama “Digital Tattoo” Episode 4

For such posts, the “fact” that Saki Iwai won her job offer by unfair means lowers her reputation, and it is false, so it is possible to demand removal, etc., due to violation of the right to reputation.

Identifying the Perpetrator Who Illegally Obtained the Photo

“The day before this photo came out, I was invited to karaoke because Saki was there… (omitted)… It seems like someone messed with my smartphone at that time…”
“Who else was at that karaoke?”
(omitted)
“You’re the one who posted the subway photo on the internet, aren’t you?”
“……!”
“And you’re the one who spread the first photo too”
“I don’t know”
“It will be clear if we check Tatsuya Koniishi’s smartphone. You shouldn’t underestimate lawyers.”

NHK Saturday Drama “Digital Tattoo” Episode 4

The person who posted the problematic photo on the internet was not Tatsuya Koniishi, Saki Iwai’s boyfriend, but their classmate, Misa Okudera. Lawyer Iwai, convinced from circumstantial evidence that Okudera was the culprit, confronted her as above and made her confess to her crime.

The drama omits how Okudera posted the image on the internet. The most likely method is that she copied it to her smartphone via the internet and posted it from her smartphone the next day. This is because recent smartphones, such as iPhones, have ample internal storage but often do not support external storage such as MicroSD cards.

If this is the case, for example, even if the relevant email is deleted from Tatsuya Koniishi’s smartphone, a log stating “an email with such an image attached was sent to Misa Okudera’s email address” would remain on the email server. Even if the relevant LINE log is deleted from Tatsuya Koniishi’s smartphone, a log stating “such an image was sent to Misa Okudera” would remain on the LINE server.

Limitations of Requesting Disclosure of Sender Information

You cannot request the disclosure of such logs from the email server or LINE server as a civil right. The so-called “right to request disclosure of sender information” is a right established by the Japanese Provider Liability Limitation Act, but this right allows you to:

Request the disclosure of information about the poster if your reputation or privacy rights are violated by a post that can be seen by an unspecified number of people

The important part is “unspecified number of people”, which means:

• You can identify the poster through a request for disclosure of sender information if your reputation is violated by a post on a bulletin board, etc., because such posts can be seen by an unspecified number of people
• You cannot identify the perpetrator through a request for disclosure of sender information, no matter what kind of email or LINE message you receive, because email and LINE are communications to a specific few (in this case, only yourself)

That’s how it turns out.

https://monolith.law/reputation/email-sender-identification[ja]

Possibility of Investigation by Inquiry to the Bar Association

However, even so, the so-called Bar Association Inquiry (Article 23 Inquiry) can be done in such cases. The Bar Association Inquiry is difficult to negotiate, and there is also a problem that the LINE server only stores communication logs for a very short period of time, especially in the case of LINE…

https://monolith.law/reputation/references-of-the-barassociations[ja]

Lawyer Iwai’s “it will be clear immediately” is somewhat of a bluff. However, in this case, if you carefully examine the posts on the internet, determine which post was made first, and make a request for disclosure of sender information for that post, it would have been possible to reach the “culprit”, i.e., Misa Okudera.

” style=”flat” background=”#2FA8E1″ size=”5″]Click here for a detailed explanation of “Digital Tattoo“