Request for Disclosure of Sender Information to Identify the Poster on Mama Stadium (MamaSta)

Mamasta, a community for mothers boasting ‘a wealth of information on child-rearing’, operated by Interspace Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Mamasta), allows users to consult daily worries using the BBS (bulletin board), interact with each other on TV topics, and gain information by viewing reviews of local hospitals and childcare facilities. However, the reality is that many defamatory comments are being made.

In this article, we will explain how to identify the authors of malicious posts and defamatory comments on Mamasta.

https://monolith.law/reputation/mamasta-anti-illegal-comment[ja]

What is the Mamasuta website?

Mamasuta is an anonymous website established as a community space for mothers. It includes bulletin board systems (BBS), columns, and reviews. In particular, the Mamasuta BBS is a discussion board exclusively for women, especially those in the child-rearing generation, serving as a valuable platform for information exchange.

While it is touted as a “discussion board to support your happy mom life,” it has become a popular site where mothers nationwide can discuss concerns about child-rearing, husbands, in-laws, and mom-friends. It also serves as a place to get excited about topics such as fashion, hobbies, news, and TV dramas. It is used as a breather in between child-rearing and has gained overall popularity.

Examples of Defamation on MamaSta

However, due to its anonymity, the MamaSta BBS can also serve as a breeding ground for defamation used to vent daily stress. There are many instances of malicious posts and defamation that have led to legal action, such as the case of Chie Horikoshi, which came to light in July 2019 (2019年7月), and the case of Nozomi Kawasaki, which was revealed in March 2020 (2020年3月).

One of the personalityistics of MamaSta is the prevalence of criticism about the appearance of others. Not only are there many instances of insults and defamation directed at the individuals themselves, but there are also many instances of derogatory comments about their children.

While it is possible to request the removal of such malicious posts and defamation by applying to the MamaSta administration, this is not a reliable solution. Even if the posts are successfully removed, if new topics are created and malicious posts and defamation continue, it does not constitute a fundamental solution.

In such cases, it is necessary to identify the poster and pursue legal action to hold them accountable.

Procedure for Identifying the Poster ①: Request for IP Address Disclosure

Firstly, to identify the poster, a request for sender information disclosure is made to Mamasta. This begins by mailing an “Information Disclosure Request Form” to Interspace Co., Ltd., the company that operates Mamasta. The Information Disclosure Request Form must include the URL (address) of the site where malicious posts or defamation were written, the name and address of the requester, and the reason for requesting disclosure.

IP Address and Timestamp

What does the company operating Mamasta know about a post’s author? Mamasta allows users to register with a nickname, so real name registration is not required. Also, while an email address is required, a free email address is acceptable.

This does not allow the sender’s name and address to be identified, but there is information that the site administrators definitely know. That is the poster’s “IP address and timestamp”.

An “IP address” is information similar to an address on the Internet. Every machine connected to the Internet, such as your home PC or smartphone, has a unique IP address. Due to the nature of the Internet, communication cannot be conducted without knowing the other party’s (poster’s) IP address.

When a site is accessed or a post is made, the poster’s IP address and the time of access, known as the “timestamp”, are recorded. Normal administrators record the IP address and timestamp, so you can request them to “disclose the IP address and timestamp of the person who made this illegal post”.

Request for Disclosure of Poster’s IP Address and Timestamp by Provisional Disposition Procedure

When a request for sender information disclosure is made, the administrator determines whether the requester’s claim meets the legal requirements and decides whether to disclose or not. While they may voluntarily comply with the disclosure request, they will likely say, “We cannot comply with the disclosure request unless a public judgment is made by the court”. Therefore, you will need to file a provisional disposition for sender information disclosure against Mamasta. Not just for Mamasta, but from the provider’s perspective, the person who made the post is a customer, and from the perspective of personal information protection, there are hardly any cases where they comply with voluntary information disclosure requests.

Therefore, it becomes something that cannot be realized without using court procedures. Specifically, this court procedure is not a lawsuit but a quick procedure called a provisional disposition. Lawsuits inevitably take time, but in the case of a provisional disposition, it can be implemented in about 1-2 months. The market price for attorney fees in this case is said to be

about 300,000 yen for the retainer fee and about 300,000 yen for the success fee.

https://monolith.law/reputation/reputation-lawyers-fee[ja]

It is said. In this procedure, it is possible to request the disclosure and deletion of the IP address at the same time. The above is the cost of doing both. However, the cost will naturally vary depending on the content and volume of the post in question.

If the information disclosure is approved by the provisional disposition, Mamasta will promptly disclose the IP address and timestamp.

Conditions for Sender Information Disclosure

People who have had their rights infringed on the Internet can request the provider to disclose sender information based on the Provider Liability Limitation Act, but there are two conditions for this.

Article 4 of the Provider Liability Limitation Act states

“You can request the disclosure of sender information when ‘your rights have been infringed’ and there is a ‘justifiable reason’.”

Provider Liability Limitation Act Article 4

It says.

What does it mean to have your rights infringed?

Even if the posts or defamation are malicious and persistent, if they are not illegal, you cannot claim that “your rights have been infringed”. For example, you cannot request information disclosure just because you are “unbearably uncomfortable”.

In the case of malicious posts or defamation, it is highly likely that you can question defamation or insult crimes for those that exceed the limit. These acts are illegal and are also torts in civil law. Article 709 of the Civil Code states

“A person who intentionally or negligently infringes the rights or legally protected interests of another person is liable for the damage caused by this.”

Civil Code Article 709

It says.

Based on these, you will request Mamasta to disclose sender information, claiming that it may constitute privacy infringement or threat crime, depending on the case. However, it is difficult to determine whether the post is illegal or not, such as whether defamation is established, whether it constitutes privacy infringement, and whether insult crimes can be questioned. It is often necessary to rely on the judgment of an experienced lawyer, not just personal judgment.

What does it mean to have a justifiable reason?

A legitimate reason is required to request sender information disclosure. You cannot request information disclosure for vague reasons or out of curiosity, such as “I want to know what age group of people make such posts”.

In other words, in the case of a poster on Mamasta, it is recognized that there is a “justifiable reason” in cases such as:

• For requesting deletion from the sender
• For exercising the right to claim damages in civil law
• To identify the person when taking legal measures such as criminal accusation

It is recognized that there is a “justifiable reason”.

Procedure for Identifying the Poster ②: Prohibition of Log Deletion

Once the poster’s IP address is disclosed in Procedure ①, it is possible to identify the provider used by the poster (such as Nifty for fixed-line connections, Softbank for mobile connections, etc.).

Next, you will need to request log information from the provider, asking them to disclose the name and address of the person who was connected at a certain time with a certain IP address. However, a problem of time limitation arises here. The amount of log information is enormous, with mobile carriers recording logs for tens of millions of people, and transit providers for millions of people. Therefore, providers delete logs after a certain period of time, with mobile carriers doing so after about three months and fixed-line providers after about a year at most. As a result, if too much time is taken between the post and the filing of a lawsuit, there is a possibility that the logs may be deleted in the meantime.

This issue of time is particularly important in the case of “Mamasta”, where a high proportion of posts are thought to be made via mobile. It is necessary to proceed from posting to filing a lawsuit as quickly as possible.

When requesting the disclosure of the sender’s name and other information from the provider, it involves asking for significant personal information, so it is generally necessary to go through a normal civil lawsuit. As it often takes several months to complete the procedures of a normal civil lawsuit, it is necessary to take provisional measures to prohibit the deletion of logs, i.e., to prevent the evidence from disappearing, during this period.

However, many providers will keep the logs if they are notified that “we are asking for the disclosure of the address and name through the court, so please keep the logs for a while”, so in many cases, this part can be covered by notification alone.

Procedure for Identifying the Poster ③: Lawsuit for Disclosure of Sender Information

Once the preservation of the access log is guaranteed, we will initiate a lawsuit for the disclosure of sender information against the provider, seeking the disclosure of information about the sender such as ‘address, name, email address’, etc.

Providers, as a rule, do not comply with the disclosure of sender information unless the sender consents. If a provider mistakenly discloses sender information due to a misjudgment of the requirements, they may be liable for damages to the sender, and in some cases, they may also be held criminally responsible, so providers also need to be cautious.

Therefore, in this lawsuit, the main point of contention is whether it is clear that the contents of the target post, etc., infringe on the rights of the plaintiff (the person requesting disclosure).

https://monolith.law/Japanese Reputation/Provider-Liability-Limitation-Law[ja]

Procedure for Identifying the Poster ④: Claim for Damages

If the lawsuit is accepted, the court will order the provider to disclose the name, address, email address, etc. of the subscriber used when posting the article.

Once the sender’s information is disclosed and the sender is identified, you have the following options:

• Make them pledge not to defame in the future
• Claim for damages
• Claim for expenses incurred (investigation costs, attorney fees)
• File a criminal complaint

In addition to claiming damages, there are other options, and it is also possible to choose multiple options.

https://monolith.law/reputation/calculation-method-of-compensation-for-damages[ja]

Summary

When you are defamed online, it is crucial to respond quickly before the damage spreads and escalates.

However, the procedures and judgments involved are specialized and difficult, and attempting to handle them on your own can be time-consuming and risky, potentially leading to unsuccessful evidence preservation and other issues.

By consulting with a lawyer experienced in defamation measures, you can obtain a swift response. Please do not hesitate to consult us at an early stage.