{"id":61289,"date":"2023-12-04T11:16:44","date_gmt":"2023-12-04T02:16:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/?p=61289"},"modified":"2024-03-14T11:02:13","modified_gmt":"2024-03-14T02:02:13","slug":"cases-not-recognized-as-defamation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/internet\/cases-not-recognized-as-defamation","title":{"rendered":"Avukat\u0131n A\u00e7\u0131klad\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u0130tibar Zedelenmesinin Kabul Edilmedi\u011fi 6 Durum"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>\u0130tibar\u0131n iftira ile zedelenmesi durumunda bahsedilen itibar, d\u0131\u015fsal bir itibard\u0131r ve bir ki\u015fiye toplumun verdi\u011fi de\u011ferlendirmeyi ifade eder. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla, bir ki\u015finin itibar\u0131n\u0131 zedelemek, ki\u015finin toplumsal de\u011ferlendirmesini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrmek anlam\u0131na gelir ve bu, hem ceza hukuku hem de medeni hukukta ayn\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Toplumun de\u011ferlendirmesi g\u00f6zle g\u00f6r\u00fclmez bir \u015fey oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in, toplumsal de\u011ferlendirmenin ger\u00e7ekten d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc kan\u0131tlamak zordur. Bu y\u00fczden, hem ceza hukukunda hem de medeni hukukta, bir ki\u015finin toplumsal de\u011ferlendirmesini ger\u00e7ekten d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc g\u00f6stermek gerekli de\u011fildir, bu durumun riskini olu\u015fturmu\u015f olmak yeterlidir. \u0130tibar\u0131n iftira ile zedelenmesi geni\u015f bir yelpazede tan\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015f gibi g\u00f6r\u00fcnse de, ger\u00e7ek olaylarda bir\u00e7ok durumda iftira ile itibar zedelenmesi olarak kabul edilmez. Bu makalede, &#8220;iftira ile itibar zedelenmesi&#8221; olarak kabul edilmeyen alt\u0131 \u00f6rne\u011fi inceleyece\u011fiz. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_53 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/internet\/cases-not-recognized-as-defamation\/#Itibar_Zedelenmesinin_Unsurlarini_Karsilamadigi_Belirlenen_Ornekler\" title=\"\u0130tibar Zedelenmesinin Unsurlar\u0131n\u0131 Kar\u015f\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 Belirlenen \u00d6rnekler\">\u0130tibar Zedelenmesinin Unsurlar\u0131n\u0131 Kar\u015f\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 Belirlenen \u00d6rnekler<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/internet\/cases-not-recognized-as-defamation\/#Belirtilen_Gerceklerin_Dogru_Oldugu_Kabul_Edilen_Durumlar\" title=\"Belirtilen Ger\u00e7eklerin Do\u011fru Oldu\u011fu Kabul Edilen Durumlar\">Belirtilen Ger\u00e7eklerin Do\u011fru Oldu\u011fu Kabul Edilen Durumlar<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/internet\/cases-not-recognized-as-defamation\/#Toplumsal_Degerlendirmenin_Dusus_Derecesinin_Siniri_Asmadigi_Kabul_Edilen_Ornek\" title=\"Toplumsal De\u011ferlendirmenin D\u00fc\u015f\u00fc\u015f Derecesinin S\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 A\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kabul Edilen \u00d6rnek\">Toplumsal De\u011ferlendirmenin D\u00fc\u015f\u00fc\u015f Derecesinin S\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 A\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kabul Edilen \u00d6rnek<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/internet\/cases-not-recognized-as-defamation\/#Arastirma_Yonteminin_Guvenilirliginin_Kabul_Edildigi_Ornekler\" title=\"Ara\u015ft\u0131rma Y\u00f6nteminin G\u00fcvenilirli\u011finin Kabul Edildi\u011fi \u00d6rnekler\">Ara\u015ft\u0131rma Y\u00f6nteminin G\u00fcvenilirli\u011finin Kabul Edildi\u011fi \u00d6rnekler<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/internet\/cases-not-recognized-as-defamation\/#Gorus_veya_elestiri_sinirlarini_asmadigi_kabul_edilen_ornekler\" title=\"G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f veya ele\u015ftiri s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 a\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilen \u00f6rnekler\">G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f veya ele\u015ftiri s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 a\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilen \u00f6rnekler<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/internet\/cases-not-recognized-as-defamation\/#Karsit_Gorus_Olarak_Kabul_Edilen_Ornekler\" title=\"Kar\u015f\u0131t G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f Olarak Kabul Edilen \u00d6rnekler\">Kar\u015f\u0131t G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f Olarak Kabul Edilen \u00d6rnekler<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/internet\/cases-not-recognized-as-defamation\/#Ozet\" title=\"\u00d6zet\">\u00d6zet<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Itibar_Zedelenmesinin_Unsurlarini_Karsilamadigi_Belirlenen_Ornekler\"><\/span>\u0130tibar Zedelenmesinin Unsurlar\u0131n\u0131 Kar\u015f\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 Belirlenen \u00d6rnekler<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Daval\u0131 ve davac\u0131 aras\u0131nda ge\u00e7mi\u015fte ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen bir dava s\u00fcreci hakk\u0131nda, daval\u0131n\u0131n kendi web sitesinde itibar zedeleyici bir metin yay\u0131nlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve davac\u0131n\u0131n tazminat ve makalenin silinmesini talep etti\u011fi bir durum olmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Daval\u0131, &#8220;al\u00e7aklar&#8221;, &#8220;o k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli telif hakk\u0131 tehdidi&#8221;, &#8220;B&#8217;nin zihinsel durumu normal de\u011fil&#8221; gibi ifadelerle davac\u0131y\u0131 s\u00fcrekli a\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131. Ancak, Tokyo B\u00f6lge Mahkemesi (2015),<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote\">\n<p>&#8220;Davac\u0131n\u0131n eylemlerini belirten ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 somut ger\u00e7eklerin az olmas\u0131&#8221; ve &#8220;davac\u0131n\u0131n ad\u0131n\u0131n belirgin olmamas\u0131 ve takma adla ifade edilmesi&#8221; yan\u0131 s\u0131ra, &#8220;yukar\u0131daki ifadelerin t\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn, daval\u0131 ve davac\u0131 aras\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen dava s\u00fcrecini daval\u0131n\u0131n bak\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131klama i\u00e7eri\u011fi oldu\u011fu&#8221; gerek\u00e7esiyle, itibar zedelenmesini kabul etmedi.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><br><\/p>\n<cite><em>Tokyo B\u00f6lge Mahkemesi 16 Haziran 2015 Karar\u0131<\/em> <\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p>Ancak, &#8220;G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f veya ele\u015ftiri olarak kabul edilebilir s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 a\u015fan, davac\u0131n\u0131n ki\u015fili\u011fine y\u00f6nelik sald\u0131rgan ifadeler oldu\u011fu de\u011ferlendirilmeli ve t\u00fcm ifadeler genel olarak bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda uygunsuz ve huzursuzluk verici ifadeler oldu\u011fu s\u00f6ylenebilir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla, daval\u0131 Y1&#8217;in eylemleri, davac\u0131n\u0131n itibar duygular\u0131n\u0131 toplumun genel kabul edilebilir d\u00fczeyinin \u00fczerinde ihlal eden yasad\u0131\u015f\u0131 bir eylem olarak kabul edilmesi uygun olacakt\u0131r&#8221; denilerek, itibar duygular\u0131n\u0131n ihlali kabul edildi ve 300.000 yen tazminat \u00f6demesi ve makalenin silinmesi emredildi. \u0130tibar zedelenmesi kabul edilmese bile, itibar duygular\u0131n\u0131n ihlali gibi durumlar kabul edilebilir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u0130tibar duygular\u0131n\u0131n ihlali hakk\u0131nda ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki makalede bulunabilir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/monolith.law\/reputation\/defamation-and-infringement-of-self-esteem\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">https:\/\/monolith.law\/reputation\/defamation-and-infringement-of-self-esteem[ja]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Belirtilen_Gerceklerin_Dogru_Oldugu_Kabul_Edilen_Durumlar\"><\/span>Belirtilen Ger\u00e7eklerin Do\u011fru Oldu\u011fu Kabul Edilen Durumlar<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/monolith.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/shutterstock_1436833571-1024x512.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-5204\" \/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Belirtilen ifadenin do\u011frulu\u011funun kan\u0131tlanmas\u0131 durumunda, iftira su\u00e7u olu\u015fmaz.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>2011 y\u0131l\u0131 Ocak ay\u0131nda &#8220;Haftal\u0131k Shincho&#8221; ve &#8220;Haftal\u0131k Bunshun&#8221; dergilerinde, Japon Ekonomi Gazetesi&#8217;nin bir kad\u0131n muhabirine cinsel tacizde bulundu\u011fu iddia edilmi\u015f ve bu durum, o d\u00f6nem Demokrat Parti&#8217;nin Siyasi Ara\u015ft\u0131rma Komitesi Ba\u015fkan Yard\u0131mc\u0131s\u0131 olan Yukio Edano&#8217;nun itibar\u0131n\u0131 zedeledi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle, yay\u0131nc\u0131lar Shinchosha ve Bungeishunju&#8217;ya kar\u015f\u0131 10 milyon yenlik tazminat talebiyle dava a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131. Tokyo B\u00f6lge Mahkemesi, 2012 y\u0131l\u0131 Haziran ay\u0131nda (Gregorian takvimine g\u00f6re), makalenin \u00f6nemli k\u0131s\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fru oldu\u011funu kabul ederek, davac\u0131n\u0131n talebini reddetti.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Yarg\u0131 karar\u0131nda ise,<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote\">\n<p>Bu durumda, \u25cb\u25cb muhabiri kendisi, tan\u0131k sorgulamas\u0131 s\u0131ras\u0131nda, s\u00f6z konusu ifadenin kendisine cinsel taciz olarak hissettirmedi\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir ve bu anlamda, s\u00f6z konusu ifadenin \u25cb\u25cb muhabiri \u00fczerinde cinsel taciz olarak kabul edilmesi \u015f\u00fcpheli olabilir. Ancak, s\u00f6z konusu Bunshun makalesi ve s\u00f6z konusu Shincho makalesinin davac\u0131n\u0131n toplumsal de\u011ferlendirmesini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrme nedeni, s\u00f6z konusu ifadenin kar\u015f\u0131daki kad\u0131n muhabiri rahats\u0131z etmesi de\u011fil, h\u00fck\u00fcmetin merkezindeki Kabine Sekreteri olan davac\u0131n\u0131n, resmi bir sosyal etkinlik s\u0131ras\u0131nda, cinsel taciz olarak alg\u0131lanabilecek bir davran\u0131\u015f sergilemi\u015f olmas\u0131d\u0131r. Bu, davac\u0131n\u0131n politikac\u0131 ve insan olarak g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerini sorgulamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n<cite><em>Tokyo B\u00f6lge Mahkemesi 12 Haziran 2012 Karar\u0131<\/em> <\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p>olarak belirtilmi\u015ftir. Do\u011frulu\u011funun kan\u0131tlanmas\u0131 durumunda, iftira su\u00e7u nedeniyle tazminat talebinin kabul edilmedi\u011fi bir \u00f6rnektir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Iftira su\u00e7unun olu\u015fmas\u0131 i\u00e7in gereken ko\u015fullar hakk\u0131nda ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki makalede bulunabilir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/monolith.law\/reputation\/defamation\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">https:\/\/monolith.law\/reputation\/defamation[ja]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Toplumsal_Degerlendirmenin_Dusus_Derecesinin_Siniri_Asmadigi_Kabul_Edilen_Ornek\"><\/span>Toplumsal De\u011ferlendirmenin D\u00fc\u015f\u00fc\u015f Derecesinin S\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 A\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kabul Edilen \u00d6rnek<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Fujitsu&#8217;nun, CEO&#8217;nun istifas\u0131 konusunda, web sitesinde, bas\u0131n toplant\u0131s\u0131nda ve genel kurul toplant\u0131s\u0131nda, CEO ile yak\u0131n ili\u015fkisi olan yat\u0131r\u0131m fonlar\u0131 hakk\u0131nda &#8220;anti-sosyal g\u00fc\u00e7lerle ili\u015fkisi oldu\u011fundan \u015f\u00fcpheleniliyor&#8221; ifadesini kullanmas\u0131, fon y\u00f6neticileri taraf\u0131ndan Fujitsu&#8217;ya kar\u015f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lan bir dava kapsam\u0131nda, iftira olarak kabul edildi. Ancak, Tokyo B\u00f6lge Mahkemesi, Temmuz 2011&#8217;de (2011), toplumsal de\u011ferlendirmenin d\u00fc\u015f\u00fc\u015f derecesinin s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 a\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle davac\u0131lar\u0131n talebini reddetti.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Kararda \u015f\u00f6yle denildi:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote\">\n<p>&#8220;Bu bas\u0131n toplant\u0131s\u0131nda, kat\u0131l\u0131mc\u0131lara, haberlerde belirli bir \u015firket veya ki\u015fiye zarar vermemek i\u00e7in i\u015fbirli\u011fi yapmalar\u0131n\u0131 isteyen bir belge da\u011f\u0131t\u0131ld\u0131&#8230; Bu nedenle, daval\u0131lar, bu ifade ile davac\u0131lar\u0131n toplumsal de\u011ferlendirmesini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrmemek i\u00e7in dikkatli ve uygun bir \u00f6zen g\u00f6stermi\u015flerdir. Ayr\u0131ca, bu ifadenin i\u00e7eri\u011fi, temelde, davac\u0131lar hakk\u0131nda anti-sosyal g\u00fc\u00e7lerle ili\u015fkisi oldu\u011fundan \u015f\u00fcphelenilen bilgi ve belgeler oldu\u011fu ve daval\u0131 Fujitsu&#8217;nun, A&#8217;n\u0131n bu ki\u015filerle yak\u0131n ili\u015fkisini s\u00fcrd\u00fcrmesini istemedi\u011fini belirten Fujitsu&#8217;nun d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncelerini ifade eden bir nitelikte olup, davac\u0131lar hakk\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekten anti-sosyal g\u00fc\u00e7lerle bir ili\u015fkisi oldu\u011funu aktif ve somut bir \u015fekilde belirten bir i\u00e7erik de\u011fildir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<cite>Tokyo B\u00f6lge Mahkemesi 19 Temmuz 2011 Karar\u0131<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p>Bu nedenle, &#8220;daval\u0131 \u015firketin bir \u015firket olarak a\u00e7\u0131klama sorumlulu\u011fu talep edildi\u011fi bir durumda, ifadenin i\u00e7eri\u011fi ve y\u00f6ntemi hakk\u0131nda, davac\u0131lar\u0131n toplumsal de\u011ferlendirmesini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrmemek i\u00e7in dikkatli ve uygun bir \u00f6zen g\u00f6sterilerek yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bu nedenle kabul edilebilir bir s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 a\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla davac\u0131lar\u0131n itibar\u0131n\u0131 haks\u0131z yere zedeleyen yasad\u0131\u015f\u0131 bir eylem oldu\u011fu kabul edilemez&#8221; denildi. Bu, toplumsal de\u011ferlendirmenin d\u00fc\u015f\u00fc\u015f derecesinin s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 a\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in iftira kabul edilmedi\u011fi bir \u00f6rnektir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Toplumsal de\u011ferlendirme hakk\u0131nda a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki makalede detayl\u0131 bir a\u00e7\u0131klama bulabilirsiniz.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/monolith.law\/reputation\/defamation-and-decline-in-social-reputation\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">https:\/\/monolith.law\/reputation\/defamation-and-decline-in-social-reputation[ja]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Arastirma_Yonteminin_Guvenilirliginin_Kabul_Edildigi_Ornekler\"><\/span>Ara\u015ft\u0131rma Y\u00f6nteminin G\u00fcvenilirli\u011finin Kabul Edildi\u011fi \u00d6rnekler<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/monolith.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/shutterstock_150332981-1024x614.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-5202\" \/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Ger\u00e7ekli\u011fi ve uygunlu\u011fu kabul edilen durumlarda, toplumsal de\u011ferlendirmeyi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrse bile, iftira olmayabilecek durumlar vard\u0131r.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>Elektronik e\u015fya perakende i\u015fi yapan bir davac\u0131, 2008 (Heisei 20) y\u0131l\u0131nda Nikkei Business dergisinde yay\u0131nlanan &#8220;M\u00fc\u015fteri memnuniyetinin en d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck oldu\u011fu sat\u0131\u015f sonras\u0131 hizmet&#8221; ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 makale nedeniyle itibar\u0131n\u0131n zedelendi\u011fini iddia ederek, haks\u0131z eylemlere dayal\u0131 tazminat ve \u00f6z\u00fcr metni yay\u0131nlama talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Tokyo B\u00f6lge Mahkemesi,<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote\">\n<p>&#8220;S\u0131ralama tablosu, t\u00fcketicilere yap\u0131lan bir anketin sonucunda, elektronik e\u015fya perakende b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde, davac\u0131n\u0131n en d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck de\u011ferlendirmeyi ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtir ve bu, di\u011fer elektronik e\u015fya perakendecileriyle kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, davac\u0131n\u0131n sundu\u011fu sat\u0131\u015f sonras\u0131 hizmetin t\u00fcketicilerden en d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck de\u011ferlendirmeyi ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 izlenimini uyand\u0131r\u0131r. Bu nedenle, davac\u0131n\u0131n toplumsal de\u011ferlendirmesini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc s\u00f6ylenebilir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<cite>Tokyo B\u00f6lge Mahkemesi, Aral\u0131k 2010<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p>dedi. \u00d6te yandan,<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote\">\n<p>&#8220;Daval\u0131n\u0131n, bu makaleleri tamamen kamu yarar\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6zetme amac\u0131yla yay\u0131nlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilir&#8221; ve ara\u015ft\u0131rma y\u00f6ntemi hakk\u0131nda da &#8220;Sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n mant\u0131kl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 garanti etmek i\u00e7in belirli bir dikkat g\u00f6sterildi\u011fi ve keyfi bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma sonucunun ortaya \u00e7\u0131kabilece\u011fi bir durumun bulunamayaca\u011f\u0131&#8221; kabul edildi. Bu nedenle, &#8220;ara\u015ft\u0131rma sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvenilirli\u011fini tamamen reddetmek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir.&#8221;<\/p>\n<cite><em>Tokyo B\u00f6lge Mahkemesi, 14 Aral\u0131k 2010 Karar\u0131<\/em><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p>diyerek, davac\u0131n\u0131n talebini reddetti.<br><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Toplumsal de\u011ferlendirmeyi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrse bile, do\u011fru istatistiksel prosed\u00fcrler alt\u0131nda elde edilen verilere dayanan bir makale olup, ger\u00e7ekli\u011fi ve uygunlu\u011fu kabul edildi\u011fi i\u00e7in, iftira olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirlenen bir \u00f6rnektir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Gorus_veya_elestiri_sinirlarini_asmadigi_kabul_edilen_ornekler\"><\/span>G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f veya ele\u015ftiri s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 a\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilen \u00f6rnekler<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>&#8220;Yalanc\u0131 Habit\u00fcel Adam&#8221; ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 gazete reklam\u0131nda itibar\u0131n\u0131n zedelendi\u011fi ve onur duygusunun ihlal edildi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle, eski Japon Meclis \u00dcyesi Suzuki Muneo, &#8220;Haftal\u0131k Shincho&#8221;yu yay\u0131nlayan Shinchosha&#8217;ya \u00f6z\u00fcr reklam\u0131 yay\u0131nlama ve 10 milyon yen tazminat talep etmi\u015f bir \u00f6rnektir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Tokyo Y\u00fcksek Mahkemesi, bu makalede eski Meclis \u00dcyesi Suzuki&#8217;yi &#8220;Yalanc\u0131 Habit\u00fcel Adam&#8221; olarak ele\u015ftirdi ve g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f belirtme \u00f6ncesi varsay\u0131lan ger\u00e7eklerin hepsinin do\u011fru oldu\u011funu veya do\u011fru oldu\u011funa inanmak i\u00e7in makul bir neden oldu\u011funu kabul etti.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote\">\n<p>&#8220;Yalanc\u0131 Habit\u00fcel Adam&#8221; ele\u015ftirisi ve g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc, biraz kaba bir ifade oldu\u011fu hissi vermesine ra\u011fmen, ki\u015fisel sald\u0131r\u0131ya kadar gitmek veya g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f veya ele\u015ftiri s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 a\u015fmak gibi bir durum kabul edilemez. Bu nedenle, bu makaledeki itibar zedelenmesi hakk\u0131nda, yazar\u0131n kas\u0131tl\u0131 veya hatal\u0131 hareketi reddedilir, hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir durum olu\u015fmaz ve onur duygusunun ihlali de ayn\u0131 \u015fekilde de\u011ferlendirilir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><br><\/p>\n<cite><em>Tokyo Y\u00fcksek Mahkemesi&#8217;nin 25 Aral\u0131k 2003 (Gregorian Takvimi) tarihli karar\u0131<\/em> <\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p>Bu \u015fekilde, Suzuki&#8217;nin talebi reddedildi ve daha sonra Y\u00fcksek Mahkeme, Suzuki&#8217;nin temyiz ba\u015fvurusunu kabul etmedi\u011fi i\u00e7in karar kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Karsit_Gorus_Olarak_Kabul_Edilen_Ornekler\"><\/span>Kar\u015f\u0131t G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f Olarak Kabul Edilen \u00d6rnekler<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>NiftyServe&#8217;in &#8220;Kitap ve Dergi Forumu&#8221;ndaki toplant\u0131 odas\u0131 ve patiosunda \u00e7\u0131kan tart\u0131\u015fmay\u0131 konu alan bir dava var. Bu davada, mahkeme kar\u015f\u0131t g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f hukukunu kabul etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u00dcye olan davac\u0131 A&#8217;ya g\u00f6re, di\u011fer \u00fcye B, A&#8217;ya hakaret veya iftira niteli\u011finde yasad\u0131\u015f\u0131 ifadelerde bulunmaya devam etti. Buna ra\u011fmen, Nifty bu ifadeleri g\u00f6rmezden geldi ve yasad\u0131\u015f\u0131 durumu kabul etti. A, B&#8217;nin adres ve ad\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131n\u0131 istedi\u011fi halde, Nifty bunu yapmad\u0131. Bu, Nifty&#8217;ye kar\u015f\u0131 tazminat talebi ve B&#8217;nin g\u00f6nderici bilgilerini a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131n\u0131 talep eden bir dava.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Tokyo B\u00f6lge Mahkemesi,<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote\">\n<p>&#8220;\u0130fade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc (Anayasa&#8217;n\u0131n 21. maddesi 1. f\u0131kras\u0131) temel ilkesi gere\u011fi, ifade ile yap\u0131lan ihlallere kar\u015f\u0131, ifade ile kar\u015f\u0131 koymak esast\u0131r. Bu nedenle, ma\u011fdur ki\u015fi, sald\u0131rgana kar\u015f\u0131 yeterli bir kar\u015f\u0131 arg\u00fcman sunmu\u015f ve bu ba\u015far\u0131l\u0131 olmu\u015fsa, ma\u011fdurun toplumsal de\u011ferlendirmesi d\u00fc\u015fm\u00fc\u015f say\u0131lmaz. Bu t\u00fcr durumlarda, baz\u0131 ifadeleri \u00f6zellikle se\u00e7ip ifade sahibine hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 eylem sorumlulu\u011fu atfetmek, ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc k\u0131s\u0131tlar ve kabul edilemez.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><br><\/p>\n<cite><em>Tokyo B\u00f6lge Mahkemesi, 27 A\u011fustos 2001 Karar\u0131<\/em> <\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p>diye belirtti ve daval\u0131n\u0131n ifadeleri, davac\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131 arg\u00fcman\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131n\u0131n toplumsal de\u011ferlendirmesinin d\u00fc\u015fmesini engelleyici bir etkisi oldu\u011funu ve davac\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131ya y\u00f6nelik ifade i\u00e7eri\u011finin a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 ve a\u015fa\u011f\u0131lay\u0131c\u0131 oldu\u011funu kabul etti. Bu nedenle, &#8220;Davac\u0131n\u0131n ifadesine kar\u015f\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131t bir ifade olarak kabul edilebilir ve davac\u0131n\u0131n ifadesi a\u015fa\u011f\u0131lay\u0131c\u0131 oldu\u011fu s\u00fcrece, daval\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131ya y\u00f6nelik ifadesinin bir dereceye kadar a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 olmas\u0131 kabul edilebilir&#8221; diyerek, daval\u0131n\u0131n ifadelerinin yasad\u0131\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 reddetti (kar\u015f\u0131t g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f hukuku) ve davac\u0131n\u0131n talebini reddetti.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f veya ele\u015ftiri i\u00e7eren ifadeler hakk\u0131nda, a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki makalede ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 olarak a\u00e7\u0131klanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/monolith.law\/reputation\/expressions-and-defamation\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">https:\/\/monolith.law\/reputation\/expressions-and-defamation[ja]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Ozet\"><\/span>\u00d6zet<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>\n\u0130tibar zedelenmesiyle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olmamakla birlikte, dava a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in mahkemenin t\u00fcm iddialar\u0131 kabul edece\u011fi anlam\u0131na gelmez. \u0130nternet \u00fczerindeki sorunlar hala yeni bir alan oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in, yarg\u0131 kararlar\u0131 da \u00e7ok fazla de\u011fildir. Bu y\u00fczden, \u00f6zellikle dikkatli bir \u015fekilde haz\u0131rlanmal\u0131, strateji belirlenmeli ve dava a\u00e7\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. \u0130\u015fte bu y\u00fczden, deneyimli bir avukata dan\u0131\u015fman\u0131z gerekebilir.\n<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>\u0130tibar\u0131n iftira ile zedelenmesi durumunda bahsedilen itibar, d\u0131\u015fsal bir itibard\u0131r ve bir ki\u015fiye toplumun verdi\u011fi de\u011ferlendirmeyi ifade eder. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla, bir ki\u015finin itibar\u0131n\u0131 zedelemek, ki\u015finin toplu [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":32,"featured_media":63390,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[17],"tags":[21,41],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61289"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/32"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=61289"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61289\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":63391,"href":"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61289\/revisions\/63391"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/63390"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=61289"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=61289"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/monolith.law\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=61289"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}