Regulatory Models on Disinformation and its Legitimacy – A Perspective from International Declarations and Comparative Law

• Main Authors: Chung, Chen, 鍾禛
• Other Authors: Chang, Chao-Tien
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2018
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/7u48d8

碩士 === 國立交通大學 === 科技法律研究所 === 107 === The so-called “disinformation”, or mentioned as “false information”, refers to false statements in a general sense. Recently, the international society gradually notices that disinformation can have huge impacts on politics and society, and that there should be some means to regulate the spread of disinformation. However, how to balance the regulation and the freedom of speech is a question. As a result, it is important to find out whether the government should intervene in the regulation of disinformation, as well as the best framework if regulating disinformation. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and organizations such as the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) have discussed and released a joint declaration on issues related to freedom of expression, “fake news”, disinformation and propaganda in 2017, expressing concerns on the spread of disinformation and reiterating that States are under a positive obligation to foster an enabling environment for freedom of expression. This declaration mainly provides guides for States to deal with the regulation of disinformation, and concerns about measures taken by intermediaries to limit access to or the dissemination of digital content. In addition to the UN joint declaration, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and other non-governmental organizations also focus on the intermediary liability and provide some general principles, together called the Manila Principles on Intermediary Liability. This thesis will first review the important concepts revealed in the UN joint declaration and the Manila Principles on Intermediary Liability, and then conclude that there are three main frameworks of regulating disinformation, including regulations for speakers, regulations for intermediary, and establishing a fact-checking mode. At last, there will be an overall review targeted at the relating regulations of Taiwan presently.