Responding to Defamatory and Rights-Infringing Posts: Removal Requests and Disclosure of Sender Information
Hello, I'm Noriaki Asato, Representative Attorney at LegalAgent.
Online troubles such as defamation, impersonation, invasion of privacy and copyright infringement are problems that startups should also be prepared for. Sometimes the representative, officers or individual employees are targeted, and sometimes baseless information spreads under your service name or company name. Also, if your company operates a community or posting service, there will be occasions when you are pressed to respond to posts between users.
The former Provider Liability Limitation Act was amended and has been in force since April 2025 as the Information Distribution Platform Act (Japanese). The practical environment surrounding removal and disclosure of posts is also changing, with large-scale platform operators designated by the Minister for Internal Affairs and Communications now subject to obligations such as establishing a contact point for reports of rights infringement, publishing their response procedures and promptly notifying the results of their decisions.
Choosing Between Removal Requests and Disclosure of Sender Information
When you find a post that infringes rights, consider removal requests and disclosure of sender information separately depending on your purpose. A removal request is a procedure for deleting the post itself to prevent further viewing and spreading. Disclosure of sender information is a procedure for obtaining information about the poster needed for claims such as damages. Disclosure has requirements, such as that the infringement of rights is evident and that there is a legitimate reason for receiving the disclosure. An order for disclosure of sender information, a non-contentious court procedure, is also available, and where necessary it is combined with a provision order or an order prohibiting erasure. Consulting the police can be considered separately, and receiving disclosure does not automatically mean that criminal liability will be established.
If you prioritize removal to stem the damage, the post disappears from the screen and spreading can be curbed, but on the other hand the communication logs on the server side may be lost, making it difficult to identify the poster. Because screenshots alone cannot preserve connection logs, first record the URL of the post, what is displayed on screen, the date and time and the account information, and then decide whether to run requests to preserve logs or procedures prohibiting erasure in parallel, and whether to prioritize removal or disclosure.
The Problematic Statements and the Rights Infringed
When asking a platform operator to remove a post, an explanation that it is merely "unpleasant" or "offensive" may not provide enough information to judge whether rights have been infringed. Also check whether you can report it as a violation of the terms of service. Explain which rights are infringed by which statements, such as defamation, invasion of privacy, copyright infringement or impersonation. For impersonation as well, specifically indicate the infringement of rights or violation of the terms that corresponds to its form.
For defamation, examine whom the post refers to and how, read in the ordinary way, it lowers the social reputation of that person or company. Distinguish between statements of fact and opinions or commentary, and also check public interest, public-interest purpose, truthfulness of the facts and so on. Even opinions or commentary may constitute defamation, and the issues are the underlying facts and whether the commentary goes beyond the bounds of commentary, such as by descending into personal attacks. Defamation is not limited to cases where false facts are written. For invasion of privacy, specifically point out that the published information concerns facts of private life, is of a nature that people generally would not want made public and leads to identification of the individual. In the text requesting removal, show the specific statements and the grounds, so that the operator's staff can judge in light of the terms and the law.
When Your Company Is the Platform Operator
If your company operates a service with a posting function, a review board or a user community, you will be on the receiving end of removal requests from outside. In this case, it is practically useful to prepare terms of use and removal criteria in advance and to set up a reporting contact point and internal review procedures.
If you keep leaving clearly rights-infringing posts in place, there is a risk of being held liable in tort by the victim. On the other hand, removing posts readily without sufficient grounds can develop into troubles with the poster under the user agreement or disputes over freedom of expression. Under the framework carried over from the Provider Liability Limitation Act, liability for damages to the victim is limited depending on factors such as whether measures to prevent transmission were technically possible and whether there was knowledge of the infringement or reasonable grounds to find that the operator could have known of it. There is also an exemption from liability toward the poster when a post is removed, but requirements must be met, such as having reasonable grounds to believe rights were infringed. Even if your company is not designated as a large-scale operator, preparing removal criteria and internal procedures in advance can reduce inconsistency in judgments from case to case.
Distinguishing From Legitimate Criticism and Opinions
Not every critical post directed at a company is unlawful. Posts such as complaints about products or services, raising issues about working conditions and legitimate whistleblowing may be protected as matters of freedom of expression and public interest.
Rather than adopting a stance of trying to eliminate every inconvenient opinion, a company should identify posts that spread false facts contrary to objective evidence, malicious pranks and impersonation, and posts that constitute defamation or obstruction of business, and steadily proceed with cases where the evidence and legal grounds are in place. Legal measures seeking removal or disclosure are a means of protecting rights and, at the same time, also have an aspect of being public relations decisions to maintain external credibility.
Services Related to Responding to Defamation
We accept consultations within the following services, ranging from removal requests and procedures for disclosure of sender information when you suffer harm, to preparing terms and review criteria for your own services.
Services connected to this topic