How not to get yourself in trouble with Blogging in Singapore

A concise guide for starting bloggers on how not to get in trouble in the Singapore blogosphere

Disclaimer: The author is not a trained lawyer and all his comments for the rest of the article, are in his own capacity as a private citizen. For those who want to seek professional advice about transgressing the boundaries of the blogosphere, please seek professional advice from lawyers or law academics, or at least refer to this reference [1] (highly recommended for reading).

Update: This is an open source blog entry, i.e. it is currently a beta version of the final article. If you like to contribute, please offer any form of advice, information and links. I appreciate if you have any links, references on cases or even additional advice which you want to contribute to this guide. Version 0.5.3 updated as of 5pm, 23 Jan 2007.

I have received initial private email responses from Aaron Ng, Ringisei, InSpir3d, The Void Deck, Loy Huichieh and Gerald Giam.  Will be adding their recommendations and links to the article. I look forward to more recommendations and links.

Recently, the Singapore blogosphere has been engaged in the discussion of the issue of self-regulation and formation of a bloggers' association. While most bloggers (including myself) are generally not in favour of the formation of such an association or any form of self-regulation from an external authority, there is one valid issue raised that we might need to look into. That issue is about educating the starting bloggers (the young, the brash and the reckless types) who might end up in getting themselves to trouble. Based on [1], we have written a concise and simple guide for a starting blogger. Do remember that when you publish a blog (unless you specifically make it password protected or private), it is for public consumption.

The aim of the article is to illustrate most possible scenarios and hopefully all possible scenarios such that the starting bloggers do not find themselves on the wrong side of the law.

I was once told that to be a good theoretical physicist, you need to make all the mistakes as quickly as possible. Similarly, this mantra can work for a blogger. If you know about all the situations that you can get yourself in trouble, it will be easy for you to avoid making those errors that might lead to undesirable consequences.  If you are a new blogger, the aim of this post is to help you to establish the boundaries and stop you from crossing the line and standing on the wrong side of the law.

Here is a list of do-nots:

1. Do not make defamatory statements or spread libel & falsehoods about someone or a group of individuals, be it a public figure or a private citizen :  Do not go on a crusade  and make ad homimems on a single person. For example,  "Mr X  (fill in your name) is a shameless person whose CV is fabricated/Mr X has done so and so wrong thing (without evidence)" The Acidflask incident is a well known incident in Singapore blogosphere where a top civil servant threatened to sue an ex-scholar for comments he made in his blog. Do not accuse anyone of wrong-doing if you don't have any substantial evidence. Do note that an individual cannot sue for defamation unless he/she can be reasonably identified as the subject of the defamatory remarks. Even if the defamed person is not mentioned by name, if sufficient references are made such that the person can be identified, the writer can be sued for defamation. A mock-up example is provided (credit to Aaron Ng) for such a statement, "The lecturer in the National University of Singapore who taught the module PH1234 last semester is a complete idiot." Note that the inferences from the organization and the person teaching the module.
   
2. Do not making seditious remarks related to race and religion: Do not use any form of racial slurs or delibrately write provoking comments against any religions. For example, the recent Mohammad cartoons and the case of three Singaporean bloggers who were charged for making racist remarks under the sedition act  in their blogs come to mind. Gerald has pointed out that sedition is defined as "an illegal action inciting resistance to lawful authority and tending to cause the disruption or overthrow of the government" and has nothing to do with causing racial or religious conflict. Singapore is the first country to use the sedition act on a blogger writing racist articles.
   
3. Do not breach electronic commercialization laws: It is important that if you plan to sell something or perform any form of business transaction, you should comply with guidelines within the e-commerce framework. For example, if you put up pop mp3 music files for download in your blog, you might be violating the copyright law.
4. Do not plagiarize content from others without prior permission: Do not steal content from others. At least have the decency to cite someone if you use the content from his or her blog. The best way to know that you don't plagiarize from an author is to provide a hyperlink or writing down the title, author and publisher on where you acquired the information from. 
5. Do not blog any confidential information about your country, company or organization: If you reveal any sensitive information about your country (for example, military secrets, company trade secrets and protocols) through your blog, you can be charged for espionage and any other related commercial crimes. If you have signed non-disclosure agreements with the company which you work in, you should be careful not to blog about it. For example, a US blogger was fired from his job because he talked about what happened inside the company.

References:

1. Bloggers Beware: The Five Commandments For Bloggers by Asst Prof Warren B Chik, Law Gazzette, Nov 2005. (highly recommended for reading).
2. On The Management of Dissent, by Tan Tarn How. (Read this to know how the establishment deals with dissent in Singapore).
3. Handbook for bloggers and cyber-dissidents, Reporters without Borders for Press Freedom, handbook I and II.
4. WWLegal.com for Bloggers,  this website is set up by local lawyers pertaining to the issue of blogging.
5. Penal Code (Cap 224), Section 499 (Defamation)
6. Sedition Act (Chapter 290)
7. Computer Misuse Act (Chapter 50A)
8. Electronic Transactions Act (Act 25 of 1998)
9. Damages in Defamation: What is Considered and What is Awarded? by Michael Palmer, Law Gazzette, May 2005.

Specialists' References:

• Effects of blogging on Job Prospects for graduate students (esp for academia).
  • Bloggers Need Not Apply, Chronicle Careers.
  • Bloggers Need Not Apply, Planned Obsolescence

Comments

[Kolej Kejururawatan Sibu]

I wonder if my Malaysia is following what you are doing there ?

[Gerald]

Hi BL,

Good guide! Thanks for writing this.

Re Pt 2, I'd like to point out that sedition is defined as "an illegal action inciting resistance to lawful authority and tending to cause the disruption or overthrow of the government". It has nothing to do with causing racial or religious conflict. It is only in S'pore that the govt has used the Sedition Act against someone who wrote racist stuff. In fact the govt has realised this and has therefore expanded the Penal Code to punish such folks.

On Pt 1, you may also wish to make reference to the Penal Code (Cap 224), Section 499 (Defamation)

It is interesting that it makes an exception to criticising the conduct or character of public servants:

Public conduct of public servants.

Second Exception.—It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatever respecting the conduct of any person touching any discharge of his public functions, or respecting his character, so far as his character appears in that conduct, and no further.

Now that you've covered what NOT to do when blogging, perhaps it would be useful if you could share your knowledge and experiences on what makes a good blogger. :)

[Huichieh]

There's probably a lot more that can be said.

Doesn't pt. 4 depend on the copyright status of the 'copied' site. If it's on CC, presumably this won't be a problem.

I reckon that many people will want an expansion of pt. 4--what constitutes "sedition", etc. A real lawyer is needed for this one...