<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Delete Policy of "2ch"</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw</link>
	<description>How the world's largest internet forum "2ch" works</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 04:24:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>References</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/15/references/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/15/references/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 04:24:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tomomichia</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/?p=14</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Due to the informal nature of this project, I did not provide the original texts I referred to while writing the blogs, as I intended to post them till the end of the blog.
 
Matsuka, Mika. “匿名掲示板に名誉を毀損する書き込みがあり,それを掲示板管理人が削除しなかったことに違法性が認められ,慰謝料・損害賠償請求が認められた事件(2ちゃんねる対動物病院事件) : 東京地判平成14年6月26日判決” 広島大学マネジメント研究 (2005)
Ishii, Shigeki. “「2ちゃんねる」事件(東京高判平成17.3.3) (特集 平成17年著作権重要判決紹介)” パテント (2006)
Ikeba, Hidetoshi. “プロバイダー等の責任と情報発信者との関係 (特集 システムリスクと内部統制)” 法とコンピュータ (2007)
Takase, Ami. “第三者によりBBS上になされた書き込みについてBBS管理者の著作権侵害責任が認められた事例&#8211;2ちゃんねる小学館事件[東京高判平成17.3.3] (知的財産権の間接侵害(その4))” [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/15/references/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Conclusion</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/15/conclusion/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/15/conclusion/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 04:24:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tomomichia</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/?p=13</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the process of writing these blog posts, there are a few criterions which I have noticed which I believe should be considered when making legislation related to regulation of speech on the internet.
My opinion is that the law should provide basic guideline and some concrete rules, but should allow each case to be individually [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/15/conclusion/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How 2ch should change its delete policy</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/12/how-2ch-should-change-its-delete-policy/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/12/how-2ch-should-change-its-delete-policy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:37:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tomomichia</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/?p=11</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Many cases have proven that the delete policy of 2ch is not adequate to its current situation, and does not fit the law. Examining past cases, I believe there are some factors that need to be taken into consideration when making a removal policy, which 2ch should have thought about.
First, 2ch should consider the new [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/12/how-2ch-should-change-its-delete-policy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Case in which 2ch was sued after the establishment of the Japanese section 230 (2)</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/07/case-in-which-2ch-was-sued-after-the-establishment-of-the-japanese-section-230-2/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/07/case-in-which-2ch-was-sued-after-the-establishment-of-the-japanese-section-230-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 07:54:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tomomichia</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/?p=10</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[However, it is this very statement that the court made which seems as if the judgment contradicts with the new law that was implemented. The new law makes it clear that unless there is enough evidence that makes it apparent that contents posted were infringing or defamatory, the service providers are not at all responsible [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/07/case-in-which-2ch-was-sued-after-the-establishment-of-the-japanese-section-230-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Case in which 2ch was sued after the establishment of the Japanese section 230</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/05/case-in-which-2ch-was-sued-after-the-establishment-of-the-japanese-section-230/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/05/case-in-which-2ch-was-sued-after-the-establishment-of-the-japanese-section-230/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 13:38:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tomomichia</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/?p=9</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A famous case in which a user requested a post be deleted, but went to court was in the “Tsumini-nureta-futari (the title of a manga)” case. In this case, the publishers of a magazine found that an interview that was published in their magazine had been posted on the internet by somebody. A user had [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/05/case-in-which-2ch-was-sued-after-the-establishment-of-the-japanese-section-230/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Japanese version of section 230: “Law concerning Limitation of Damages to Specific Telecommunications Service Provider and disclosure of Sender Information”</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/03/the-japanese-version-of-section-230-%e2%80%9claw-concerning-limitation-of-damages-to-specific-telecommunications-service-provider-and-disclosure-of-sender-information%e2%80%9d/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/03/the-japanese-version-of-section-230-%e2%80%9claw-concerning-limitation-of-damages-to-specific-telecommunications-service-provider-and-disclosure-of-sender-information%e2%80%9d/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 15:31:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tomomichia</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/?p=8</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ 
Although the Japanese law has some similarity to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, in general, it seems that the Japanese version expects more from the “specific telecommunications service provider,” a term that refers to  both the internet service providers (ISPs) and the provider of services (such as internet forums). That is, the service [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/03/the-japanese-version-of-section-230-%e2%80%9claw-concerning-limitation-of-damages-to-specific-telecommunications-service-provider-and-disclosure-of-sender-information%e2%80%9d/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cases before laws regarding responsibility on the Internet were passed (2)</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/03/7/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/03/7/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 13:38:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tomomichia</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/03/7/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[              The latter (crime of aiding and abetting) crime is usually defined for people in a group who did not directly get involved in the actually crime, but helped the criminals by helping the criminals, providing weapons or goods to the criminal, keeping a look out for the criminals etc. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2009/01/03/7/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cases before laws regarding responsibility on the Internet were passed (1)</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2008/12/31/cases-before-laws-regarding-responsibility-on-the-internet-were-passed-1/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2008/12/31/cases-before-laws-regarding-responsibility-on-the-internet-were-passed-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2008 08:14:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tomomichia</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/?p=6</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There are only a few cases in which 2ch was held responsible for a post on the website, before the law regarding the responsibility of service providers took place in 2002. One case took place between 2ch and a veterinary hospital. The judgment to this case was given on June 26, 2002 at the Tokyo [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2008/12/31/cases-before-laws-regarding-responsibility-on-the-internet-were-passed-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Delete Policy</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2008/12/24/the-delete-policy/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2008/12/24/the-delete-policy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Dec 2008 01:29:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tomomichia</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/?p=5</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The geeky culture of 2ch is also existent in how the website is administrated. Because the owner of the website is a single thirty year old man, it is far beyond his reach to make sure that the entire website is running properly. Instead, in 2ch, some people voluntarily play special roles within the community. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2008/12/24/the-delete-policy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The 2ch community and its influence</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2008/12/23/the-2ch-community-and-its-influence/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2008/12/23/the-2ch-community-and-its-influence/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 01:09:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tomomichia</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/?p=4</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[“2ch” has several characteristics which separate it from other internet forums. The first major difference is the broadness of the topics that it covers. It has countless “categories” which covers a broad topic, and each category is consisted of numerous “boards.” On each board a user can make a “thread,” in which the actual discussion [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/2chlaw/2008/12/23/the-2ch-community-and-its-influence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
