Got a question for those of you who know your Taiwan law.
First - the scene.
Mrs Taffy’s parents run an internet café in Zhanghua County. Apparently someone made a fraudulent purchase online using one of the computers in their establishment and the defrauded party is obviously not very happy about that. Mama is asked to go down to the police station in Pingdong (where the injured party is based) to meet with the police and explain. She does so voluntarily, and is treated like a suspect when she arrives (mugshot, fingerprints etc). The police inform her that all the documents related to the case will be sent to the court in Pingdong where a decision will be made on whether to prosecute.
So my question is - can an internet café owner be criminally liable for acts committed using their computers? It seems a little far-fetched, but I don’t know how the law works in Taiwan.
[quote=“Belgian Pie”]Basically she should have documented the user of said computer at said time … big mistake not to do so
Now she has to prove she didn’t do it herself …[/quote]
With the exception of public libraries in Australia (and that’s only to check that you have a library membership card - no photo id needed), I’ve never needed to show ID in any net cafe anywhere I’ve been - Taiwan (when I first arrived, before i had a PC), India, Thailand, Tibet, Nepal, Cambodia, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Australia etc.
The net cafe’s could have proved that someone was using the computer at the time, but there’d have been no way they could prove that it was me and not them.
Short of having time-stamped cameras and checking photo ID, I’m not sure how a net cafe owner could show which user was using which computer at the time.
And with dynamic IP addresses, it just gets harder still. For the Taiwan police to actually track the fraudulent purchaser to a particular net cafe would take a bit of work and some resources. Based on most people’s opinions of the abilities of the Taiwan police, it must have been a very, very large amount of money involved for the police to have even bothered. Or the injured party has some very good guanxi.
The fraudulent purchase was virtual (credit for an anonymous phone card), so no dice there. You’re also assuming the cops actually care about establishing the truth - a notion with which I have a little trouble.
[quote=“cfimages”]With the exception of public libraries in Australia (and that’s only to check that you have a library membership card - no photo id needed), I’ve never needed to show ID in any net cafe anywhere I’ve been - Taiwan (when I first arrived, before I had a PC), India, Thailand, Tibet, Nepal, Cambodia, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Australia etc.
The net cafe’s could have proved that someone was using the computer at the time, but there’d have been no way they could prove that it was me and not them.
Short of having time-stamped cameras and checking photo ID, I’m not sure how a net cafe owner could show which user was using which computer at the time.[/quote]
My experience tallies with this. I hear China has introduced regulations requiring wangba owners to note the ID of everyone using their computers (in order to control dissent) but I don’t know of anywhere else this is done.
Nope. Presumption of innocence? The issue here is not that anyone seriously believes she is responsible directly (i.e. that she herself made the fraudulent purchase) but rather that as the proprietor she is liable for offences committed in her establishment. What I am asking here is whether this can be the case.
Nope. Presumption of innocence? The issue here is not that anyone seriously believes she is responsible directly (i.e. that she herself made the fraudulent purchase) but rather that as the proprietor she is liable for offences committed in her establishment. What I am asking here is whether this can be the case.[/quote]
Is there a serious presumption of innocence in Taiwan law?
The article is talking about the death penalty, so it may not apply in this case.
From 2005 the Vietnamese government introduced a directive requiring cafe managers to go on a training course on how to “monitor and control” use of PCs by their customers. They were also required to start taking the identity details of their users.
A few places did start asking names etc., but its been widely ignored since. A bit of a farce now as so many coffee shops/restaurants are offering free wireless access.
Nevertheless, cafe managers could be held responsible for the actions of their users if they’ve not logged them. Some have responded by installing content filters to prevent access to certain sites - in addition to those already in place by the government.
Doesn’t really affect the argument here, but thought I’d mention it! I’m in Saigon now, and an English version of the directive is posted on the wall with a request that users fill in a form with their details. Nobody’s bothering.
