比較美國: 部落客惡評麵店 賠20萬判拘役

 
首先注意到 下面提到的美國類似案件  Mr. Chow of New York v. Ste. Jour Azur S.A, 案子裏法官, 原告飯店, 和被告評論者全是公開的.  不像台灣,  法官, 原告飯店, 和被告評論者全部隱瞞.  台灣為什麼應該公開的東西卻隱瞞?  See https://groups.google.com/d/topic/i_love_taiwan/tjmrJEehlP4/discussion

一個評論 (review), 從定義來看, 就只是評論者的意見. 
當評論者説麵太鹹, 任何人都知道這是評論者的意見.
法官的判決卻是, 你不能只吃一次就表達麵太鹹的意見.  為什麼不可以呢?  這是我的誠實的認知呀!
我希望媒體公布整個案情, 包括法官的名字, 讓大家來決定這法官的判決是否合乎邏輯或常識.

It's not rare for restaurants to sue reviewers in America, but they almost never win. A 1985 ruling by the 2nd Circuit Federal Appeals Court in New York, in the case Mr. Chow of New York v. Ste. Jour Azur S.A., gave critics extremely wide berth for their restaurant reviews. The judge in the case explained that American readers understand that reviews represent the opinion of the writer, and so should not be taken factually. 

Taiwanese Blogger Gets Jail Time For Negative Restaurant Review
Huffington Post
A food blogger in Taiwan was sentenced to 30 days in jail, given two years probation and fined 200,000 New Taiwan Dollars ($6928 as of 3 PM this afternoon) for writing a negative review of a restaurant in Taichung, Taiwan. The blogger, whose surname is Liu, called the food "too salty" and said that there were cockroaches in the kitchen. A regular customer read Liu's blog, and told the restaurant's owner about the review. The owner sued Liu for libel. The Taichung court that ultimately ruled on the case decided that Liu's review was libelous because it was written after just one dinner, and so was not well-informed enough for such harsh judgment. The decision is final.
It's not rare for restaurants to sue reviewers in America, but they almost never win. A 1985 ruling by the 2nd Circuit Federal Appeals Court in New York, in the case Mr. Chow of New York v. Ste. Jour Azur S.A., gave critics extremely wide berth for their restaurant reviews. The judge in the case explained that American readers understand that reviews represent the opinion of the writer, and so should not be taken factually. Subsequent lawsuits in America have almost never been decided in favor of restaurants—our critics are too influential for punishment!