9/18/2019 Case | Freedom of Expression Documentation Center | น อ ลกฎหมายและค เส ภาพ been saved from a website? Dr. Jittat said the image appeared to be an image file attached and forwarded via email and it can be automatically saved into a computer. Since the   Reference file name was saved based on the topic of the email, i.e., “Fwd” and it was saved in folder “Thunderbird”. Then, the lawyer gave a highlighting pen to the witness to highlight important phrases.     Re-examination by the prosecutor   The prosecutor asked Dr. Jittat if he has become a member of the Foundation’s Board of Directors early or later in 2008? Dr. Jittat said he could not remember that. The prosecuto asked further if during that time the accused was the webmaster of the webboard or not? Dr. Jittat said yes.     The prosecutor asked, though during the time, there were many posts made, was the accused supposed to manage to have all inappropriate statements removed all the time? Dr Jittat said, in principle, yes. The prosecutor asked if there were any inappropriate posts, should they be deleted? Dr. Jittat said if they were found inappropriate, they should be either hidden or removed. The prosecutor asked did such a duty have to be performed everyday and every time? Dr. Jittat said in principle, it should be done so.     The prosecutor handed over Exhibit J32 to Dr. Jittat and asked him if he had come across those statements? Dr. Jittat said no. The prosecutor asked as a member of Prachatai website’s Board of Directors, has he ever got to read a post in the webboard? Dr. Jittat said yes, he read it as a webboard user.   Eventually, the prosecutor asked criteria concerning the hiding of inappropriate statements, will they be subject to consent from Prachatai? Dr. Jittat said no. Any posts could be hidden by any volunteers recruited by the webmaster.     Re-examination by defence lawyer   The defence lawyer gave a document cited as incriminating evidence for Dr. Jittat to view, and asked from viewing the printout, is it possible to tell if the document has been printe out directly from the web page, or from other sources? After viewing the document for a moment, Dr. Jittat said normally, a printout can be derived from data downloaded to a computer and it could be subject to editing. In addition, the print screen option can be stored as an image file and such an image file can be subject to alteration, as well.     The witness examination was adjourned around 12.25 am. The Court read the docket for 14 February witness examination that two witnesses have been examined, and one witness examination is pending.     15 February 2012 Examination of witness no.8, Mr. Wanchat Padungrat, founder of Pantip.com   Mr. Wanchat Padungrat, 48 years, a business entrepreneur, took his oath and started to testify at 10.00 am.   Mr. Wanchat stated that he is owner of Internet Marketing Co, Ltd., which operates Pantip.com, Pantipmarket.com, Bloggang.com and Pantown.com. In addition, he is an advisor to Thai Webmaster Association, composed of webmasters who want to monitor internet ethics.     The lawyer asked what kind of services Pantip.com offer? While Mr. Wanchat was replying, the Judge intervened and said from his experience, Pantip.com features webboards allowing exchange on various topics on entertainment, science, etc. They are divided into 24 webboards containing topics posted by users. In one day, there can be as many as 1,000-2,000 topics posted generating several thousands or tens of thousands of comments a day.     In terms of popularity, Mr. Wanchat said Pantip.com is one among the top ten websites in Thailand (recorded as “topnotch” by the Court). It boasts the highest number of users an main income is derived from advertisement.     As for rule and etiquette, Pantip.com sets out ten rules, for example, (1) should a person post any comment to criticize or refer to the King and other royalties, the poster shall be banned from making any further posts.     In terms of management, the lawyer asked if Pantip.com hires staff members to screen any information before having them disseminating in the webboard? Mr. Wanchat said the monitoring took place after the posting. There are staff members at different levels assigned to monitor the matter. Prescreening cannot be done due to two different reasons. Firs owing to the quantity, since there are many users, it is impossible to screen all postings. Second, owing to the contents, though the webmaster gets to read all posts, but the discretion made by the webmaster may differ from the state officers. So it is impossible to check all the posts. As an advisor to the Thai Webmaster Association, he found that various webboards employ different methods in monitoring. The higher the number of users, the more stringent the regulations. But in general, there are no webboards with prescreening. They simply offer a feature for removal notification.     The lawyer asked what would happen if webboards are required by the ISPs to prescreen every post before? Mr. Wanchat said that personally, there could be two impacts. First, i would create a lot of burden and require a lot of money for the service providers. Second, Thailand’s websites will become less competitive and may stand to lose income since users would shift to using webbaords in other countries since they can be accessed faster. And once the websites are hosted abroad, they may not be subject to Thailand’s jurisdiction.     Apart from having a system to remove any inappropriate posts, Pantip.com also has a system to monitor offensive and abusive word using computer software. Once such a term spotted, it shall be recognized and then removed from the webboard. Such a system had been employed since before CCA came into force. Still, it has at least two major constraints/drawbacks. First is the software cannot filter out inappropriate posts written with hidden meaning, or using symbols or metaphors.     The lawyer asked about hiring staff members to look after webboards, but the Judge asked the lawyer to ask more precisely. The lawyer revised his question and asked if Pantip.com is able to monitor its webboards in all aspects? Mr. Wanchat said that given a massive number of posts and comments, it is not possible to fully monitor the webboards The lawyer further asked after the enforcement of CCA, have his webboards been subject to any legal action? Mr. Wanchat said no. But certain users have been held liable.     Cross examination by the prosecutor   That Mr. Wanchat said Pantip.com has never been subject to any legal action, is that because Pantip.com employs an “excellent” monitoring system? Mr. Wanchat said it is possible. Whereas in the record of the Court, it was written that that Pantip.com has never been held liable, it could be because of its “good” monitoring system.     The prosecutor asked Mr. Wanchat if it is possible for Pantip.com to monitor every post and comment? Mr. Wanchat paused, then the prosecutor intervened asking him to “please answer the question. You must have the best (monitoring system), right?” Mr. Wanchat said that in principle, we try to do the best. But it is impossible given the massive amount o https://freedom.ilaw.or.th/en/case/112#circumstance_of_arrest 24/26