On Friday last week, Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Mark Ho (何志偉) criticized the justice system for a lack of progress in investigating several paid-membership pornography Web sites that provide videos of people secretly filmed in a variety of compromising situations, including nude photographs, women using the bathroom and sex acts.
People have been filmed in private and public places, including restrooms at train stations, gyms, schools and office buildings.
Some were allegedly tricked into sending videos to the Web sites run by Yu Chi-hao (余啟豪), while others might have been victims of extortion. Many are underage.
There are more than 1,000 alleged victims, with their names, personal details and other private information — including their habits and places they frequent — being used as “currency” among the more than 40,000 members of the Web sites.
While several victims last year filed charges against Yu and he was briefly detained, he was later released due to a lack of evidence.
In contrast to South Korea’s Nth Room, the case did not gain widespread domestic attention until several professional basketball players also allegedly fell prey to Yu and his online network.
Unfortunately, there is little the judiciary can do, because the Web site is hosted on servers overseas, according to an article in the Chinese-language Liberty Times (the sister newspaper of the Taipei Times).
Although Yu has been indicted, he remains free and has announced that he might emigrate to the UK, as he is not barred from leaving the nation.
Users are still requesting and trading videos through the Web sites, Ho says, and there have allegedly been cases of users contacting some of the higher-profile victims and blackmailing them.
This has undoubtedly caused great psychological harm to those who have been filmed, many of whom have considered suicide.
While Yu runs the Web sites, there are likely countless collaborators, given how extensive the operation is. They should also be investigated so that victims do not have to live in fear.
Ho believes that these people are traceable, especially if they have been trying to blackmail the victims, and even though the police cannot shut down the Web sites, they could certainly use information from posts on the sites to put a stop to this before more people are harmed.
However, that does not seem to be happening.
Victim blaming and shaming also needs to stop.
Ho says that some alleged victims have been blamed by their families for what happened, and shamed by their coworkers, despite it often not being their fault.
In such an environment, coming forward is out of the question for many, which is why only a few of those filmed were willing to file charges against Yu.
The authorities have provided little protection or services to help those alleged victims who have come forward, who might be suffering from fear and deep distress, Ho says.
As cybercrimes become more elaborate, there need to be more mechanisms to deal with such cases so that investigations do not end with the judiciary proclaiming “the Web site is hosted overseas.”
The people running the Web site and posting content are Taiwanese, and it is clear that crimes are being committed in Taiwan.
The law needs to be amended so that these people can be prosecuted.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS