Could You get Sued for Your Bad Reviews?

13 years ago

He should have not drawn attention to it, but instead asked his happy patients to write their honest reviews which would have negated hers.

On another note, I saw a woman on a pay per task site asking people to rate her day care highly and give her five stars even though they had never used it!

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Pen Name + 8 eBooks + social media sites 4 SALE - PM me (evergreen beauty niche)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2895535].message }}

Alexa Smith

Banned 13 years ago

Originally Posted by LilBlackDress

On another note, I saw a woman on a pay per task site asking people to rate her day care highly and give her five stars even though they had never used it!

Things like this go on all the time. :rolleyes:

I noticed in a recent thread here about fiverr.com, in which people were asked what good services they'd bought there, somebody replied very openly that he bought two really great testimonials for his new product.

And then people complain about "too much regulation" and "government interference" and "nanny statism" when the FTC prosecutes people. And the ultimate irony is that the ones who complain are usually the very same ones who are causing the problem for all of us in the first place!

[ 4 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2895585].message }}

Kay King

13 years ago

There are some inconsistencies that made me go "huh"?

The woman has a lawyer but has not sued the doctor. Why would that be? Could there be more to the story than just what she has told?

Here's the problem I have with this... In a court of law the woman can present her complaint and the doctor has the chance to rebut it or answer it with facts.

Online - she can say anything she wants to discredit the doctor. He can't present his side because he is limited by laws regarding patient privacy. She is choosing a venue where she knows he cannot present facts to defend himself. Why would she do that rather than face him in court?

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

Live life like someone left the gate open

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2895565].message }}

Kay King 13 years ago

He did have patients who wrote how happy they were - but that won't balance charges of malpractice. I think the only choice he had was to sue.
His reputation is key to his business.

We don't know how many previous surgeries the woman had or whether this was to correct other problems. We don't know if the doctor takes on harder cases that other physicians won't attempt. That's the kind of thing that would be presented in court.

It's cowardly to me to accuse someone without facing them and giving them the opportunity to defend themselves. Isn't that what civil cases are about?

kay
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
Live life like someone left the gate open
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2895592].message }}
- bgmacaw 13 years ago
  
  It's called SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation)
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  Product Reviews | Earn Online Cash | Free HTML Templates
  Free WordPress Themes: Boring Memo | Dateless Mini-Site | Info Magazine | 100 Twenty-Ten Niche Headers
  Discount Templates, Graphics and Scripts: Templates for Website
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2895649].message }}
  
  mcmahanusa 13 years ago
  
  This is one of those issues (not rare, sad to say) on which it is difficult to make a judgment, as it is hard to know where the truth lies. If the doctor is in the right, he will still find himself combating the negative publicity. Ultimately, whether he wins or loses the lawsuit, his reputation will suffer.
  
  The fact that the woman chose to air her grievances publicly rather than filing a civil lawsuit is a strong indication that she has a weak case. Plenty of attorneys would take such a case on a contingency basis if they felt they had a strong case against the doctor.
  
  The anonymity of the internet is a two-edged sword. One can air a complaint usually without fear of retaliation, but on the other hand, one person can unjustly vilify another and get away with it. I've seen some incredibly nasty statements by anonymous posters, enough for me to wish that dueling were still legal.
  
  Of course, if you are employed by a company and you bad mouth that company (justly or unjustly) and they can uncover your identity, you can kiss your job goodbye, as well as your life's savings, should they use the hammer of a lawsuit against you.
  
  Ah, well. Another instance of only the lawyers winning.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Success is not to be pursued; it is to be attracted by the person you become - Jim Rohn
  
  Visit our beautiful gardens
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2895747].message }}

E. Brian Rose

13 years ago

If you defame somebody in a review then you can be sued. Saying that somebody is a fraud or a con-artist because you do not like his product is not protected by your 1st Amendment Rights. Giving an honest review of a product or service is.

I am not a lawyer, but I like to pretend that I am at least as smart as some of the lawyers that I have dealt with, so you should listen to this advice.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Founder of JVZoo. All around good guy :)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2895680].message }}

bgmacaw

13 years ago

Originally Posted by E. Brian Rose

If you defame somebody in a review then you can be sued. Saying that somebody is a fraud or a con-artist because you do not like his product is not protected by your 1st Amendment Rights. Giving an honest review of a product or service is.

Here's what you can do...

From the Wikipedia article on Penn & Teller's Bullsh*t! (can't link to it due to board filters)

Since their act is not normally associated with a frequent use of profanity, Jillette explains their choice of using the term bullsh*t in the opening episode: if they referred to people as frauds or liars, they could be sued for slander, even in the face of overwhelming evidence of chicanery, but as "vulgar abuse" is not considered slanderous, referring to them as a_h___s or m___f___ers ostensibly expresses an opinion rather than a statement of fact and is legally safer for them

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2895879].message }}

mauii

13 years ago

A site called infomercial scams was sued by Video Professor, and I believe shut down, for the same exact reason.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2895705].message }}

richgrad

13 years ago

I'm not a lawyer but I guess personal opinions, stated as that (Eg. this is a personal opinion.. I feel that xyz product/service is blah blah blah), should be ok but trying to pass off personal opinions as facts... that's where you get into trouble

Thanks

Signature

Get my NEW eBook "How I made S$138,255.80 in passive internet income during the last recession" (worth $47) FREE now (Limited Time Only!)

FREE eBook: 101 Powerful Affirmations (worth $47)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2895844].message }}

LetsGoViral

13 years ago

Originally Posted by TiffanyDow

Yes, while the case will probably get thrown out, these women are going to have to pony up thousands in legal fees first.

It's him suing them so he pays the legal fees. If the verdict is beneficial for him, the judge might order the women to pay the fees, but it obviously won't be.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Time of thinking is over.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2895867].message }}

Black Hat Cat

Banned 13 years ago

Originally Posted by LetsGoViral

It's him suing them so he pays the legal fees. If the verdict is beneficial for him, the judge might order the women to pay the fees, but it obviously won't be.

He pays HIS legal fees. Unless her lawyer works for free, she has to pay her own legal fees.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2896283].message }}

LetsGoViral 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Black Hat Cat

He pays HIS legal fees. Unless her lawyer works for free, she has to pay her own legal fees.

Yes, but he will have to repay those fees as well after the judge has passed a verdict.
- Thanks
Signature
Time of thinking is over.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2896306].message }}
MWZ81 13 years ago

Having a review good or bad is perfectly fine as long as it regards the service.

Once you cross the line of getting personal, slander, defaming etc it is no longer a review.

If you want a good idea of how this works, look up the T.O.S. in google places reviews. You can actually have reviews removed if they cross the line.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2896312].message }}
- Jill Carpenter 13 years ago
  
  I was named in a SLAPP suit this last year. :rolleyes:
  
  Here's the deal as far as suing goes - anyone can sue anyone for anything.
  
  Here's the deal as far as reviews go - if you tell the truth you have nothing to worry about. But you need to make sure you can back up your claims if you are very matter of fact about the truth you present.
  
  Luckily, the slapp suit I was named in will never come to happen, as the truth I told (along with others) was proven in court so the slapp suit no longer has merit.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  "May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2896624].message }}