• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

This Guy May Get Sued Over an Amazon Review

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

This Guy May Get Sued Over an Amazon Review

More and more people are finding that "Free Speech" may not be so free....
 
link to said review? And may is the operative word.
 
I wonder who the company is? It shouldn't be illegal slander/libel to say a product was identical to another one and that it was a bad item. The company is being petty, and they should be brought to light so that people can boycott them.
 
I'd like to see the review as well, it really depends on what he said.

Now I deal with online reviews a lot, I'm charged with replying to them... There have been many cases where slanderous things have been said about myself and staff members, but you can go through the website in question to have it removed...

This opens up a real pandoras box... There are some instances where legal action could be taken, for example if you went on tripadvisor and said a staff member at a Marriott, did something really bad, that they didn't do... Why shouldn't Marriott get to sue your ass for slander and libel?

Maybe the guy said that the router comes with viruses attached, or something bogus like that.

Anyway it's an interesting case and it opens up all kinds of whacky possibilities.
 
Since when does the laws of free speech apply to a privately owned forum, privately held web site, or review service? So now the laws of government (free speech) must be applied to private entities and the publications? Seriously? I think if the man can't justify his claims and has caused harm to the company out of some eratic spite they should take him for all they can.


Kal'Stang said:
This Guy May Get Sued Over an Amazon Review

More and more people are finding that "Free Speech" may not be so free....
Click to expand...
 
This isn't a Constitutional issue and has little to do with freedom of speech/1st Amendment. This is more of a civil issue.
 
This would be a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation). This is clearly an exercise of free speech and a big company is trying to use the legal system to intimidate someone into not speaking out against them.

Make sure your state has an anti-SLAPP statute and support it when there is a bill for a federal one!

Strategic lawsuit against public participation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
I never said that it violates free speech. I just said that free speech can cost. And sorry, can't provide a link to the review that got the response as the article already stated that it was already edited.

Paschendale however does make a point. And one that has been raised before. Can free speech be free speech if it is drowned out by litigation? IE: Using the government to silence someone. I can perfectly understand sueing someone for libel. But there is a fine line between libel and interference of free speech through government sanctioned litigation. Particularly when it is a corporation vs one person. A corporation can have millions to spend on litigation, but joe blow down the street? He/She can and usually does get buried under a mountain of debt just to defend themselves.

It should also be noted that such litigation can happen due to anything that is said anywhere on the internet. Including this forum I would imagine. Just think, suddenly I or you gets served papers for saying something bad about Wal-Mart.
 
That is all true but equally, one person can have a massive impact on a company, especially with the reach and ability to effectively self-publish of the internet.

There are countless negative reviews and comments about all sorts of products and services which companies take on the nose (even where they're misrepresentations or malicious). It remains rare for any company to go as far as has been reported here and I can only see them doing so in extreme examples. Big corporations may well have lots of resources and staff lawyers (though we're not necessarily talking about corporations of course) but they still stand to loose out from gaining an image of being excessively litigious or defensive.

Over all I think things seem reasonable well balanced and this article as it stands doesn't change my opinion on that.

Kal'Stang said:
It should also be noted that such litigation can happen due to anything that is said anywhere on the internet. Including this forum I would imagine. Just think, suddenly I or you gets served papers for saying something bad about Wal-Mart.
Click to expand...
Litigation can happen due to anything said anywhere in the public domain. The only thing the internet really changes is how easy it has become to make and propagate statements before anyone has a chance to do anything about it (legitimately or not).
 
The prevalence of occurrences such as this are becoming more common. Furthermore, there are companies nowadays whose function is to remove negative reviews off the Internet.

I can't see how someone could say that this isn't a free speech situation. Granted, if someone is making false claims I.E. libel, then that is an entirely different can of worms as character assassination can ruin lives or end businesses/careers. However, having read several people's reviews that have become targeted for lawsuit, they fell well within the limits of free speech and do not cross over into the boundaries of libelous comments as accused.
 
digsbe said:
I wonder who the company is? It shouldn't be illegal slander/libel to say a product was identical to another one and that it was a bad item. The company is being petty, and they should be brought to light so that people can boycott them.
Click to expand...
It depends on if the criticism is honest or not. I think it would be unlikely that a company would sue if they couldn't back such a case up.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Free speech does not include infringing on other peoples rights.

Slander is a chargeable offense.
Click to expand...

Unless its not slander but someone's honest opinion of a product that they bought. Litigation can be used to silence free speech. It's a numbers game...who has the most money? The corporation...or the individual?
 
Original review:


Company flooded with bad reviews after threatening to sue over bad review
 
Kal'Stang said:
Unless its not slander but someone's honest opinion of a product that they bought. Litigation can be used to silence free speech. It's a numbers game...who has the most money? The corporation...or the individual?
Click to expand...
I agree. See my past two posts. I've been searching the issue.
 
Wow, looking at images, it is the Tenda being sold for $50.
 
I has a bad online experience with a company called Action Packaged, Inc. I wish I had read the reviews about this company before ordering. Be careful because they will claim an item is "in stock and ready to ship" when they have none in stock.
 
Always record your boss, always save images to phone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…