• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

OT: Link Co vs. anonymous Yelp users

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

single317dad

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

This is starting to shape up like Amy's Baking Co. all over again.

http://www.businessinsider.com/links-sues-anonymous-yelp-reviewer-for-1-million-per-negative-post-2015-6

Link Co was gaining a very bad reputation on online review sites, so they sued the authors of the reviews. Yelp has since hidden the reviews in question.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/269357564/Link-Corporation-Lawsuit

However, during a reddit discussion of the lawsuit, a man purporting to be the owner of Link made a few questionable comments of his own, and screenshots of even more combative behavior on the now-hidden Yelp comments have surfaced.

http://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/3apo2d/palo_alto_contractor_sues_8_yelp_users_over/?sort=new

This kind of defamation suit has existed for a long time: party A makes derogatory public statements about party B, B sues A, when all the while B had been defaming A as well. Now we just get to watch them play out in a very public fashion, with lots of written proof, where it used to be quietly contained to the neighborhood.
 


quincy

Senior Member
Yelp gets sued a lot. So do its reviewers (both those posting real reviews and those creating fake reviews).

What is required for a successful defamation suit does not change all that much from state to state so one defamation action tends to be pretty much like all others - at least in the basics.

Here is a direct link to the Link Corporation suit: http://www.scribd.com/doc/269357564/Link-Corporation-Lawsuit

Perhaps a more interesting Yelp suit is the recent one out of Virginia, in that it has a jurisdictional twist and not (yet) a First Amendment argument (Hadeed Carpet Cleaning v. John Does, Yelp, Inc.; Yelp, Inc. v. Hadeed Carpet Cleaning).

Hadeed filed a defamation suit against anonymous Yelp reviewers and subpoenaed Yelp for the identities of his anonymous reviewers. When Yelp refused to comply with the subpoenas and was found in contempt, Yelp appealed. The Virginia Supreme Court found that Virginia courts do not have subpoena power over the California-based company so Haddad must try again to identify his John Doe defamers:
http://law.justia.com/cases/virginia/supreme-court/2015/140242.html#

With Yelp, it has not been so much the REAL reviews posted by consumers to Yelp that are the problem (although they can be and have been) but rather the FAKE reviews posted by competitors. Negative reviews have been shown to have a significant negative impact on a business and defamatory reviews can be disastrous. It is not surprising that those who are affected by defamatory reviews want to strike back in kind with negative posts of their own (although they would be well-advised not to).
 
Last edited:

single317dad

Senior Member
It is certainly all too common that the plaintiff in a defamation suit himself behaves quite inappropriately. I can only hope that by sharing this information, a future visitor will educate him or herself and decide to take the high road before they wreck their own lawsuit. Making disparaging remarks about a person or business behind the guise of online pseudo-anonymity is rarely if ever advisable; as a known entity during pending litigation, it is even less so.
 

quincy

Senior Member
It is certainly all too common that the plaintiff in a defamation suit himself behaves quite inappropriately. I can only hope that by sharing this information, a future visitor will educate him or herself and decide to take the high road before they wreck their own lawsuit. Making disparaging remarks about a person or business behind the guise of online pseudo-anonymity is rarely if ever advisable; as a known entity during pending litigation, it is even less so.
Yes, people are not always smart - especially when they are angry or feel aggrieved.

It is not only the online comments that need to be controlled, either. People often discuss their defamation cases with others and what they say about what was written can be as defamatory as what was written.

The best advice to anyone is to not say anything you would not want said about yourself. Following this advice tends to keep you out of trouble (unless you don't like yourself that much - then it is best to just keep quiet :)).
 

Just Blue

Senior Member
Yes, people are not always smart - especially when they are angry or feel aggrieved.

It is not only the online comments that need to be controlled, either. People often discuss their defamation cases with others and what they say about what was written can be as defamatory as what was written.

The best advice to anyone is to not say anything you would not want said about yourself. Following this advice tends to keep you out of trouble (unless you don't like yourself that much - then it is best to just keep quiet :)).
Oh YES!! The "Golden Rule"!! :cool:
 

quincy

Senior Member
Probably everyday growing up from your Mother. And you took that "rule" to heart. You are very nice. :cool:
Ha. I know there were plenty of times when I was a teenager that my mom threw her hands up in frustration and probably thought I was going to hell.

I think I turned out okay, though. :)
 

Just Blue

Senior Member
Ha. I know there were plenty of times when I was a teenager that my mom threw her hands up in frustration and probably thought I was going to hell.

I think I turned out okay, though. :)
Yeah...You did. Mom did a good job and you will not got to hell. :cool:
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top