Jack Carlson

Censorship and accountability are two different things, no? - Mona N. via IM

Here I think it's combined. The only way that chiropractor can win is if he can show that the events the guy said happened, didn't. - Shevonne

There's a big difference between saying "The food was too spicy for my palate" and "This guy is a liar and a cheat". If you say the latter, it better be true and you better have solid evidence to back it up. - Logical Extremes

Exactly, logicalextremes. This is a good wake up call. Everyone's entitled to their opinions, but more people must think before they speak - especially with the ease of data distribution. - Mona N. via IM

It seems like the chiropractor filing court papers is what lowered his referrals. Therefore, it shows that he is the cause for himself losing business; not the patient. "Biegel, who was a "sponsored" advertiser on Yelp and encouraged customers to write reviews on the site, received about as many referrals per month from Yelp while the review was up as before, but fewer after the lawsuit was filed, Blacksburg said, citing Yelp documents." - Shevonne

Libel is libel... what is the debate? - Brian Roy

This case seems to be somewhere in the hazy gray area in between. Unfortunately, in practice our legal system often favors the party with more access to money. - Logical Extremes

"seems" which is not a fact. - Mona N. via IM

Reading this guy's other negative review, his comments can go both ways. I wish I could have read the original review. Maybe if I email him? Hmmmm.... Here is his Yelp profile, if anyone cares: http://www.yelp.com/user_detai... - Shevonne

Of course you should. Libel laws should apply online just as they do to print. - Dave Purrington

Interesting, though there is not yet solid case precedent... "Accusing a business owner of unethical conduct would constitute defamation unless it is true, said Aaron Morris, an Internet defamation attorney in Santa Ana, Calif. However, if the defendant can successfully prove that posting the statement was a matter of public good then the plaintiff would have to show malice and that the defendant knew the statement was false or had reason to believe it was false, he added." - Logical Extremes

From the grad class I took, this is very hard to prove. This is one of the reasons celebrities don't even bother sometimes. There was another case where a business owner was sued by a company for her negative review. I think they settled out of court. - Shevonne

What if you spread the review by sharing it into FriendFeed or Twitter? Should you be held accountable for that? - Mona N.

You should be held accountable for things you say whether online or not. Interesting here is that the dynamic of power has changed. With traditional MSM the outlet is generally in possession of money and legal resources and can legally defend itself. With individual publishing capability almost universal (via blogs and micro blogs) the publisher no longer is capable of strong defense. - Brian Sullivan

Someone up there said it, defamation is defamation and the same legal standards apply regardless of venue of the communication. Only functional difference is the publishing requirement, which would likely be deemed satisfied as a matter of law when you post on the internet. Same whether on Yelp, Friendfeed, Twitter, Facebook, Seesmic, anywhere. - Martha

So what about people that spread / share the information? - Mona N.

You *are* accountable for what you say, whether online or not. The same legal standards apply: if it's knowingly false and with ill intent, it's defamation. That includes people that spread or share the information: if they *know* it's false and the intent is to harm, then they can be sued. - Glen Campbell

Of course you should. You can seriously hurt someone's business by what you write online, therefore you should give it due consideration before you write it. The real debate might be more about how fair libel laws are really. Obviously if people feel worried about what they write in reviews, then it might reduce willingless to post reivews. Then again, if people have to consider the implications of their review more carefully before they broadcast it to the world, that might improve the quality of reviews in the long run. In some ways its good that this is coming to court, as that is one way that we can settle some of the gray areas around this kind of content. - Sam via twhirl

@Sam - In this particular case, the chiropractor admits that what hurt his business was HIM filing the lawsuit; not the review. - Shevonne

this chiro is digging himself a big hole and knows it. However, you CAN edit your own Yelp reviews so perhaps there is evidence of libel somewhere (as mentioned above by Mona, "seems" would likely rule out libel/defamation). But, yeah, Yelp is a prominent feature of Facebook connect and cross-posting to one's profile, this litigous chiro will set an example of what not to do, imho. - Andy Sternberg

Sam - bingo. It's about causing people to THINK before they act. Too many people don't, imho, since I haven't heard of a case (yet) where people are actually held responsible for their actions. Censorship? That's a load of crap. - Mona N. via IM

held accountable sure, litigated for personal opinion.... HELL NO. - Joshua Schnell

This is opinion so the chiropractor has no case here. He should have just made things right with his customer and the guy would have likely altered the review. It would have saved a lot of time and a lot of money. - Seth

Simple rule: write reviews from fact and your perspective, not emotion. If you're angry or upset, wait a day or more to write the review. Explain the details as you saw them and not what you thought was happening nor what you thought the other person was doing or thinking or trying to do. Only _your_ side of the story and how _you_ experienced it. - ·[▪_▪]·

Bingo - and many do not possess the rudimentary writing skills, Robot. Hence, this case. @Seth: Disagree!! - Mona N. via IM

@·[▪_▪]·, you're right. Always wait until you are calm enough to write a sound review. =) - Shevonne

"A word flies out, a sparrow; it returns, an ox." - Polish Proverb - Phil Boiarski

If I am not mistaken, Scales V. Noto, as determined by the Supreme Court, states one cannot be held accountable for the actions of a group they participate in. Not sure if this can be applied to a website where you publish your own reviews, but who knows? - Brandon J. Mendelson

That is a very interesting law, Brandon - Mona N. via IM

Ridiculous. I can freely give my opinion on whatever I like. If you wanna waste money and sue me for it, so be it. - Andru Edwards

Mona, you know I'm going to say no, you should be able to express your opinion freely. - Kol Tregaskes

Censorship != accountability. - Mona N. via IM

I think this starts to tread close to unbearably sticky ground, namely because I doubt anyone has tapes of the conversations, so it gets down very quickly to "he said, she said." I also wish I knew where the burden of proof was for libel. I feel like it might be too easy for people to go on suing sprees if they got their way too easily. Either way though, I think this is a little... ambitious on the chiropractor's part. At least he's suing the actual reviewer instead of Yelp... - David Wynn via fftogo

Mona and others - check this overview of SLAPP and Cal's new Anti-SLAPP legislation here http://www.thefirstamendment.o... Not an easy area at all to tread. While I am all for speaking freely, I am always careful about controversy, particularly on the internet. Having a real legal claim and being able to file suit and cause someone huge headache are two very different animals. Go Anti-SLAPP! - Martha

@koltregaskes exactly. But that's the point. There's a fine line between opinion and fact. It depends on how it's worded. "You're a cheat!" or "I felt that you cheated me!" - ·[▪_▪]·

Sure you should be held accountable; service providers should be held accountable for their practices. If this "doctor" doesn't want a bad review--he needs to treat his/her customers right. Can you imagine shitty restaurants or playwrites suing for negative reviewers? Give me a break. - Rob Michael

It goes both ways. The customer is not always right, you know. I've seen people cuss out retail workers over a bagel. A BAGEL., then had the audacity to write about it on Yelp saying the workers provoked him to behave that way. Are you kidding me? Give ME a break! - Mona N. via IM

And Rob, if you read the article, it was over a billing issue: "This is clearly Christopher Norberg's version of conversations with the doctor relating to a billing dispute and his opinion of how the doctor was behaving," - Mona N. via IM

Yes. - Dan Morrill via Alert Thingy

At my business, when a potential employer calls about a prior employee of our s, we only confirm the dates they worked, a bad review and the employee might sue for defamation, a good review and the new employer might sue if the employee proves to be no good. - Robert Hafer

And you are totally right to do that Robert, because of so-called "self defamation" in the employment context. - Martha

I hear what everyone is saying and I think it comes down to tact, common sense, common courtesy, and critical thinking. Unfortunately, with the ease of publishing, the above are not exercised as often as they should be, hence the need for radical action to be taken to make that statement. - Mona N. via fftogo

Rob Michael, apparently you don't have to imagine restaurants suing reviewers: "The Irish News must pay £25,000 plus court costs to a west Belfast Italian restaurant owner" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_... An interesting post with other links too: http://philafoodie.blogspot.co... - Micah Wittman