What happened to free speech!? (Freedom: 2009, how much, lawyer)

[Jonotastic]

Dentist sues over negative Yelp review

This is now the second lawsuit being filed against a yelper and yelp.com for a review made about a Dentist. Basically stating, when my son got back from the dentist he was dizzy and the dentist used Mercury in his cavity filling. The dentist claims that feeling dizzy is normal and they signed a paper that stated the filling will contain Mercury, so she wanted the review to be removed, which both the yelper and yelp.com refused.

I don't care if they said, they take people in the back and shoot them. No judge should even listen to a case like this, even if the dentist doesn't win, it will still cost yelp a lot of money in lawyer fees and the boy's parents time and maybe some money too. These "Doctors" should realize people will use their own judgement on whether a review is worthy or not. This is now the second lawsuit within the last few weeks, don't tell me this is a new trend. If I still lived in the Bay Area, I'd throw a brick through that Dentist's window. What a way to ruin a great site and people's freedom. Hmmm I wonder if I'll be sued for this post now.

[Luke9686]

No freedom's have been violated yet. Now if the judge sides with the dentist, which isn't very likely, then something could be said.

These days being sue over everything.

[Bluesbabe]

There is Freedom of Speech, but there are still laws for Defamation of Character, and who would win in a situation like this would rely on burden of proof. If there's no burden of proof then ~ let's face it ~ the determination depends on one lawyer's expertise over the other. AND/OR the judge's own interpretation.

Although I will agree, two serious accusations in this situation should raise concern.

This very topic came up in the radio this morning, and the announcer made some interesting points. He brought up ratings sites for restaurants where people can enter their reviews anonymously. When it's anonymous, what is to stop that restaurant's competition from entering false information???

[NorthernCalifornia]

Yelp and other sites should see this as an opportunity. If a key ruling is finally in place regarding such suits then the precedent will allow further attempts to sue over online comments to be thrown out immediately.

[NorthernCalifornia]

Originally Posted by Bluesbabe

This very topic came up in the radio this morning, and the announcer made some interesting points. He brought up ratings sites for restaurants where people can enter their reviews anonymously. When it's anonymous, what is to stop that restaurant's competition from entering false information???

Nothing! and every restaurant site in the world has obvious lousy/fake reviews, probably from competitors. If a site wants to do well it will filter these recommendations and/or they will be drowned out by the larger number of genuine recommendations.

It is no different than telling your neighbor and all your friends how much you hated a restaurant or loved it.

There are existing laws in place for all sorts of defamation, none of this is special because it occurs on the internet.

[humboldtrat]

Originally Posted by NorthernCalifornia

Yelp and other sites should see this as an opportunity. If a key ruling is finally in place regarding such suits then the precedent will allow further attempts to sue over online comments to be thrown out immediately.

Not so fast. You can't libel someone or do harm to a business. If I posted on Yelp that many people have gotten food poisoning at your restaurant (and it's not true) and it damages your business, then yes you can sue me.

Freedom of speech is not unlimited.

[Jonotastic]

My point is that it's almost an online forum. People are able to write almost anything, people say they smoke weed on many sites, do police arrest these people, no because it's online. You can't just sue over every negative comment. It's not for the business owner to see, it's for other consumers. The person demanded the comment to be taken off, I mean come on, that is a new low. Defamation is more towards real life. If someone is camping outside a dental office with a sign saying, they don't clean their equipment, that is understandable to sue, but we're talking about online. If the court sides with the dentist, are you ready to proof read everything you type on this website and making sure you are being poltically correct..."in my opinion" "i could be wrong" etc because it will start a whole new era of lawsuits.

It doesn't even matter if the dentist in this case looses because it will still have cost Yelp and the customer money and time in lawyer fees. My family has been through it before, almost $5,000 in legal fees and we were found not guility, but we were still out of our money.

[Luke9686]

My question is why did the person sign a form allowing the use of mercury, then went and complained about it?

[humboldtrat]

Originally Posted by Jonotastic

My point is that it's almost an online forum. People are able to write almost anything, people say they smoke weed on many sites, do police arrest these people, no because it's online. You can't just sue over every negative comment. It's not for the business owner to see, it's for other consumers. The person demanded the comment to be taken off, I mean come on, that is a new low. Defamation is more towards real life. If someone is camping outside a dental office with a sign saying, they don't clean their equipment, that is understandable to sue, but we're talking about online. If the court sides with the dentist, are you ready to proof read everything you type on this website and making sure you are being poltically correct..."in my opinion" "i could be wrong" etc because it will start a whole new era of lawsuits.

It doesn't even matter if the dentist in this case looses because it will still have cost Yelp and the customer money and time in lawyer fees. My family has been through it before, almost $5,000 in legal fees and we were found not guility, but we were still out of our money.

Well, there is a woman going on trail for cyber-bullying and spreading false rumors after her intended victim commited suicide. Should we just forget about it and move on just because it was online? If we pass around a false rumor online that a certain person is a child molester and this causes harm, such as losing a job, why shouldn't that person sue?

Stating online that you smoke weed doesn't involve another person and hurts no one except the idiot who puts too much information about himself online.

It doesn't matter if you libel a person online or in person (such as picketing in front of the dentist's office). It can still do harm to that person's charecter and reputation. If what you say is accurate about a person and you can back it up, then your're on solid footing.

[VLWH]

Way to promote criminal activity .... you just lost all credibility.

Originally Posted by Jonotastic

If I still lived in the Bay Area, I'd throw a brick through that Dentist's window. What a way to ruin a great site and people's freedom. Hmmm I wonder if I'll be sued for this post now.