- New attack fells Internet Explorer
- Steve Jobs is a man of a few words
- Oddball gifts for uber geeks
- Global warming research exposed after hack
- Google adding IPv6 to YouTube
A San Francisco doctor is suing a patient for posting a negative review of his office on Yelp.com. I'd like to officially give that lawsuit a negative review.
The Yelp Negative Review Lawsuit
First, a little background: The patient, Christopher Norberg, went to see the doctor -- Dr. Steven Biegel, a chiropractor -- following a car crash in 2006. Norberg felt he was billed unfairly. He posted a review stating such on Yelp, a Web site designed specifically for user-submitted opinions.
So where's the problem, you might ask? Dr. Biegel suggests Norberg's review was libelous and caused him to suffer "loss of reputation, shame, mortification, and hurt feelings," as well as "injury to his business and profession," according to a copy of the complaint posted on the San Francisco Supreme Court Web site. Biegel further suggests that the Yelp review "invaded [his] right to privacy."
My Thumbs Down
Here's why I'm giving this negative review lawsuit a negative review, then: There's a clear difference between libel and opinion. Stating your opinion is a protected constitutional right. Biegel's assertion is that the Yelp review could be interpreted as fact rather than opinion. I disagree.
First, Yelp makes it clear that the reviews contained within its site are just that -- reviews. Opinions. Personal experiences.
"Yelp is the ultimate city guide that taps into the community's voice and reveals honest and current insights on local businesses and services," the site's description explains.
That distinction aside, let's take a look at a couple of the specific phrases from the review listed in the doctor's complaint:
-- "A friend told me to stop going, cause Dr. Biegel billed his insurance company funny awhile before."
Biegel's complaint says this phrase "suggests [he] is dishonest." I'd suggest that the beginning of the sentence, "a friend told me," makes it abundantly clear that the statement is someone's personal opinion.
-- "I saw the guy for two visits, expected a bill for about 125 bucks... So ends up, Biegel billed me for over $500. I called to pay, and he couldn't give me a straight answer as to why the jump in price."
Biegel's complaint: The words "'he couldn't give me a straight answer' suggest [Biegel] was billing in a fraudulent and dishonest manner." Once again, is there really any question we're looking at one person's opinion based on his perspective of his experience?
There are a handful of other similar examples, but you get the gist. Each excerpt appears to me to be quite clear, especially in this context, that it's part of a personal review and one man's personal opinion -- and thus protected speech.
Would You Like a Lawsuit With That Comment?
Ryan Jacobson, an attorney and cochair of the Entertainment Media and Privacy Law Group at Chicago-based SmithAmundsen, says he comes across plenty of these cases, particularly as Yelp-style review sites become more common.
Indeed, a similar case cropped up just this past October when an eBay seller sued a buyer for leaving a negative review on his page. Like in the Yelp instance, the review was posted in an area of the site clearly designated for opinions. The seller just didn't like what it said.
Partner Content
Simplify Your Branch Infrastructure
Learn how to simplify your branch infrastructure while dramatically increasing app performance with Citrix Branch Repeater.
Download the Free Info Kit
Next-Gen Load Balancing
Free Guide: "Next Gen Load Balancing: 8 Things You Need to Handle Today's Network Traffic" shows you the functionality needed in your next load balancer.
Download the Free Guide
Accelerate Your Web Apps by up to 5x
Free Guide: "The Secret to Getting Maximum Speed from your Web Applications."' Learn how you can deliver Web apps up to 5x faster.
Download the Free Guide
Comment