Courts Order Amazon To Reveal Identities Of Negative Reviewers

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
A federal judge in Washington state has ordered Amazon to turn over the identities of people that left negative reviews for a company that makes dietary supplements.

In its complaint against 10 “John Doe” defendants, Ubervita alleges that these Amazon users have been running a “campaign of dirty tricks” against the supplement company, “in a wrongful effort to put Ubervita at a competitive disadvantage in the marketplace.” The company claims these defendants orchestrated their negative reviews to give the false impression of a “growing body of unsatisfied customers.”
 
I find it comical that dietary supplement companies can make any claim they want about their product....but you can't do the same. :rolleyes:
 
I hope Amazon, after turning over the names, bans this company from selling on the site.
 
Once again, user reviews are opinion pieces & protected under free speech.

"You keep using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means" :cool: ... so called "Free Speech" is a very narrow constitutional thing and applies only to the government itself restricting free speech ... there is no protection between private citizens or other organizations that might wish to pursue non-criminal solutions to undesirable or harmful speech ;)
 
If it was just bad reviews, yes. In the article it states the defendants posed as employees for the company and made very false statements. Libelous stuff.
 
What, snake oil salesmen complaining about people complaining that their snake oil doesn't work?
 
I wonder what they'll do when they see the results and figure out there really is a “growing body of unsatisfied customers.”
 
If it was just bad reviews, yes. In the article it states the defendants posed as employees for the company and made very false statements. Libelous stuff.

Yeah, their behavior almost borders on the criminal ... would be interesting to see once they are unmasked if they are disgruntled employees or competitors ;)

According to the complaint, the defendants also posed as Ubervita employees to write Amazon to state that Ubervita was selling counterfeit products. Each of these four instances resulted in Amazon temporarily suspending the sale of Ubervita items.
:eek:
 
These companies really need to educate themselves on the Streisand Effect. Even if the plaintiff proves libel, the damage has already been done. I would have never heard of Ubervita had it not been for news of this lawsuit.
 
If it was just bad reviews, yes. In the article it states the defendants posed as employees for the company and made very false statements. Libelous stuff.

this. If its true they should have charges pressed against them. there's a difference between a bad review and someone intentionally harming your company through reviews.
 
"You keep using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means" :cool: ... so called "Free Speech" is a very narrow constitutional thing and applies only to the government itself restricting free speech ... there is no protection between private citizens or other organizations that might wish to pursue non-criminal solutions to undesirable or harmful speech ;)

Like he said, but to clarify, freedom of speech is protected for all of us, UNTIL, we sign a contract/Term of service/are employed etc. by a third party. Then, they can limit our right to free speech so that it doesnt impact their image. I mean, you wouldnt want to see a KKK member coming to work everyday ranting and raving about blacks, when some of your customers were black. How well do you think your business would do? Well before it was burned to the ground i guess.

In this case, you signed the ToS when you made an account with amazon, now im not sure how their privacy policy works, but most will still state that a court order would require them to turn the information over. How amazon themselves choose to fight this might be interesting. I dont understand why you cannot smear the piss out of products on amazon and not be protected for your right to protest. I mean, have you read some of the reviews there?

If you are ever bored, look for some of the weird sex toys on amazon, and read the reviews. Its free comedy, and some of the best on the net.
 
I hope you don't make a habit of looking up weird sex toys on Amazon while at work.
 
Once again, user reviews are opinion pieces & protected under free speech.

Posting opinions are protected under free speech. Libel isn't.

Libel is Defamation:
Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, or traducement—is the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government, religion, or nation. Most jurisdictions allow legal action to deter various kinds of defamation and retaliate against groundless criticism.

We are free to speak our minds, we aren't free to speak lies to harm someone else.
 
I find it comical that dietary supplement companies can make any claim they want about their product....but you can't do the same. :rolleyes:

Yeah pretty much. It's BS. That's how Enzyte has become a billion dollar company. In this country, you're legally allowed to market the placebo effect and sale that to consumers. If someone tries to tell otherwise and thus, damage your product (the placebo effect), you can sue them.

Welcome to capitalism. Home of the snake-oil salesman.

Granted, there were a lot of dietary supplements that do work, but you have to do your home work. There's a guy on Amazon that reviews supplements, and he does it in a scientific way. Breaking it to where they source their products, if they mix with a inferior, or if it's a cash grab. Pretty damn informative reviews, and he doesn't seem to be a shill because one companies magnesium supplement may get 5 stars from him, but that same companies fish oil may only get 2 stars.
 
What the heck? A couple of people post negative reviews about a product and that's reason for a company to sue? My how far this society has fallen when it is OK to sue someone else because their feelings got hurt from a review that didn't blow smoke up their collective backsides. Sigh.
 
Yeah pretty much. It's BS. That's how Enzyte has become a billion dollar company. In this country, you're legally allowed to market the placebo effect and sale that to consumers. If someone tries to tell otherwise and thus, damage your product (the placebo effect), you can sue them.

Welcome to capitalism. Home of the snake-oil salesman.

....

sales of snake oil have nothing to do with capitalism.
 
What the heck? A couple of people post negative reviews about a product and that's reason for a company to sue? My how far this society has fallen when it is OK to sue someone else because their feelings got hurt from a review that didn't blow smoke up their collective backsides. Sigh.

Some claimed to be employees of the company... That's part of the problem.

If it was just bad reviews, I'd say fuck em. But, this is going beyond that. Posing as employees, etc. to ruin the company.
 
Yeah pretty much. It's BS. That's how Enzyte has become a billion dollar company. In this country, you're legally allowed to market the placebo effect and sale that to consumers. If someone tries to tell otherwise and thus, damage your product (the placebo effect), you can sue them.

Welcome to capitalism. Home of the snake-oil salesman.

Granted, there were a lot of dietary supplements that do work, but you have to do your home work. There's a guy on Amazon that reviews supplements, and he does it in a scientific way. Breaking it to where they source their products, if they mix with a inferior, or if it's a cash grab. Pretty damn informative reviews, and he doesn't seem to be a shill because one companies magnesium supplement may get 5 stars from him, but that same companies fish oil may only get 2 stars.

On the one hand, you blame capitalism for snake oil salesmanship... then on the other you go on to praise someone on Amazon who does reviews for supplements...

you do realize these statements are completely incompatible, right?
 
Yeah pretty much. It's BS. That's how Enzyte has become a billion dollar company. In this country, you're legally allowed to market the placebo effect and sale that to consumers. If someone tries to tell otherwise and thus, damage your product (the placebo effect), you can sue them.

Welcome to capitalism. Home of the snake-oil salesman.

I have no problem with taking money from the stupid.

I don't even have a problem with this lawsuit. If you hire people to smear your competitor they have every right to call you on it.
 
Yeah pretty much. It's BS. That's how Enzyte has become a billion dollar company. In this country, you're legally allowed to market the placebo effect and sale that to consumers. If someone tries to tell otherwise and thus, damage your product (the placebo effect), you can sue them.

Welcome to capitalism. Home of the snake-oil salesman.

Granted, there were a lot of dietary supplements that do work, but you have to do your home work. There's a guy on Amazon that reviews supplements, and he does it in a scientific way. Breaking it to where they source their products, if they mix with a inferior, or if it's a cash grab. Pretty damn informative reviews, and he doesn't seem to be a shill because one companies magnesium supplement may get 5 stars from him, but that same companies fish oil may only get 2 stars.

Man, we better hammer down on regulations and make sure that the people are protected so they don't get ripped off because they're too lazy to do any damn work to find out if the product actually does anything or not :rolleyes::rolleyes:... If people would actually realize that there are products out there that don't do shit, eventually they would be weeded out of society since people would actually do the work to see that they don't do shit and why waste their money. But as usual, lets cater to the lowest common denominator, in this case, people who are lazy and don't research shit which are the ones who fund this sort of crap.
 
I find it comical that dietary supplement companies can make any claim they want about their product....but you can't do the same. :rolleyes:
Steve, I find it funny that you think dietary supplement companies "can make any claim they want about their product" :rolleyes:
 
First of all, I think dietary supplements are snake oil items of little actual worth or that have destructive side affects and I would advise against taking them to anybody. That's strictly my opinion.

But that being said, the company may be right here. It looks like someone is trying to discredit the company via deceit. Posing as employees, creating fake Craiglist ads, making negative reviews in order to harm the company, someone crossed a line here.

And it smells of vindictive payback...disgruntled employee or customer.

The SCOTUS has stated the the constitution is not absolute. Freedom of speech is not universal, libeling someone with claims you know to be false is illegal.
 
First of all, I think dietary supplements are snake oil items of little actual worth or that have destructive side affects and I would advise against taking them to anybody. That's strictly my opinion.

But that being said, the company may be right here. It looks like someone is trying to discredit the company via deceit. Posing as employees, creating fake Craiglist ads, making negative reviews in order to harm the company, someone crossed a line here.

And it smells of vindictive payback...disgruntled employee or customer.

The SCOTUS has stated the the constitution is not absolute. Freedom of speech is not universal, libeling someone with claims you know to be false is illegal.
Taking more than one dietary supplement could easily kill you if you mix the wrong ones, they are worse than drugs because they are so unregulated but aren't benign like, homeopathy, which is pure snake oil as it's been so diluted it's lacking any original medicine. Be interesting if that posing as employees turns out to be one scorned ex-employee.
 
this. If its true they should have charges pressed against them. there's a difference between a bad review and someone intentionally harming your company through reviews.
Yup, I have to agree, and as long as it requires a court order where evidence is presented, I don't really have an issue with it.

As long as true bad user reviews are protected... but we don't need to protect competitor businesses spewing libel to harm the competition though.
 
I which he companys I gave bad product reviews did come after me. 99% of time, it's because their poorly serviced or completely ignored warranty. At least I'd have their attention instead of having to spend a few hours on hold on a long distance call hoping not to get disconnected or spoken to in spanish.
 
interestingly, the german supreme court recently ruled just the opposite. with many other recent rulings from there, "the land of the free" has already been left behind in freedoms.
 
interestingly, the german supreme court recently ruled just the opposite. with many other recent rulings from there, "the land of the free" has already been left behind in freedoms.

It's a case of libel. Not of negative reviews. I guess land of the RTFA has been left behind in skimming news snippets.
 
Easy solution for Amazon,
1. Revoke their seller's license if they insist on going after customers and
2. Only allow reviews from confirmed paid customers.
 
You are ALWAYS free to speak your mind. You are NOT however free from any consequences of said speech; unless you were talking about the government, then it's pretty much a free pass. So you are free to defame someone, in that you can't be arrested and put in jail for doing so, but you can be sued. This is an important distinction and one that is often forgotten: the difference between civil and criminal liability.
 
Easy solution for Amazon,
1. Revoke their seller's license if they insist on going after customers and
2. Only allow reviews from confirmed paid customers.

I am not sure why they need to revoke the seller's license here ... in the article it indicates that the reviewers in question have committed multiple acts of fraud in this case (which is why the seller wants them identified) ... some of the examples from the article:

  • Reviewers placed fake Craigslist ads asking for positive reviews and then posted negative reviews linked to the ad
  • Reviewers placed fraudulant orders designed to deplete the Amazon stock and make it appear as if the product was out of stock
  • Reviewers pretended to be employees and informed Amazon that the product was contaminated (forcing Amazon to suspend sales of the product twice)

This isn't some garden variety "bad review" and I think it is certainly reasonable to identify them and potentially prosecute or sue them for these behaviors
 
If it was just bad reviews, yes. In the article it states the defendants posed as employees for the company and made very false statements. Libelous stuff.

I am not sure why they need to revoke the seller's license here ... in the article it indicates that the reviewers in question have committed multiple acts of fraud in this case (which is why the seller wants them identified) ... some of the examples from the article:

  • Reviewers placed fake Craigslist ads asking for positive reviews and then posted negative reviews linked to the ad
  • Reviewers placed fraudulant orders designed to deplete the Amazon stock and make it appear as if the product was out of stock
  • Reviewers pretended to be employees and informed Amazon that the product was contaminated (forcing Amazon to suspend sales of the product twice)

This isn't some garden variety "bad review" and I think it is certainly reasonable to identify them and potentially prosecute or sue them for these behaviors

Yeah...by this point, if they haven't read the same thing in the article or the dozen times it was repeated in this thread, not sure it's going to get through. :(
 
Back
Top