• Home
    • About
      • Home
      • About the Site
      • The Authors
      • Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
      • Email me
    • Reviews
      • List of All Reviews
      • Best of Portland by year
        • Reader Survey: Best of Portland Food 2017
        • Best of Portland 2015
      • Steakhouse Roundup
        • Steakhouse Reviews Introduction
        • El Gaucho Steakhouse
        • Morton’s Steakhouse
        • Ringside Steakhouse
        • Ruth’s Chris
        • Steakhouse – Results
      • Product/Business Reviews
        • Retailer Reviews
        • Product Reviews
    • Topics
      • Food Writing
        • Alcohol Related
          • Beer
          • Wine
          • Spirits
        • April Fools Stories For Portland
        • Contests and Competition
        • Food Memories
        • Travel Writing
      • Authors / Book Reviews
      • Cheese information
      • Interviews: Honest dialog with people in the Portland food industry
      • Portland Food and Restaurant News and Discussion
      • Recipes
    • Guides
      • Guide to Portland coffee
        • Portland Coffee Guide
        • A Map of our favorite Portland coffeehouses
        • Reader Survey: Best Coffeehouses in Portland 2017
      • Guide to Local Wine Shops
      • Guide to Portland Bakeries
      • Guide to Portland Distilleries
      • Guide to Portland’s Beer Shops
    Portland Food and Drink

    Portland Food and Drink

    Restaurant News and Information For Portland Oregon Area Restaurants and Bars

    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • Send me email!

    Court Forces Yelp to Reveal Anonymous Reviewers’ Identities

    By PDX Food Dude Last Update March 16, 2014 8 Comments

    Anonymous trolls beware. In what the Washington Times calls “a decision that could reshape the rules for online consumer reviews, a Virginia court has ruled that the popular website Yelp must turn over the names of seven reviewers who anonymously criticized a prominent local carpet cleaning business.”

    From the Courthouse News Service,

    Yelp must identify seven anonymous reviewers who left negative reviews for a carpet-cleaning business, a Virginia appeals court ruled.
    With approximately 102 million unique visitors every month, the Yelp website allows users to post and read reviews of local businesses. Anyone who posts a review is required to have actually been a customer of the business in question, pursuant to Yelp’s Terms of Service.

    To review a business on Yelp, a user must register and provide Yelp with a valid email address. While Yelp does not require users to register with their real name, it records the IP address of every user who posts.
    In July 2012, Yelp displayed 75 reviews of Hadeed Carpet Cleaning in Alexandria, Va., a number of which were negative.
    After finding no record that the reviewers were actual Hadeed customers from a review of its customer database, Hadeed claimed that the negative reviews were false and defamatory.

    The business sued the John Doe authors of seven critical reviews and subpoenaed Yelp to learn the identities of the anonymous reviewers. Yelp repeatedly refused to respond to it, however, leading the trial court to hold Yelp in contempt.
    On Tuesday, the Virginia Court of Appeals agreed, 2-1, that Yelp must identify the users accused of defamation.
    While “an internet user does not shed his free speech rights at the log-in screen,” the right to speak with anonymity is not absolute, Judge William Petty said for the majority.

    The Virginia Legislature has developed a detailed six-step test, codified at Section 8.01-407.1, for anyone seeking to uncover the identify of an anonymous internet user. The court rejected calls to find the law unconstitutional, saying “we cannot identify a clear, palpable, and free from doubt infirmity.”

    I am aware of several cases in the Portland area, where a restaurant has been the subject of a vendetta by ex-employees upset over the sale of their business, revenge after being fired, etc. Whether the poor reviews are justified or now, restaurateurs will know that they can fight back and sue the reviewers for libel – at least in Virginia.

    Related

    Category: Portland Food and Restaurant News and Discussion.

    Previous Post: « Book Review – The Toro Bravo Cookbook
    Next Post: New California Food Safety Rule Requires Bartenders Wear Gloves »

    Reader Interactions

    Comments

    1. zumpie says

      January 9, 2014 at 5:42 pm

      Or the business could just conduct business in an ethical, professional manner and treat its employees with respect. This is also a very dicey ruling that I suspect we might well see overturned. To say nothing of the myriad of easy ways around this: just don’t use your own IP address, post the negative reviews from a variety of public connections, use fake email accounts, etc. Verrrrrryyyy simple.

      Reply
      • PDX Food Dude says

        January 9, 2014 at 9:27 pm

        I suspect the average Yelp user doesn’t know how to spoof IP’s, use a VPN, etc. Fake email accounts accomplish nothing. If someone gets a court order, all they need is your MAC address, which most people aren’t going to understand how to spoof.

        It will be interesting to see how all of this plays out. Look at all the effort Google is making to eliminate anonymous commenting. It seems to be a trend.

        Reply
        • Madeline4994 says

          January 17, 2014 at 11:28 am

          I have actually tried to register my identity on Yelp when I have posted reviews and had trouble – I guess I must be a computer doofus.

    2. Rachel schoening says

      January 9, 2014 at 6:33 pm

      Right, Zumpie, all disgruntled employees that write bad reviews were treated with disrespect by their employer, and all of said business owners could have avoided having disgruntled employees had they only run ethical businesses. So simple.

      Reply
      • zumpie says

        January 9, 2014 at 7:39 pm

        Actually there IS a fair amount of veracity to that, I’ve yet (in any capacity) to work for a restaurant that didn’t bend or break the law somewhere. It’s precisely why they get sued a lot, themselves. Also, if you don’t want negative things said about you, don’t run a direct to consumer business

        Reply
    3. mczlaw says

      January 10, 2014 at 12:23 am

      Well, zumpmeister, truth is a defense in a defamation suit so the truth-speaking, anonymous Yelpers should have no qualms about their identities being revealed so they can defend the business owner’s frivolous suit on the merits. Maybe Yelp will pick up the cost of their defense. Hahahahahaha.

      Let’s face it. Yelp loves anonymity because it allows them to post scurrilous garbage that others will read and react to. More hits. More $$$. Bottom line.

      Leonard Pitts, Jr. wrote a brilliant op-ed piece that appeared in many newspapers in the spring of 2010. I still have the crumbling page from The Oregonian. As Pitts noted, when back and forth Internet banter began to gain popularity, “it must have seemed an inspiration kissed by the spirit of Jefferson.” The truth, it turns out (as Yelp exemplifies), is that anonymous message boards “have inadvertently licensed and tacitly approved the worst of human nature under the guise of free speech.” Here, here. Link to the whole column is here:

      Let’s hope the Virginia opinion is the beginning of the end of unaccountable “reptilian” commentary on public internet forums. Yelp is a great first step.

      –mcz
      (Michael C. Zusman)

      Reply
    4. pdxyogi says

      January 12, 2014 at 2:35 pm

      After writing a 100% factual review of a local place, the owner contacted me and attempted to extort and blackmail me into having it removed.

      Reply
      • mczlaw says

        January 12, 2014 at 11:53 pm

        Are you suggesting your experience justifies anonymous comments? Be interesting to hear a few more details of your story. If attempted blackmail or extortion were truly involved, I hope the police were called. Short of that, do you agree or disagree that it’s fair for a commenter to be held accountable for what they write?

        BTW, you notice how Eater suddenly had no horrid defamatory attacks on its Portland site once commenters had to identify themselves? I’m sure Eater is paying for it with reduced click-throughs. I’d bet they’re not going back to the old way though.

        –mcz

        Reply

    Leave a Reply Cancel reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    © 2023 · PortlandFoodandDrink.com • See Terms of Service and Privacy Policy