TripAdvisor NOT Getting Sued
Discussion
TripAdvisor and similar are benign platforms. In simple terms, they are not publishers but enable anyone to publish their thoughts on their platform. Think of it like a placard. If someone wrote a defamatory message about you and stood outside your house with it, would you take issue with them or the company that provided the materials to make the placard?
Moneysavingexpert and similar are publishers. If they write a bad review then providing that review is objective and based on evidence, then there is no legal recourse available to the company being reviewed.
Where it gets legally tricky is if a review overstates the problem or the author is being subjective.
Moneysavingexpert and similar are publishers. If they write a bad review then providing that review is objective and based on evidence, then there is no legal recourse available to the company being reviewed.
Where it gets legally tricky is if a review overstates the problem or the author is being subjective.
Friend with a car dealers had a bad review left on Autotrader as he would not discount a car. The person made false allegations about him and his company so he asked Autotrader to remove but they refused, it was then escalated via solicitors and Autotrader basically turned it on the person who left the review and advised them they would need to defend any legal action. They then asked for it to be removed.
It seems as the hosting review site you can pass any legal complaints onto the person who left the review so you need to keep IP addresses etc.
It seems as the hosting review site you can pass any legal complaints onto the person who left the review so you need to keep IP addresses etc.
I won't use any PHer on recommendation here because of the name-and-shame rule. I did once and had a seriously concerning experience - I can't mention it here though and the PHer is still frequently recommended.
My view is that if you're prepared to make money from PH recommendations, you should be prepared to address negative experiences too.
My view is that if you're prepared to make money from PH recommendations, you should be prepared to address negative experiences too.
StevieBee said:
TripAdvisor and similar are benign platforms. In simple terms, they are not publishers but enable anyone to publish their thoughts on their platform. Think of it like a placard. If someone wrote a defamatory message about you and stood outside your house with it, would you take issue with them or the company that provided the materials to make the placard?
Moneysavingexpert and similar are publishers. If they write a bad review then providing that review is objective and based on evidence, then there is no legal recourse available to the company being reviewed.
Where it gets legally tricky is if a review overstates the problem or the author is being subjective.
They can lose their section 5 defence though if they fail to deal with any complaints correctly.Moneysavingexpert and similar are publishers. If they write a bad review then providing that review is objective and based on evidence, then there is no legal recourse available to the company being reviewed.
Where it gets legally tricky is if a review overstates the problem or the author is being subjective.
The Moose said:
I have an idea for a website, similar to TripAdvisor (not rating hotels/restaurants etc) and I wanted to understand how they got around being sued for hosting negative reviews when forums like PH avoid negative reviews of companies.
Because the PH admin team are cowards.L0gan5 said:
StevieBee said:
TripAdvisor and similar are benign platforms. In simple terms, they are not publishers but enable anyone to publish their thoughts on their platform. Think of it like a placard. If someone wrote a defamatory message about you and stood outside your house with it, would you take issue with them or the company that provided the materials to make the placard?
Moneysavingexpert and similar are publishers. If they write a bad review then providing that review is objective and based on evidence, then there is no legal recourse available to the company being reviewed.
Where it gets legally tricky is if a review overstates the problem or the author is being subjective.
They can lose their section 5 defence though if they fail to deal with any complaints correctly.Moneysavingexpert and similar are publishers. If they write a bad review then providing that review is objective and based on evidence, then there is no legal recourse available to the company being reviewed.
Where it gets legally tricky is if a review overstates the problem or the author is being subjective.
The Moose said:
L0gan5 said:
StevieBee said:
TripAdvisor and similar are benign platforms. In simple terms, they are not publishers but enable anyone to publish their thoughts on their platform. Think of it like a placard. If someone wrote a defamatory message about you and stood outside your house with it, would you take issue with them or the company that provided the materials to make the placard?
Moneysavingexpert and similar are publishers. If they write a bad review then providing that review is objective and based on evidence, then there is no legal recourse available to the company being reviewed.
Where it gets legally tricky is if a review overstates the problem or the author is being subjective.
They can lose their section 5 defence though if they fail to deal with any complaints correctly.Moneysavingexpert and similar are publishers. If they write a bad review then providing that review is objective and based on evidence, then there is no legal recourse available to the company being reviewed.
Where it gets legally tricky is if a review overstates the problem or the author is being subjective.
Cheers
The Moose said:
L0gan5 said:
StevieBee said:
TripAdvisor and similar are benign platforms. In simple terms, they are not publishers but enable anyone to publish their thoughts on their platform. Think of it like a placard. If someone wrote a defamatory message about you and stood outside your house with it, would you take issue with them or the company that provided the materials to make the placard?
Moneysavingexpert and similar are publishers. If they write a bad review then providing that review is objective and based on evidence, then there is no legal recourse available to the company being reviewed.
Where it gets legally tricky is if a review overstates the problem or the author is being subjective.
They can lose their section 5 defence though if they fail to deal with any complaints correctly.Moneysavingexpert and similar are publishers. If they write a bad review then providing that review is objective and based on evidence, then there is no legal recourse available to the company being reviewed.
Where it gets legally tricky is if a review overstates the problem or the author is being subjective.
As a part of the Terms & Conditions you agree to '...defend and indemnify the Tripadvisor Companies...'
https://tripadvisor.mediaroom.com/uk-terms-of-use#...
https://tripadvisor.mediaroom.com/uk-terms-of-use#...
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff