Legal issues with this?

[deronsizemore]

I'm going to publish a cellular blog/forum/review site. The site is going to be about one company in particular. I'm wondering if there will be any legal implications for having a review type site with blog features and a forum for one particular cellular phone company?

The name of the site will not make reference to the company, so that shouldn't be a problem there.

[The New Guy]

Well the only way you can get in trouble is by liable, and that would be the case if it was a general review site. The only issue I see over and above liable is trademark issues. I would take alook at all the IPOD dedicated sites, since they are basically the same thing.

[deronsizemore]

Well the only way you can get in trouble is by liable, and that would be the case if it was a general review site. The only issue I see over and above liable is trademark issues. I would take alook at all the IPOD dedicated sites, since they are basically the same thing.

Doesn't liable mean that I would be legally responsible for anything that happens? Wouldn't this be the case with any site created?

As far as trademark issues, does this just go for the company logo, or even saying the name somewhere on the site?

With the IPOD sites, are you just saying to take a look at their legal disclaimers to get an example of how to not be liable for content from forum members or review posts?

[Hylo]

"The New Guy" may have meant libel rather than liable which puts a different slant on it. With libel, you may be taken to court if you have written something untrue or damaging to the company's reputation (I'm not sure of the exact legal terminology used). In a nice twist of the English language, you would then be liable for any damages caused to the company involved.

Answer is: be very careful about what you write concerning the company. You might feel it's an honest appraisal but whether it is or not you won't be able to compete with a corporation's legal team if they feel they have been defamed online.

[Shawn]

I know of an individual who owns a website about doctors (with user-submitted reviews). One day, he received an e-mail from a doctor who had been poorly reviewed on his site. He wasn't happy at all, as you can imagine. The doctor had assumed that the guy who owned the site was also responsible for posting the negative reviews (although, the user-submitted review concept was fairly obvious).

The thing was close to going to court, however, the site owner finally came to his senses and completely removed the negative reviews on the doctor.

--

Even though you may want to seem "fair and balanced" to your website visitors, I would add an "abuse" form on your site. Allow the companies being reviewed to appeal any review they feel that is unjust.

It makes you appear like you're fair, that you're not simply out to bash that certain company. Sure, you could still get sued -- but the abuse form allows them to remove the reviews first -- it shows that you're willing to be fair and you don't mind cooperating.

[deronsizemore]

Wow, this may be a lot more trouble then I care to deal with. If any negative reviews at all were on the site it would be user submitted, I wouldn't be doing any bashing. I would basically post some news, like the specs on a new phone or something and let that be reviewed.

I'm curious how a site like www.phonescoop.com gets a way with it...or maybe they don't and are going through the legal stuff right now with carriers, because in their forum there is some MAJOR bashing of places.

One other thing I thought was that for review type sites it was called something and companies could not take legal action, else we wouldn't see golf review sites, book review, electronic reviews, etc... I don't know though, I'm no lawyer here so I'm just throwing stuff out there.


I would add an "abuse" form on your site. Allow the companies being reviewed to appeal any review they feel that is unjust.

That's a good idea, but doesn't seem like it would stop someone from sueing the pants off of me if they wanted. lol


EDIT: What about a stricly forum site with no blog or reviews? Same type of situation there or not?

[Hylo]

You can still get sued for comments on forums and I think I'm right in saying it is the forum administrator's duty to weed out libellous or otherwise unlawful material, hence the need for tight moderation on forums so they don't turn into walking legal timebomb free-for-alls.

[Shawn]

deron, there is absolutely NOTHING you can do to stop anybody from suing you.

It doesn't matter what you do with the site, you could easily get sued, even if you're absolutely 100% in the right. The only thing you can do is limit your chances.

[Chris]

An online service provider is not responsible for the comments of users posted on their service. In every case I've read about the owner of the website/forum always wins.

You can still get sued though, so if someone complains its generally worth it to just remove what they're complaining about, unless you know they won't sue you (some 16 year old kid or whatever) or you have the backing of a free speech organization like EFF or ACLU.

One example (and yes, the site won this case):

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/apr2000/san-a18.shtml

[deronsizemore]

deron, there is absolutely NOTHING you can do to stop anybody from suing you.

It doesn't matter what you do with the site, you could easily get sued, even if you're absolutely 100% in the right. The only thing you can do is limit your chances.


Okay, so in this case do you think it best to stear clear of this kind of site to just not even take the chance?

[Shawn]

No, I wouldn't say not do it. I have several sites that are based off of user-submitted reviews with both negative and positive reviews. I have a way, however, for those being reviewed to flag a review they deem untrue or unfair.

It won't protect you from being sued, but it shows those negatively reviewed that at least you're willing to be contacted and rectify the situation.

[paul]

If you are going to be in business for yourself you just have to accept (in the USA at least) that you will be sued someday. The suit will probably come out of the blue about something you never imagined.

I have done some work for a guy who has spent $60,000 so far defending himself in a class action suit that hinges on the difference between the words "may" and "will" in a form letter he sent.

You need to have basic precautions in place before that happens. Basic precautions are described in many books and might include limited partnerships, LLC's, Corporations, Trusts etc. The 80/20 rule works for you here. Simple, inexpensive precautions will protect you from many problems.

[The New Guy]

Yes, I ment libel sorry I was tired. Anyway, you should find this article useful.

http://news.com.com/Is+Wikipedia+safe+from+libel+liability/2100-1025_3-5984880.html?tag=nl

[deronsizemore]

Yes, I ment libel sorry I was tired. Anyway, you should find this article useful.

http://news.com.com/Is+Wikipedia+safe+from+libel+liability/2100-1025_3-5984880.html?tag=nl


Thanks...I'll take a look.

[Snowballer]

curiuos, if a site is non-american based...is the sueing still prevelant?

[Chris]

Not as prevalent I would wager.