back to article Yelp wins fight to remain morally bankrupt

Reprehensible review site Yelp is not responsible for negative views posted on its site, a US appeals court has ruled. The company was sued by a locksmith who claimed that Yelp posted a scathing review about a different company to his profile as a way to pressure him to take out advertising with the company. Douglas Kimzey, …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    A plausible sequence...

    1. Build site.

    2. Fail to make $.

    3. Devise plan to make $ by abandoning fairness/decency/privacy/etc.

    4. Jettison morals.

    5. Make $.

    I'm not asserting that Yelp has done this, but how many individual people could resist this temptation? And considering that corporations _usually_ have all the venality of the worst humans -- and none of the moral restraint inherent in the best of us... what other sequence could possibly exist?

    1. a_yank_lurker

      Re: A plausible sequence...

      Yelp and other review sites have a problem with accuracy and verify the reviewers bona fides. It is fairly easy to post a bogus review on these sites. Reviews on Amazon suffer from this to some extent but Amazon can verify if the reviewer actually purchased the product.

      Also, how many bad reviews did this guy get versus good reviews?

      1. Oh Homer
        Mushroom

        "That approach has led to frequent suspicions that Yelp..."

        ...has no credibility.

        For a business whose sole purpose is the provision of credible information, that should be game over.

    2. Oengus

      Re: A plausible sequence...

      A more likely sequence...

      1. Jettison morals.

      2. Devise plan to make $ by abandoning fairness/decency/privacy/etc.

      3. Build site.

      4. Fail to make $.

      5. Hope a Google/Facebook/VC vulture decides to buy you out to make $.

    3. Sgt_Oddball

      Re: A plausible sequence...

      Just remember Apple once thought differently and Google espoused not being 'Evil'..........

      1. werdsmith Silver badge

        Re: A plausible sequence...

        Consumers become aware that Yelp hides bad reviews for money?

        Consumers don't trust Yelp so consumers don't use Yelp so Yelp becomes extinct.

        Trust is really very important. Even if it is misplaced.

  2. Efros

    Used to be known as

    the "Otherwizen Business", "You give us money otherwizen we beat you up." Or in this case,"You give us money otherwiizen we let bad reviews be viewed". Must be a case for the US equivalent of demanding money with menaces or suchlike.

    1. Mark 85

      Re: Used to be known as

      "Nice business you have there. I note that you have a bad review... It would be a shame for you to ignore it and have your business fail. But we can fix that....".

      1. Rich 11

        Re: Used to be known as

        "Nice business you have there. I note that you have a bad review... It would be a shame for you to ignore it and have your business fail. But we can fix that....".

        "And then he nails my head to the floor."

        "He nailed your head to the floor?"

        "At first, yeah."

        1. BuckeyeB
          FAIL

          Re: Used to be known as

          “She turned me into a newt.... But I got better...”

    2. ecofeco Silver badge

      Re: Used to be known as

      No, it's racketeering and he is not the first to complain.

      Yes you can Google it.

    3. Mage Silver badge
      Headmaster

      Re: Used to be known as

      They don't need to make fake negative reviews. They will happen anyway to even the best run most excellent businesses.

      They should be in trouble for offering to remove them in exchange for money.

  3. Crazy Operations Guy

    Yelp is a joke anyway

    They have no system to even determine the legitimacy of the reviews, not even some kind of GeoIP filter to prevent people from posting reviews about a location they haven't even been within a thousand miles of. I've been able to post a review of a pizza place in Sydney while sitting in New York (I was actually at the pizza place a few days before, but how was Yelp to know that?). Something like requiring a photo / scan of the receipt would be simple to implement and cut down quite a bit on false reviews.

    They also don't seem to do any filtering to remove reviews for locations that, by all rights, should never be reviewed. Things like Auschwitz, or Hitler's home should never be reviewable, especially since the reviews for both places are routinely filled with hate speech and holocaust denial (For which Yelp is quite slow to respond to). There is also some pretty hateful stuff posted as reviews for the memorials at Hiroshima and Nagasaki...

    1. Code For Broke

      Re: Yelp is a joke anyway

      My down vote is attributable to the concept of a verification system based on scanned receipts. Such a system would not be simple to implement, nor practical for the average user.

      Concerning flamingly negative reviews, I expect we have all found ways to contextualize such information as educated internet users. If, as a service provider, such as the complainant in the subject of this article, I have only received one flamingly negative review ever, the contextual clue to the customer is that I don't do much business and therefore may be lacking the experience to provide excellent service.

      While I am very uncomfortable with the business model that yelp is accused of pursuing here, I don't think this complainant's case was even close to the adequate example to illustrate yelps abuses.

  4. Phil W

    In fairness this guys claim was clearly a bit of a none starter, one bad review followed by them offering him advertising, which would also have made the bad review go away, may perhaps seem a little suspicious but hardly the basis for a court case. You'd think if Yelp were going to use such a tactic they would post more than one bad review as leverage.

    In fact he's lucky Yelp didn't counter sue him for damages from slander/libel since it appears he accused them of racketeering without any evidence beyond a single coincidence that they actually did it.

    I'm all for holding illegal or immoral business practices to account, but not without a little more than a single coincidence to go on.

    1. Justin Pasher

      Re: @Phil W

      To me, it looks like Yelp wants to have its cake and eat it to. They argue that they are immune because they do not control the content of the site, yet they are pursuing someone with a bad review to get a commitment to buying advertising ... to alter the content on the site.

      Not quite racketeering, since I'm sure they don't try to sell advertising just to people with low review scores. Sounds a lot more like just simple (possibly indirect) blackmail.

    2. Sitaram Chamarty

      what he should have done

      is to capture the page before, then pay for the advertisement, capture again, and then sue. That's proof that this is a racket if the bad review goes away when you pay.

      A lot more tangible, IMO.

      1. Phil W

        Re: what he should have done

        It's not racketeering to take down legitimate negative reviews for a fee or as part of some other business arrangement i.e. taking out advertisements. It may be morally questionable but it's not racketeering or any other form of crime.

        It's only racketeering if the negative reviews are written by (or on behalf of) the people offering to remove them for a fee.

      2. Goldmember

        Re: what he should have done

        There's no racket involved. It seems this one has already been addressed and dismissed by the courts, as the systems are Yelp's own;

        "As a result, it offers advertising to companies who may then find their negative reviews are relegated or discounted from the system – an approach that was supported by the Ninth Circuit of Appeals, which noted it is Yelp's own system and it can do pretty much what it wants with it (under the concept of "editorial immunity")."

        Immoral, yes. Illegal, no.

  5. MondoMan

    Calling the El Reg Detective Agency!

    The story claims "...something that the company often does, complete with a quid pro quo that it will hide negative reviews in return ". This claim could be true, but Yelp has always denied that it offers such a quid pro quo -- can El Reg provide any links to actual evidence that Yelp offers such quids pro quo?

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: Calling the El Reg Detective Agency!

      Of course not, it's going to be over the telephone and verbal. If they sent an email or took out a full page ad in a broadsheet they would have been successfully sued by now.

      1. Alan Brown Silver badge

        Re: Calling the El Reg Detective Agency!

        "Of course not, it's going to be over the telephone and verbal. "

        A recording of that would be useful (many people record all calls and conversations)

        Then again this is the 9th circuit and rulings tend to be all over the place.

        1. Dave 15

          Re: Calling the El Reg Detective Agency!

          You could always actually test it.

          Set up a venue

          Get some friends to write a mixed bag of reviews, some every hostile, some ok

          Check they are all present and take a copy of the page

          Then complain

          Take out an ad with the quid pro quo

          Then see if the reviews have materially changed.

    2. Phil Koenig

      Re: Calling the El Reg Detective Agency!

      "...any links to actual evidence that Yelp offers such quids pro quo?"

      Yes, they do. But here's how they do it:

      At the top of every review today, Yelp now proudly states:

      " Your trust is our top concern, so businesses can't pay to alter or remove their reviews. Learn more."

      Classic weasel-words.

      No, they don't technically "remove" negative reviews, they hide them. Which is the go-to tactic these days for online "review pages": the vast majority of people do not have the motivation or drive to seek out anything but the stuff right at the top of any page they are viewing. If a company like Amazon or Google Play systematically put the positive reviews of a product or service right at the top, 99% of people will never read anything but those positive reviews.

      SO they hide the ones their advertised businesses don't like. Take a look here: http://imgur.com/a/qaEjB

      That's an example from today, using a desktop browser. Note how they hide the bad reviews and call them "Not Recommended", at the very bottom of the page (there are 20 reviews per page) in small, faint grey text with a tiny dropdown button. And I'm not sure that "unhide" feature is even available to people using a mobile to view reviews. (Probably the majority of Yelp users these days)

      Sleazy, absolutely. Pity it's not thought of as illegal here in Capitalism Central.

      I remember the days when Yelp was much more useful. Now you have to be very careful to not get misled by the reviews.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It seems fair to me that you forego the arguments of editorial immunity and 'the reviewer is a third party we have no control over' if you agree to censor your own users in return for cash.

    The first one is perhaps murkier but you can't claim reviews are completely independent and at the same time offer to fiddle with them in return for cash.

    As usual South Park did the best job of lampooning Yelp. I'd say the existence of its absurd business is justified by the material it gave them to write an episode with.

  7. Youngone Silver badge

    My two cents worth

    It is Yelp's platform, so they can run it anyway they like, but if they are hiding negative reviews in return for cash, they will become less and less reliable and the problem will fix itself.

    1. veti Silver badge

      Re: My two cents worth

      You're talking as if "reputation" and "reliability" were still actual bankable commodities.

      Nobody cares any more. The closest we have to "reputation" online is Google pagerank, and guess what? - you can fix that by giving money to Google, which Yelp does in great profusion.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: My two cents worth

        "you can fix that by giving money to Google"

        No, you can't.

      2. Efros

        Re: My two cents worth

        "You're talking as if "reputation" and "reliability" were still actual bankable commodities."

        As evidenced by the current candidates in the US Presidential election, in the case of one much more so than the other. I'll leave you to make the decision as to which one, subject to your own fears, prejudices, and conspiracy theories.

      3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: My two cents worth

        'You're talking as if "reputation" and "reliability" were still actual bankable commodities.'

        You might find them appearing on company balance sheets as goodwill. If they weren't bankable why do you think people would pay for page rank?

        1. veti Silver badge

          Re: My two cents worth

          @Doctor Syntax: Pagerank is absolutely bankable, yes. But it's not the same as "reputation". It's effectively controlled by a single company, which can manipulate it any way it chooses and doesn't have to explain what it's doing or why.

          Yelp and Google have an unholy deal that gives *ridiculously* high profile to Yelp's "reviews". I can only imagine that Yelp pays Google an ungodly amount of money for that deal, but I'll never know for sure and neither will you (unless you happen to be a high ranking exec at one of those two companies, in which case I assume you wouldn't be compromising your employer by commenting on here).

          @IsJustABloke: you're making the point. You're going by a "reputation" that's determined by the reviews you happen to see. Guess what? - those reviews are not a fair sample. They're not "all" reviews for the site, and they're also not a "random" selection: they're a selection, written by people who may or may not ever have been within a thousand miles of the place, and chosen by editorial criteria that we don't know.

          What we do know about it is that the "editors" will sell advertising to the reviewed establishment, on the basis that if they buy it then the negative reviews will no longer be seen.

          That's a very, very different thing from listening to friends and family and people with actual reputation on the line.

      4. IsJustabloke
        WTF?

        Re: My two cents worth

        "You're talking as if "reputation" and "reliability" were still actual bankable commodities."

        Of course they are....

        I am booking a hotel. I've never been to the "place" before so I do some research.

        I don't even look at hotels that have mostly negative reviews. I don't consider that perhaps they're malicious reviews I *just* move on. That Hotel won't be "banking" my cash.

        let's consider "reputation" - I need a plumber, I ask around friends and family, a couple of them had an experience with "Mario" (who kept bumping in to things and breaking them) that was really quite poor. His work was bad and it was a bit of a struggle getting him back to do remedial work. Mario's reputation means that *he* won't be banking any of my cash either.

        Let's not even get started on the shit we hear/ read about TripAdivsor .

    2. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

      Re: My two cents worth

      "It is Yelp's platform, so they can run it anyway they like..."

      <deliberate snark>Oh, if only the lawyers defending those Silk Road guys would have thought of something like that.</deliberate snark>

      But seriously, "there are rules, man"!

      1. Cuddles

        Re: My two cents worth

        "But seriously, "there are rules, man"!"

        There are laws, and if the service you're offering are actually illegal, as with Silk Road, then you will get in trouble. But no, there aren't any other rules, and simply being dishonest does not usually break the law. Running a review service that hides some reviews in return for payment is like running a restaurant that insults every third customer unless they pay extra - it's not exactly good business practice but there are no rules preventing you from doing so.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Stop

    Yelp are weasels, sounds like I should ignore their reviews.

    Title says it all

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Yelp is still a thing?

    Wow

    1. 's water music

      Re: Yelp is still a thing?

      It is like HijackThis log report postings. Just one more thing to filter out in order to find useful information in a web search

  10. Version 1.0 Silver badge

    Money talks?

    I wouldn't use Yelp if the paid me - over the years I've come to believe that virtually all user created content in sites like Yelp, Expedia, Amazon etc is crap. Sure, there's some honest reviews there but you've got to look really hard to find them.

    My belief is that 90% of the reviews out there are typed by bots hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard 24/7 with the hope that eventually they will create the complete works of William Shakespeare.

  11. Pazl

    If there are discerning yelp users

    It seems that the result is that businesses with poor reviews would be the majority of advertisers on Yelp, so the discernible conclusion for a yelp visitor would be "don't use the advertisers services". The problem of course is most users, appear not to know what is going on in the Yelp business model eh?

  12. Pascal Monett Silver badge
    WTF?

    Editorial immunity ? That is a thing ?

    I think that a lot of websites slammed for being responsible for the posts on their site should take a loooong look at this ruling.

    I'm ordering the popcorn now.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The only thing, from the article, that Yelp probably should be responsible for is having a review tied to this guy that is for a different business. I could understand if he could show that Yelp knew that the business being reviewed wasn't his and yet still had the review available and tied to his business after being informed that it wasn't correct.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I'm SHOCKED!!

    As Captain Renault said in the movie "Casablanca": 'I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!' Or in this case, other immoral activity.

  15. Dave 15

    Really more shite

    Look, lets be honest here.

    I have just bought a quad core 2.2 ghz laptop with a top spec ssd and 8gb of ram. If I were to write a review of it and the MS windows 10 that is on it the review would fail to match any single measure of polite. The experience is shit.

    The last laptop fell apart for no good reason... good review for that? No chance

    BOTH were brand name laptops of supposedly good reputation. The work laptop failed with a hard drive collapse on Friday, the 24 hour support changed the drive today and insisted on walking away with a drive with sensitive company information... would they expect a good review?

    My sons toys... if I buy something on ebay from the 50s and 60s they still work the next day, if I go to the toy shop and buy anything today (apart from Mamod and Mechanno) it will sure as hell not be functioning by the end of this evening ... good review???

    Most dinners out in the UK? Good... not really, edible? Only sometime

    Most hotels in the UK... frankly over priced flea pits

    The problem is that review sites tend to let people tell the truth... and the truth is that almost everything today is utter crap.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Really more shite

      Back when I was a lad people were much better at harking back to a bygone era that didn't really exist.

      Today it just doesn't feel like their heart is in it.

    2. Robert Moore

      Re: Really more shite

      > The problem is that review sites tend to let people tell the truth... and the truth is that almost everything today is utter crap.

      Your ideas intrigue me, and I wish to review your newsletter on Yelp.

    3. Code For Broke

      Re: Really more shite

      Dave, you must be invited to al the happening parties.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like