hosting co suing for neg reviews
- Thread starter psx23.com
- Start date
A) Who is doing that?
B) I believe a company has a right to pursue legal action if they believe someone's statement is incorrect and damaging to their company. As far as background checks, that sounds like part of legal process (when they get ready to go to court), companies are looking to build a case against those who they sue to damage their credibility in the eyes of court.
Best,
B) I believe a company has a right to pursue legal action if they believe someone's statement is incorrect and damaging to their company. As far as background checks, that sounds like part of legal process (when they get ready to go to court), companies are looking to build a case against those who they sue to damage their credibility in the eyes of court.
Best,
http://www.webhostdebate.com/showthread.php?p=3386#post3386post3386Artashes said:
So basicly any unhappy consumer that complains to the public can be sued. Paypal could sue www.paypalsucks.com then. Why hasnt paypal sued them? Because they cant,its freedom of speech.
Last edited:
webfreak08
New member
That post, by you (it's obvious), does not provide evidence that the web host in question was going to sue for slander or do a background check.
Please note that in the United States, the first ammendment does not grant you a right to say whatever you want. Slander is against the law. Period.
If a person has had negative experiences, then that's one thing. Intentionally saying something that damages the reputation of another person or business is another.
Please note that in the United States, the first ammendment does not grant you a right to say whatever you want. Slander is against the law. Period.
If a person has had negative experiences, then that's one thing. Intentionally saying something that damages the reputation of another person or business is another.
Last edited:
I also tried to look over the exchange of posts between you and a company on two other forums that you linked to. Posting an accurate negative review is one thing (that is freedom of speech - as long as forum rules take you). Exaggerating and making false statements might have confused the hosting company, perhaps that is why they posted their responses.
If you didn't like the service, and could not resolve the problems you had, move to the next host. Now that you have already taken your points across about this host at HostingDiscussion (this is the second thread), as well as other forums, it would seem that your mission now is to simply ruin the company's reputation, at all costs.
In regard of PayPal.. How do you know they are not pursuing legal action against PayPalSucks?
Best,
If you didn't like the service, and could not resolve the problems you had, move to the next host. Now that you have already taken your points across about this host at HostingDiscussion (this is the second thread), as well as other forums, it would seem that your mission now is to simply ruin the company's reputation, at all costs.
In regard of PayPal.. How do you know they are not pursuing legal action against PayPalSucks?
Best,
Blue
New member
psx23.com said:
Freedom of speech does not cover libel.
If you tell a bunch of lies about a company, or if you make certain accusations that you can't back up then they have every right to sue.
You would think you would know this considering you claim to be an attorney on that other forum.
Somehow I really doubt that you are and attorney.
Last edited:
I never threatened to sue anyone or made up a bunch of lies about a company. I just posted my review on the company. I also contacted the company twice to try and resolve the matter but they declined yet they continue to post about it in public forums. I guess they need publicity.Blue said:
opcorn: 
Exon
New member
Sabeur said:
Most users will not only, NOT take the time to contact the site owner, but if someone asks them, "What do you think of ABC Company?" the person who read the negative review would state, "OH! STAY AWAY! I READ A BAD REVIEW!". So then two people are effected by one negative review.
On top of that, let us say for a second that the potential client contacts the company/"site owner" about the review. What is to say the review is honest, and ABC Company is a "fly-by-night" operation, of course the owner is going to claim the review is incorrect.
You can't just bash anyone/any company and then not expect them to be able to come in to defend themselves. Wouldn't you like the opportunity to defend your company, or should we make a new rule that all complaints should be locked after the complaint is made with a Note:
I also thinka rule should be made, that if you post a review, good or bad, you should provide a URL (to verify nameservers), and any screenshots of proof of your claim, that you may have.
We just had a complaint here, where the user was reluctant to post any type of proof at all.
Now, after he did post proof, his credibility was still shot, because of the initial post in which he was showing his reluctancy. He even became offensive when asked for proof. Basically in the mind set that "I made a complaint. You should just trust me."
The problem is...there are so many false review, both good and bad, that not even the most honest person can be taken seriously at face value.
The general rule should be, "If you can't or won't provide proof of your claim (especially when asked to do so), don't even bother posting your review."
Not only does proof increase the credibility of the OP, but it also keeps the board respectable, and clean of unsubstantiated garbage.
We just had a complaint here, where the user was reluctant to post any type of proof at all.
Now, after he did post proof, his credibility was still shot, because of the initial post in which he was showing his reluctancy. He even became offensive when asked for proof. Basically in the mind set that "I made a complaint. You should just trust me."
The problem is...there are so many false review, both good and bad, that not even the most honest person can be taken seriously at face value.
The general rule should be, "If you can't or won't provide proof of your claim (especially when asked to do so), don't even bother posting your review."
Not only does proof increase the credibility of the OP, but it also keeps the board respectable, and clean of unsubstantiated garbage.
Actually, I wish it were so easy to have this person's garbage removed from review sites. I contacted the owners of the 20 or so review sites where the person who started this thread posted, and only a handful agreed to remove the reviews. I provided links to the posts proving not only that the reviews were false, but also that the individual had a personal vendetta against me and my company.
It took a letter from my lawyers to make the guy stop. I have the ability to sue, and if he had continued, I would have. I have a huge file of evidence (everything he has posted in forums and review sites, harassing, foul, and threatening emails he sent directly to me, etc.) as well as proof that his claims were false.
Since he slandered my business on the Internet, I could have sued him in Federal Court, which would have required him to travel to this state for the trial. Fortunately the guy finally did the right thing and stopped.
So, my opinion of the review sites is not very high. Anyone can go on one of them (your competitors even) and write baloney and it will get posted to the majority of the sites. How do I know this? At the time that this guy wrote his "reviews" he did not even have a domain hosted on our servers (he was a customer for less than 24 hours), so clearly none of these sites verified anything.
It took a letter from my lawyers to make the guy stop. I have the ability to sue, and if he had continued, I would have. I have a huge file of evidence (everything he has posted in forums and review sites, harassing, foul, and threatening emails he sent directly to me, etc.) as well as proof that his claims were false.
Since he slandered my business on the Internet, I could have sued him in Federal Court, which would have required him to travel to this state for the trial. Fortunately the guy finally did the right thing and stopped.
So, my opinion of the review sites is not very high. Anyone can go on one of them (your competitors even) and write baloney and it will get posted to the majority of the sites. How do I know this? At the time that this guy wrote his "reviews" he did not even have a domain hosted on our servers (he was a customer for less than 24 hours), so clearly none of these sites verified anything.
Perhaps the company felt like the customer was being deliberately negative and producing slander or false information for no other reason but to harm the company. I think their are probably two sides to the story. Unfortunately, to many people jump to conclusions without looking into the issue first.
Forum supporters
Save 37% Off Plesk License
Official Plesk Partner, Instant License Delivery, No Contract Commitment. Grab Your Savings NOW!
cplicense.net
Official Plesk Partner, Instant License Delivery, No Contract Commitment. Grab Your Savings NOW!
cplicense.net
Up to 30% Off on KVM VPS
Significant discounts on KVM VPS SSD. Worldwide Locations. Full Root Access. Instant Deployment.
greenwebpage.com
Significant discounts on KVM VPS SSD. Worldwide Locations. Full Root Access. Instant Deployment.
greenwebpage.com