California Tells Businesses: Stop Trying To Ban Consumer Reviews

ericgoldman writes Some businesses are so paranoid about negative consumer reviews that they have contractually banned their customers from writing reviews or imposed fines on consumers who bash them. California has told businesses to stop it. AB 2365--signed by Governor Brown yesterday, and the first law of its kind in the nation--says any contract provisions restricting consumer reviews are void, and simply including an anti-review clause in the contract can trigger penalties of $2,500.

Comments

Mecial Cannabis companies

[future assassin]

In Canada started doing this from bad reviews on their facebook/twitter pages but dropping the customer and not allowing them to purchase anymore.

Re: Mecial Cannabis companies

[master_kaos]

Well it wasn't me, I was just a kid working there. And what are you talking about? We sold to everyone at that price. We had a LIMIT sign on it and she STILL had a cart load of product. Remember this wasn't walmart with 50 skids of product in the back, we were a small independent grocer. We let her take it a few times, but enough is enough. When she literally takes 1/'2 the product not leaving much for anybody else that's bullshit.

Let me guess you are one of those asshats who is selfish and takes everything for yourself and screw everyone else.

Re: Mecial Cannabis companies

[rossz]

Did you fail comprehension? He clearly stated they sold the item at the advertised price. Loss leaders are perfectly legal (at least here in California), but you have to actually have to have a reasonable amount of the product on hand. So if a single person buys out all the stock, the business could get in trouble for not having the product on hand, which could be seen as bait-and-switch. When there is an extremely limited supply, it must be clearly stated in the advertisement. A loss leader is meant to attract customers in the hopes that they will buy additional items and make up for the loss and possibly gain a new regular customer. Also, it is perfectly legal to set a limit on sale items.

Re:Huh?

[Lab Rat Jason]

Here is an example from my home state, Utah:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/n...

This crap is actually happening a lot! Its one of the rare instances where I hope the nation follows Cali.

Re:hmmmm

[amRadioHed]

This law applies specifically to consumer goods. How many consumer goods require an NDA to purchase? In pretty sure not even the Apple store has tried that.

Re:Please can

[Wookact]

Well I am not anonymous, and yes it is annoying. I am not sure why you think its a good idea to split up your comment like that. Do you write the first few words of your email in the subject line too? Do you write the first few words on the envelope of the letter? Honestly I don't get the point. Perhaps you can sway my opinion.

Re:hmmmm

[jbolden]

A shill posting a fake review is still committing defamation. A company whose purpose is to commit crimes is committing racketeering. This law covers fines for bad reviews from customers not negative reviews from non customers.

Re:hmmmm

[mysidia]

This law applies specifically to consumer goods. How many consumer goods require an NDA to purchase?

Many EULAs contain something that is NDA-like.

Some consumer products even forbid you from publishing performance metrics or the results of comparative performance testing.... if I recall correctly, VMware used to be known for this, specifically.