Slashdot Mirror
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.
There is one sure way to reduce negative reviews: Make sure your product and/or service is good quality.
Nothing can entirely eliminate negative reviews, because sometimes people just get a lemon product, or the person giving them service was having a bad day, or they're just ornery people who can't be satisfied. But if you do your job right, monitor your employees to make sure they're not slacking off or mistreating your customers—and, of course, the best way to do this is to make sure they're satisfied with their jobs in the first place—and don't skimp monetarily on the quality of your product, service, or employees, then you're likely to get more good reviews than bad.
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
In Canada started doing this from bad reviews on their facebook/twitter pages but dropping the customer and not allowing them to purchase anymore.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
I don't care how many 1-star reviews a place get. You know what matters? How they respond to them.
I'd rather go to a place that replies politely to every negative review than one that ignores them entirely. And if they are genuinely fake, things such as "We have no record of your stay, but we're sorry that you had trouble" speak a thousand times more to what's actually happening then any amount of ignorance.
Everywhere gets bad reviews. You cannot have perfection. What matters is how you deal with when you fuck up.
Reviews are like a box of chocolate.
The person with the loose filling always gets the caramel instead of the strawberry truffle they were expecting.
You stop putting the start of your comment in the subject and the rest in the body. Why? BECAUSE IT IS HARD TO READ - like all caps (BUT WORSE). We can quickly gloss over the effect it has on your argument, whether good or bad.
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.
Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?
We need more penalties just for trying to include illegal terms in a non-negotiable contract. It's not enough to simply say "well, the courts will toss it out if they try to enforce it" - because that relies on people being able to fight a legal battle that they shouldn't have needed to fight to begin with.
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.
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
We don't
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
That's one more headache for small businesses. Oh great, I forgot to check supplies because I was on Yelp. Now we're out of Dijon mustard. Next thing you know, there's a 1-star review from somebody who loves Dijon mustard. If there isn't any existing law, conspiracy to place unwarranted negative reviews should also be illegal. Competitors and their employees should be barred, or at the very least required to disclose their positions. That would be similar to the financial talking heads on TV who have to say if they own the stocks they discuss.
The one's with teeth marks are caramel?
What you're saying is, every small business has to do business with Yelp. They're the 1000 lb gorilla in this case, and Yelp itself has earned plenty of bad reviews from businesses forced to deal with them.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
Terrific to hear! Nice to see this terrible practiced blocked. It has been awful damaging to enterprise software for almost two decades now.
I own a tiny one person business. In order for me to reply to comments on Yelp! I have to pay them a monthly fee. Last time I looked one patient gave me a glowing review. Before that I was "invisible." After that I got 30 calls from people working for Yelp! trying to get to to 'join.'
Meanwhile, other business review websites have popped up, giving me 4/5 stars. Basically, they quote the Yelp! review, but knock it down one star. For low number of reviews? For?
For me fortunately it probably makes no difference. But at the same time if I'm looking for a plumber it is so easy to go with the guy with good reviews.
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.
It should be a clear enough distinction. Hotel's and restaurants don't get you to sign NDA's.
Even KlearGear's lawyer can't hide his scumminess from his public statements.
>> "Ironically, if Mr. Palmer [consumer] had simply approach[ed] Kleargear first last fall and requested a stay to finance their new furnace — we would have worked with him," Mathieu [shitty company's lawyer] wrote. "We are human beings. Instead he has chosen a public forum."
Yeah, and be sure to ask your mugger if he can hold off a minute, so you can buy your lunch before he steals your credit card.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
If they care about Yelp, then yes they have to work with Yelp.
If they don't care about Yelp then they can ignore it completely.
You can't care about Yelp but not want to do anything about it so the site should be shut down.
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.
That's one more headache for small businesses. Oh great, I forgot to check supplies because I was on Yelp. Now we're out of Dijon mustard. Next thing you know, there's a 1-star review from somebody who loves Dijon mustard. If there isn't any existing law, conspiracy to place unwarranted negative reviews should also be illegal. Competitors and their employees should be barred, or at the very least required to disclose their positions. That would be similar to the financial talking heads on TV who have to say if they own the stocks they discuss.
If the business ran out of Dijon mustard, they deserve the one star review from the Dijon lover -- that way other Dijon lovers can steer clear. Why shouldn't a restaurant get bad reviews for not stocking an expected condiment? If the restaurant doesn't have time to stock basic supplies, what else is falling through the cracks?
It should be a clear enough distinction. Hotel's and restaurants don't get you to sign NDA's.
Some may start adding a non-disclosure clause, that is, if they think it can allow them to legally restrict negative reviews.
I'm not so sure what that widely repeated line from the film Forrest Gump is supposed to mean. Every box of Zachary chocolates that I've seen has a map of the chocolates on the inside of the lid. I wonder if this misconception was meant as a sign of Forrest's inability to read the map due to mild low intelligence. Or are maps of chocolate samplers the result of increased food allergen awareness that didn't exist during the era when the film takes place? Or am I overanalyzing?
NDAs are to cover technology or "trade secrets" - writing a review for "peppermint Coca-Cola" (making something up) saying "it sucks moose balls" isn't revealing their 'recipe' for making it or anything secret, anyone can buy a can and make their own judgement.
By the same token, even if I enter an NDA with a company to, say, integrate their technology into a product - saying "these people are a PITA to work with and I would never want to deal with them again" isn't violating the NDA on their technology.
Now... I could see perhaps if you entered into a deal with say Rossi and the "eCat" cold fusion nonsense, that saying "they're a fraud, the technology is a hoax" might perhaps be a gray area - but still, as long as you're not revealing their 'secret catalyst' or the actual (non-) functioning details of the device, you aren't really revealing their 'secret' technology?
You're right that businesses should respond to negative reviews and customer complaints. However, the burden is rather high on small businesses to be constantly doing this. And hiring an outside firm to do it doesn't guarantee satisfactory results all the time either.
Since Google's being forced to delist web pages (DMCA and all), Yelp and other such directory sites probably should be forced to have a delist procedure as well. In fact, I would think that a lot of issues with fake reviews and fake updates and such would be solved if many of these things were opt-in (in the same way that Craig's List or eBay or Amazon Marketplace or Google Shopping is opt-in). At the very least, there should be an ability to opt-out.
I mean, it's one thing to complain when the system you took part in is working against you, but it's something else to be forced into the system that without your active involvement is being gamed against you.
People forget that consumer protection is not just about protecting the consumer directly, but also about preventing unfair business practices to maintain a competitive landscape (this falls in the same vein as price collusion, except it's one bad actor instead of multiple bad actors).
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
no, those are nougat. As far as my family knows, the never come with caramal :)
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Agreed. I always go straight to the bad reviews. Usually the 2-3 star are the most useful. 1 star is often posted by people that will never be happy and is usually a rant about something insignificant, unless there are lots of them. Even a company with 99% ratings, I'll look at those 2-3 stars to see how they handle things when they DO have problems,
That's the real lesson companies need to learn. Bad reviews are a great chance for good PR. It's ok to screw up. Last time I logged a complaint at Amazon, I almost felt bad about having said anything. THAT is why they're dominating the market. I have paid extra to buy things through them rather than direct from a dealer because the Amazon backing had that much value to me. I didn't know if the dealer would back the product, but I *KNEW* Amazon would.
I was just gonna bring up the topic of EULA's. But thanks for doing that instead. And it's not just VMware, but all heavy iron SQL database vendors like MS SQL Server, Oracle, IBM DB2, etc. A decade ago I used to look at storagereview.com for harddrives, then I'd look for database performance reviews, just to find out the software EULA specifically forbids those. What a load of crap?
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.
Maybe this law has *good* unintended consequences?
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Does this mean that DeWitt clauses (http://sqlmag.com/sql-server/devils-dewitt-clause) prohibiting publication of benchmark results are now invalid by statute in California? I'm sure that would be he very definition of 'unintended consequence', but I'd love for it to be true.
In other news, California courts ruled that Yelp is allowed to manipulate the ratings that users see, depending on whether the restaurant pays for advertising.
I don't care how many 1-star reviews a place get. You know what matters? How they respond to them.
I'd rather go to a place that replies politely to every negative review than one that ignores them entirely. And if they are genuinely fake, things such as "We have no record of your stay, but we're sorry that you had trouble" speak a thousand times more to what's actually happening then any amount of ignorance.
Everywhere gets bad reviews. You cannot have perfection. What matters is how you deal with when you fuck up.
This x 1000.
Fuck ups happen, I'd rather stay with someone who understands how to deal with them than someone who pretends they dont happen.
I know quite a few hoteliers (protip: if you want a good room, book direct and not through an agency) and the problem isn't just bad reviews, the problem is that people are too meek (read: gutless) to bring a problem to a owner/managers attention. So the live with the problem for their entire stay and then make a "scathing" review on Yelp or trip advisor. So often a guest can do something about their problem with a short conversation with the owner or manager (or front desk if its a big hotel) but wont. Often the hotel management doesn't know about the problem (previous guests hide or ignore them because they're scared of being charged for it) and managers cant count on housekeepers working for minimum wage (or less in some countries) who have dozens of rooms to do, to do a thorough inspection when a guest leaves.
There is an art form to complaining and getting what you want. First you must be clear about the resolution you would like, but also friendly (this is why I prefer to do it in person rather than over the phone, even if I have to wait in a line). God and hotel managers help those who help themselves, going a little way to fixing an issue is enough to make someone else go a long way. Appreciation is always appreciated, just a thanks. To a hotelier it makes them feel good about themselves and you (this often leads to discounts, free upgrades and drinks, especially for repeat customers). For staff it earns them brownie points, promotions or sometimes bonuses (so if a front desk staffer, concierge or housekeeper helps you, leave a compliment and make sure to mention those who helped you by name).
Beyond this you have the outliers, guests who are just difficult to deal with. I'm sure we all know the kind, people who want to pay bottom dollar but expect champagne service and nothing is ever good enough for these people. Fortunately these people are as rare as they are arrogant and blusterous.
Of course there are always crap hotels. But a bigger issue is that a lot of people who have a bad time have a bad time because they did nothing to fix it. Why wait until after leaving to make your issue known and make a big song and dance on an anonymous message board when 99 times out of 100 they'll fix it for you because being hospitable is what the hospitality industry is all about.
Knowing a bit about how guests behave from the other side of the desk means I explicitly dont trust sites like Trip Advisor or Yelp because they're too easily manipulated by the passive aggressive. Also, they can be manipulated by the other side (especially Trip Advisor) to have genuine negative reviews quashed or edited (remember with these sites, you aren't paying for them so that makes you the product, not the client).
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
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.
Publishing is a different kettle of fish. Publishing means a syndicated or corporate distribution. It is also used to prevent competitors from publishing fake reviews (I.E. I'm pretty certain this is what Uber was doing to Lyft).
However message boards (and sites like Yelp are just that) are not covered as publications.
However in my country, shrink wrap EULA's and NDA's are completely unenforceable. We have strong laws against deformation and slander (but the truth or at least reasonable doubt is a watertight defence) but you cannot stop a customer from making a negative review. Hell, you cant stop a professional reporter (or troll) from doing it unless you can prove they are flat out lying (and I mean flat out, exaggerations dont count).
If you have an NDA, that is an explicit contract between you and another party that you have agreed to and signed so you will be held to it. You cannot be held to a contract you haven't signed (or even been given the opportunity to read, like so many EULAs).
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
You don't get to opt-out of being the subject of other people's freedom of speech.
Unless you're Kim Jong Un.
Freedom of speech. I can say anything I want about anyone.
Within reasonable limits. There are laws that cover libel, slander, nuisance, needlessly yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, etc.
I'm allowed to have an opinion.
Absolutely 100% true. But nobody is obliged to help you express that opinion. And IANAL, but my understanding is that your ability to express an opinion can be affected by any contract you sign, including the click-through contracts these companies are foisting on their customers at the time of purchase.
BTW, I wholeheartedly support what California is doing here. What these companies are doing is unconscionable, but possibly tenable. This law closes the door on it.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
True, but Yelp! and similar are also under no obligation to make your speech accessible via their search engines.
I'm not sure being able to opt-out of Yelp! (presumably you'd lose/hide both your good and bad reviews if you did) is really all that useful.
I suppose being a non-entity (ie: you don't show up on Yelp! at all) is better than having a terrible rating, but generally speaking opting out would mean you're losing visibility and unless you truly suck, that's a worse prospect than dealing with a few bad reviews.
The government isn't restricting your speech. They are recognizing that you traded that right for financial compensation.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
exactly, ofcours there can be errors and such in orders that I might not have been delivered but that is up to the business to reply with that answer and in a polite way
> I own a tiny one person business. In order for me to reply to comments on Yelp! I have to pay them a monthly fee.
This is the exact same business model as the Better Business Bureau (BBB).
When the BBB gets a complaint against a non-member business they use it as a sales pitch to sell a membership to the business. The hook is that BBB members have a much easier time getting complaints wiped from their BBB record. The specifics vary from franchaise to franchaise, but the gist is that unresolved complaints against non-members never expire but unresolved complaints against members are wiped clean after 12-24 months.
The BBB scam can actually be good for customers, but not in the way the BBB would have you think. If you see a non-member business with a clean record, then you can be sure their record is really clean. But clean records for member businesses are inconclusive, kind of like a carfax report that says no problems - there still might be problems, they just aren't on the record.
This seems almost like an extortion racket, but done by "refined" gentlemen instead of the mob.
My favorite bad review response ever:
Review:
Incredibly rude disgusting fat slob insulted me and my family. Needed a table for five wife and kids in line midway to counter, I decide to sit down (just had hip replacement) and this idiot approaches and tells me to order or get out. This punk needs for someone to adjust his attitude.
Response from the owner:
This is the fat slob. I wanted to put some context around Mr Scaccia's review. First, no disputting it, I'm fat. I take issue with the rude and slob parts. I shower every day. I say please and thank you. But, fat, unfortunately I can't dispute that.
OK, let's talk about our interaction yesterday. I was in the dining room as I am almost every Saturday and Sunday when we start to get really busy. We had a medium sized line (probably about 15 people) and we were seating groups as they ordered so that everyone could get a table before they get their food. I call it Kindergarten rules. if someone is in front of you, they get to go first. I came around the corner and Mr S was at a table that had been put together for 8 people as was a man caring a baby carrier who was also looking for a table for a larger group. I asked Mr S if he had ordered yet and he said he hadn't and I told him that we would get him a table once his group had ordered.
I couldn't get anything more out of my mouth. Mr S said "well if we can't have a table then we will just leave." I did not approach Mr. S and tell him to order or get out, I said that we would get him a table once his group had ordered. After he proclaimed that if he didn't get a table right then that he would leave, I told him to have a nice day.
This really isn't a position I ever like to be put in. We don't have a line to the door every saturday and sunday because we are bad at what we do. The line is there because we take care of our customers and all their requests, just as we would have taken care of Mr. S. I was still going to try to save this relationship, but what Mr. S did next shocked me so much that I froze. He threw his menu on the table, moved toward me and belly bumped me out of his way and stormed off. (I'm not sure if he noticed the video camera that hopefully caught all of this directly next to the flat screen in the corner as he pushed me out of his way)
I then proceeded to help the group of 8 with the baby and the group of 7 with the elderly couple who had waited in line and ordered, get their tables after they had ordered, as I did for the next hour and a half every other large group who walked in and calmly waited in our long but quickly moving line. I wish I had a much bigger restaurant and a much smaller stomach but the facts are the facts.
Mr S would have hopefully spent this morning back in Louisiana writing a great review about this little mom and pop restaurant in Houston if he had only let us do our job, but he chose to give me an ultimatum where I can't win. Let him take a table before two groups who were in front of him, making a family with small children and a baby stand and wait or the group with the elderly couple stand and wait. I feel I did the only thing I could and wish Mr. S the opportunity to reflect on this situation and see the big picture.
Brock Silverstein Pecan Creek Grille
They are not your reviews. They are other people's reviews about you. You don't own them or control them in any way. People put thier reviews on Yelp because they want the reviews to be seen. They are opting in to being on Yelp when they post the review on Yelp.