Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Negative Online Reviews Are Not Defamation (At Least In Canada)

Posted by timothy on from the in-canada-at-least dept.

An anonymous reader writes A client who was dissatisfied with the service of an immigration company in Canada took her grievances online, upon which she was sued for defamation and libel by the owner of the company. A Canadian superior court has tossed out the lawsuit with the note: "One may be dissatisfied with the quality or efficiency of services but expressing one's dissatisfaction is not equivalent to defamation." The court noted: "This demand is grossly exaggerated. It flirts with frivolity and abuse within the meaning given to these words in Article 54.1 C.C.P."

3 of 62 comments (clear)

  1. Common Sense Prevails by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Now, let's bring that logic here to the US.

    1. Re:Common Sense Prevails by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Funny

      I hope the test case is Dice suing someone over a "Slashdot Beta Sucks!" comment.

      --
      10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
  2. IANAL but that doesn't seem to be what it says by Tyger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The main cause for dismissal of this wasn't that online reviews are not defamation. It was because the lawsuit was brought by the wrong entity (the lawyer who represents the website, rather than the corporation who owns the website) and that he failed to provide substantive proof of any monetary loss.

    If it were brought by the right entity and there was proof of loss, it may not have gone the same way. The judge specifically said that the review did have defamatory language in it.