Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Sues To Block Fake Reviews
An anonymous reader writes Amazon has filed suit against operators of sites that offer Amazon sellers the ability to purchase fake 4 and 5 star customer reviews. The suit is the first of its kind and was filed in King County Superior Court against a California man, Jay Gentile, identified in Amazon's filings as the operator of buyazonreviews.com. The site also targets unidentified "John Does" who operate similar sites: buyreviewsnow.com, bayreviews.net, and buyamazonreviews.com. From the article: "The site buyazonreviews.com, which the suit claims is run by Gentile, didn't respond to a request for comment. But Mark Collins, the owner of buyamazonreviews.com, denied Amazon's claims. In an email interview, Collins said the site simply offers to help Amazon's third-party sellers get reviews. 'We are not selling fake reviews. however we do provide Unbiased and Honest reviews on all the products,' Collins wrote. 'And this is not illegal at all.'"
Interesting, how would you prove a review is fake, written with no experience of the product? Even more interesting is the question that is for example audiophile magazines have been known to do fake reviews sometimes (I guess the amount of proven cases is like 1 or something) how does that relate to this case?
I ignore reviews on Amazon because the majority of them are already fake. I've purchased items on Amazon only to receive promotional material with them offering coupons and gift cards in exchange for writing a 5-star review.
I do not trust the system at all.
Next Amazon will be suing people for their fantastic reviews of The Mountain Three Wolf Moon Short Sleeve Tee.
Fortunately, the three wolf moon t-shirt's power also indemnifies the wearer of any culpability. Truly the most amazing shirt ever made by man.
...but I usually don't want to hear what the wider public thinks about the products I buy. The average person is impulsive with purchases, lazy with learning/troubleshooting, incompetent with fixes, unfamiliar with the wider market, poor at remembering (did producers once do a better job? or are they in fact doing better but not receiving due credit?), and hasty with judgment, so the average Amazon review is by someone who doesn't really understand the product, has only used it for a week or two, and bases their entire score/rant on whether they have been instantly satisfied or not.
For me, a "verified review" should be one written by someone who has used the product for at least a year, assuming it's not a perishable. And every reviewer would state their skillset and experience with similar products.
"We are not selling fake reviews. however we do provide Unbiased and Honest reviews on all the products"
Wow, that's priceless. Oh, wait, no, it does have a price. Want to know how this works? From the site itself:
A purchase of your product is not required for us to post a review. If you would like a verified purchase review however we can buy your product first. If the cost is $2.00 or less we will cover the price. If it is more than this you will need to make arrangements with us to reimburse the cost. We are only accepting very limited amounts of verified purchase reviews, please contact us before ordering if you are interested in these.
Price List:
3 Reviews $74.26!
5 Reviews (Reg: $124.50, w/ 20% $99.60!)
10 Reviews (Reg: $249.50, w/ 20% $199.60!)
.
.
.
200 Reviews (Reg: $4887.50, w/ 30% $3421.60)
I can see why Amazon wants to shut this down. It completely undermines the legitimacy of their user ratings system. Not a big surprise, of course, as just about any system will be gamed if at all possible when there's money involved.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
If these guys are so adamant that there is nothing wrong with paid reviews, ask them if they'd be willing to disclose in their reviews that they are paid.
If I were Amazon, I'd include a check box "I am not being paid or compensated for this review"... at least then they'd have reason to delete any from paid reviewers.
...why Americans put up with such blatant Anti-Gentilism.
The "this is super and excellent" reviews don't tell me much. I look at the bad reviews. Usually you can get an idea if a product is any good by the type of bad review. If there are many good reviews, but one or two saying "delivered late", "wrong product", or "damaged in transit", then I figure that this can happen occasionally but can be sorted out if it does. Some reviews will be bad because of different use-cases ... if most people give high rating for sound quality on a radio but one or two say "distorts at high volume" then you'll probably be OK if you listen at reasonable volumes. Someone once gave a washer/dryer a 2 start review because it took over three hours for a complete wash/dry cycle. For us that didn't matter - we run it a few times a week and just set it going until it ends. Someone might complain about "complicated controls" on an SLR camera or "lack of flexibility" on a point and shoot ... again it might not matter to you.
On the other hand if a lot of people complain about the general quality of an item, or lack of functionality that you would actually use then that's a good reason to stay away from one.
I base my purchases on the bad reviews not the good ones.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
There are the retarded reviews too:
I just got it! It looks great! - 5 stars.
I haven't finished the book yet, but 5 stars.
Then there are the 5 star reviews by folks who come across as the author's pals or sycophants.
And the ALL TIME champ for shit reviews (1 stars) is Pickety's "Capital in the 21st Century".
Everyone who calls him a Communist obviously didn't read the book because for those of who did - or at least the introduction - would know what he thinks of Communism.
" every reviewer would state their skillset and experience with similar products"
That's often evident from the reviews. 2-4 star reviews tend to be the most helpful, and there are often good points made in them. Expecting all of them to be useful or applicable to your situation would be like expecting all the /. story comments to be insightful, or to have a MS or Apple thread without trolls and fanbois in the mix. It just ain't gonna happen.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
If anyone is worthy of a good doxing, it's these guys.
Interesting, how would you prove a review is fake, written with no experience of the product?
Doesn't really matter if it is fake or not if it is paid. If the review is a paid review then it is by definition written with at least a secondary motive and therefore by definition cannot be considered unbiased. Buying reviews arguably harms the reputation of Amazon and could affect their sales and thus would potentially constitute tortious interference with their business.
Does that mean all 5000+ reviews for the Banana Slicer will soon disappear?
Does that mean people who receive money from the government should not be allowed to campaign for a certain political party? In that case they are just paid reviewers, and can they be sued for helping make a TV commercial to support a candidate that promises them a hand out.
Now before you get all upset with the above comment, I just want to know if the two situations are different and how. Could be an interesting precedent if they win.
Amazon can stop fake reviews by putting real fear into the minds of sellers. If a seller is caught in a fake review scam, Amazon should force the seller to accept returns. Until then, I give Amazon two stars in their efforts to control fake reviews. I'm looking forward to Amazon rolling over the perps and exposing their cheating clients. Fake reviews are against the law in some jurisdictions.
If I see a bunch of 1 star reviews saying it breaks after several months of use, I'm going to go onto the next product.
You have to bear in mind that sometimes the 1 star reviews are quite useless/fake. I was looking at a water heater on Amazon recently and there were a lot of one star reviews claiming the product broke and was terrible but most of the reviews were actually for a different and older version of the product which was no longer in production. I've also seen 1 star reviews that were clearly designed to astroturf the product.
Point is, presume any review has ulterior motives unless you have evidence to think otherwise.
Obligatory xkcd
Another xkcd
Yes, I agree because no one that has ever clicked a check box anywhere has ever lied before.
Doesn't matter if they lie or not for it to be useful. Reason is that it forces them to either A) disclose that they have been paid or B) violate the terms of service.
The IRS uses this exact same tactic on your 1040 form. Look at line 21 of the current 1040 Form and you'll see "Other Income List Type and Amount". This applies whether or not the income is legally obtained. So this is where someone dealing in illegal drugs would be required to disclose their income. If they do not disclose their (illegal) income then they have committed tax fraud. This is how Al Capone was busted - not for the actual crimes but for tax evasion on those crimes.
BIC Cristal For Her Ball Pen
95% of the apps on my Android phone also have fake reviews. Ever wonder how an app gets a broken update and still maintains a constant flow of 5-star reviews? Flip through all the reviews sorted by date and you can see the waves of bots or spammers, typically from foreign countries (especially for apps written in English only).
"Unbiased" and "Honest" are capitalized. That's cruise control for credible.
You can't explain that.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
It gets rejected. I have to trim it down so far that it's no longer accurate. And their weighting system for average review is biased towards better reviews.
I feel like the overall assumption is that people are buying good reviews about their own product.
I wonder how these companies feel about posting bad reviews for a competing product.
"These people look deep within my soul and assign me a number based on the order in which I joined" --Homer re:
The site also targets unidentified "John Does"
It's the suit which is also targetting unidentified John Does, not the site.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
This is a logic I just don't get, but seems extremely common amongst /. readers.
Why? Do you think that all reviews are honest, legitimate and well formed opinions about the services provided by people who would actually be in a position to provide such a review? If so then you are being rather naive/foolish and I doubt you actually are. You can get useful information even if some of the "reviews" are fake but you need to read them with some default skepticism.
Some things just aren't worth the time it would take to come to a good decision without using reviews, and using reviews (with a pinch of salt) has worked consistently.
Nobody (sane) is saying don't use the reviews. Just have the default assumption that they may not be honest unbiased opinions because to do otherwise is foolish. It's not too hard usually to figure out useful information from online reviews but doing so does require a certain amount of skepticism.
Only allow reviews from people who have a logged purchase for the product, one review per purchase. That won't completely stop fake reviews ("Want to make easy money? Let us pay you to write reviews for products you buy!") but it will cut off 99.742% of them.
I have been saying this for years (trust me) on Amazon's book reviews. How can someone review the book three months before it is available for sale?
Amazon must require reviewers to have purchased the item through Amazon to post a review. Thus, whether the review is good or bad, it requires an expense to make. If someone wants to bash the product (ie. a competitor), they have to put money in the creator's pocket. If the creator wants to artificially inflate the review of the product, they have to come out of pocket. Either way, it will reduce the amount of "shill" reviews.
One thing I look at is fix-it boards. For example, I was recently looking for a washer-dryer. A certain company had a *LOT* of people asking on fix-it boards how to replace the element on the dryer, and noting that it died fairly early on or repeatedly.
Try googling
"[product] how to replace" or "[product] how to fix" and see what people are commonly asking about. Maybe it's a simple thing and even if it breaks now and then you don't care, but it gives you an idea of what commonly breaks down. Note that this may be due to the part being fragile/defective, a common part that needs replacement in that type of item, or a lot of people being dumb able handling that particular part, so some filtering on your part would be needed.
How can you prove that they are fake? Because the site says so in it's opening paragraph:
BTW, requiring verified purchase does not solve the problem. That site will buy the product if it is $2 or less. You can have "verified purchase" on higher-priced products by "making arrangements". I assume they then ship the product back to the manufacturer, so they only lose shipping and Amazon's profit. LOL, I'll bet they have Amazon ship it right to the manufacturer! (Or to an employee.)
Send payment and if I have mod points I'll apply them to your posts (or to those on the other side of whatever flamewar you're in) in a totally unbiased way of course:
.
Buy 14, get one free !
Nullius in verba
Amazon already has a "verified purchase" tag for reviews (read the quoted part of my post again), and of course it's already only one review per product for each customer. The "verified purchase" tag isn't required, but people are much more likely to discount a review if it doesn't have that tag. I'm guessing it's also weighted much lower in aggregate scores as well.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
If you want to control this kind of thing, require that users turn over something that can be tied to their real-life identity, like a cell phone #. Then verify that what they give you is real.
Then make them swear that they have not received or been offered any compensation.
If you later discover that they probably lied, you can sue them.
As for people logging in from countries where suing the person individually is not an option, one thing you can do is limit the visibility of their comments, perhaps by limiting them to others who are from the same country.
Yes, there are ways to get around this (proxies, VPNs, disposable phones, etc.) but it will raise the cost of doing business for those companies who do "shill reviews."
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
As a consumer Ive already decided which product I'm going to buy. I done the research long before i have decided WHO I,m going to buy it from. Those are the reviews i look, for reviews of the business.Do they ship in a timely manner? if there's something wrong with the product did they take care of the problem without hassles? those are the reviews that are important to me.
Jack of all trades,master of none
They should only allow reviews from people who actually purchased that product. Their reviews are already a mess, with tons of one star reviews for products that are really meant for the seller.
They already have a mechanism for this too: http://www.amazon.com/gp/commu...
They just need to purge all the other reviews. There's so many scams and agendas both for positive and negative reviews, that nowadays I only trust verified purchase reviews anyway.
This is what I received after submitting negative feedback on an item that took 5 days to ship 180 miles, and the contents were expired, there was no free shipping due to being perishable. So it seems sellers can have negative feedback removed. This was for live ladybugs. The seller even blocked me from submitting a seller review after contacting them about the order.
Positive or negative fakes ? Generally not hard to find because they usually don't fit in with the others. Accept means and toss the extremes usually works.