Zable Fisher

Warning: Your Blog Entry Could Lead to a $20 Million Lawsuit

Posted October 27, 2008 by Margie Zable Fisher

In the November, 2008 issue of Inc. Magazine, Leslie Richard, owner of The Oko Box, discusses how a negative blog entry resulted in a $20 million lawsuit against her company. 

To summarize, Richard posted an entry at her blog warning other business owners about a “new scam.”  The company she mentioned said that it had lost $5 million in business due to her negative comments, and filed a $20 million lawsuit against her.

A few blogging experts contributed to the article, including Seth Godin.  Here is one of Seth’s quotes from the Inc. Magazine article:

“My sense is that she could have written her warning post in a more careful way.  I want to push CEOs to be authentic on their blogs and to be selfless in trying to help readers.  But they also have to understand that their words will be out there and widely seen.  So they owe it to their stakeholders to act responsibly.”

It got me thinking…

We write lots of stuff on blogs, in e-mails, on Twitter, etc., that could be considered controversial.  Often we write it because that’s the kind of stuff we like to read.

But in today’s litigious world, maybe we need to step back and think about this.

A while back I noticed something on Seth Godin’s signature line in his e-mails.  It said “This note is off the record (blogs, too) unless we agree otherwise.”

When I asked him about why he had that line in his e-mail signature line, he e-mailed this reply:  “I do it so I can have ‘human’ conversations instead of press conversations.” And yes, I got his permission to write about his response.

It was a great answer, but it’s also a great way to cover yourself if you have lots of casual e-mail conversations. 

What are your thoughts about posting negative thoughts about people and companies?

8 comments...What do you think?

  1. Posted by jeff zbar 28th October, 2008 at 4:26 am

    In journalism, we have a mantra, a defense mechanism really: Truth is the ultimate defense. It means that if what you write is truthful, then it shouldn’t be actionable if someone doesn’t like it. I review technology. I’ve slammed some products and services, and given glowing reviews to others. Some people haven’t liked what I’ve said or written, but wearing the journalist’s badge, and having written honest reviews, I’ve (thus far) avoided fall-out and lawsuit alike.

    Ultimately, we’ll see more people striking back. It’s inevitable with the emergence of the blogging community. Uncredentialled “reporters” out there write with a biting tongue - and without regard for ramifications. Blogger beware: What you write is permanent, it’s viral in the way it spreads, and it can haunt you forever more…

  2. Posted by PRIIA Cosmetics 28th October, 2008 at 9:00 am

    Personally I feel it’s best to leave off negative comments about others at your blog. Obviously Ms. Richard’s is in some serious ‘hot water’ right now by doing so. Who wants that?

    I’ve also seen this type of thing at another blog I read and when the owner posted negative comments about a political issue, the blog went NUTS with comments. She actually received death threats from that! It’s just not worth it in my opinion.

    Thanks for posting this- it’s good food for thought.

    -Kelley

  3. Posted by B. 28th October, 2008 at 12:09 pm

    I agree with the right to businesses to sue based on slander. I am partial owner of a small business with a very unique, delicate and custom product.

    Sometimes, no matter how well and how much you educate your consumer, information will fall on deaf ears. This leads a business to walk a tight rope in trying to keep a customer and keep their business afloat financially when said consumer is not satisfied with the “actions” of the product.

    These unsatisfied consumers can literally kill your business with their blog entries on the Internet. This slander is generally one sided where a business is left unable to tell the “real” story behind the interaction with the customer and how that customer may have been a true nightmare. After all, a consumer’s interaction with a business is held by a privacy policy…so businesses should have the right to sue when this privacy is violated in a negative way that hurts their business.

    Additionally, with such easy, quick and free access to blog software, some business owners may slander their competitor under the guise of their competitor’s consumer thus killing their competitor’s sales.

    Just some food for thought.

    *Sorry for grammatical or spelling errors.

  4. Posted by Gail Sideman 28th October, 2008 at 12:41 pm

    I think that this is a “Freedom of Speech” issue. If a person’s opinions are stated as such, it should not be liable for slander. If data, concrete facts are misstated, I think the offended business owner should make personal contact with the writer and the blogger asked to post a correction, as do other media outlets.

    Products and services have long been reviewed without threat of litigation and that practice should remain. Without them, we wouldn’t have the right to decide whether to take advice about great restaurants or the most effective electronics for our needs.

    If legal action becomes a real threat in the blogosphere for simple opinion (which people have a right to believe or not), we’re all violated.

  5. Posted by Argina 29th October, 2008 at 11:03 am

    Actually, a person is entitled to state an opinion about a product or service they bought by given a review of their experience. However, some statements can be misleading and damaging to a companies reputation. The bottom line is the truthfulness of a story. If it is determined that a company is a scam, may others be warned.

  6. Posted by Marvin Glassman 11th November, 2008 at 1:56 pm

    There is a lot we do not know about the original source Leslie Richard. Is this person a competitor to the business suing the blogger? If so, it suggests a vested interest in posting a negaive comment and would give the business a right to sue, but if this was a comment with no obvious self-interest, then the company that is suing is in need of good public relations instead of a good lawyer.
    The lawsuit is horrible public relations. It suggests to people that the company was doing something to justify the negative comments, or $5 million in business would not have been lost. Lawyers who file these lawsuits have vested interests as well. Marvin Glassman

  7. Posted by Artissebruts 26th December, 2008 at 4:29 pm

    jizhjvxluubbdycswell, hi admin adn people nice forum indeed. how’s life? hope it’s introduce branch ;)

  8. Posted by Artissebruts 3rd January, 2009 at 12:24 pm

    uffbvyyyqsyxwfagwell, hi admin adn people nice forum indeed. how’s life? hope it’s introduce branch ;)

What do you think? Join the discussion...