I do actually agree with @artismo on this one - I think Steve Burke at GamersNexus would be a good person to partner with as he's got lots of reach in tech - and if you think what happened with Tekton was bad, wait until you hear what Nvidia does when they don't like a review.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Proposal: Right to Fair Review (RFR) Association
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
OP
- Thread Starter
- #222
But what would our ask be of him? We need to put together a proposal, get it to starting point and then work on endorsements.
Scotty does Toyota reviews. If it aint Toyota, it's crap. I used to watch him but he is so biased its sad.
It gets expensive anytime lawyers, process, insurance, and arbitration is involved and I doubt this idea is sustainable.
Another way is to develop standards for reviewing and sticking to the standards. The reviewer interpretation aka opinion of the results is where the problems can occur. Need to put the interpretation thru the lens of the standard to remove opinion. This is challenging due to the subjectivity of audio due to how everyone’s ears and preferences are different.
Perhaps write reviews in a similar format as Project Farm on YouTube. For example, he tests a bunch of wrenches and videos the test process. Puts the results on a grid and then highlights the best product, the best value, and the cheapest product that still works. He’ll add comments that these wrenches will last forever and won’t rust because of the coating or whatever. Some of his tests are controversial like how fast oil flows after being frozen or how big the wear test spot is. While this can be measured, does it matter? Anyways comparing products like he does eliminates some of the opinion.
Putting against the standard would then put the ball in the court of the product manufacturers to improve the standard.
Another way is to develop standards for reviewing and sticking to the standards. The reviewer interpretation aka opinion of the results is where the problems can occur. Need to put the interpretation thru the lens of the standard to remove opinion. This is challenging due to the subjectivity of audio due to how everyone’s ears and preferences are different.
Perhaps write reviews in a similar format as Project Farm on YouTube. For example, he tests a bunch of wrenches and videos the test process. Puts the results on a grid and then highlights the best product, the best value, and the cheapest product that still works. He’ll add comments that these wrenches will last forever and won’t rust because of the coating or whatever. Some of his tests are controversial like how fast oil flows after being frozen or how big the wear test spot is. While this can be measured, does it matter? Anyways comparing products like he does eliminates some of the opinion.
Putting against the standard would then put the ball in the court of the product manufacturers to improve the standard.
That's what insurance companies/big corporations do - create your own standard and follow it, except create a real standard (sometimes they make them up).
Long time lurker, first time poster here.
I am a civil litigation attorney in Arizona that mainly defends companies, so thought I would chime in with some basic advice (I will give the usual lawyerly warning that this does not constitute legal advice or the forming of an attorney-client relationship). I have not read through every single prior post, so apologize in advance if some or all of this information was already relayed.
I know it was mentioned that affordable insurance coverage is hard to come by, but I would check with specialized brokers for business defamation coverage. Lockton is the first that comes to mind, but there are others that should be able to help find available coverage and get you quotes. Insurance across the board right now is expensive, but you should definitely look into obtaining coverage. In the event something ever comes up your insurance carrier will retain a lawyer on your behalf and be responsible for any potential indemnity payment (settlement or judgment).
I would also look into the corporate formation of ASR. Is ASR an LLC, S Corp, partnership, or something else? Is ASR even incorporated? Assuming ASR is an LLC or correctly incorporated, does ASR have any collectible assets? Is ASR following good business practices of not comingling business and personal funds or property (separate bank accounts, separate credit cards, equipment owned by the company/not individual, etc). Making sure ASR is correctly incorporated and following good basic business practices will help protect assets in the event litigation does occur.
I would also recommend consulting with a lawyer in your area that handles defamation type cases to get advice on best practices moving forward. They should be able to explain the various laws and protections in place for reviews (CRFA, Anti-SLAPP, etc). The price will hopefully be outweighed by the peace of mind that you should get from consulting with a knowledgeable attorney.
Sorry you have to deal with this. You would think the negative press alone would be enough to dissuade companies from going after honest and independent reviewers, but apparently not.
I am a civil litigation attorney in Arizona that mainly defends companies, so thought I would chime in with some basic advice (I will give the usual lawyerly warning that this does not constitute legal advice or the forming of an attorney-client relationship). I have not read through every single prior post, so apologize in advance if some or all of this information was already relayed.
I know it was mentioned that affordable insurance coverage is hard to come by, but I would check with specialized brokers for business defamation coverage. Lockton is the first that comes to mind, but there are others that should be able to help find available coverage and get you quotes. Insurance across the board right now is expensive, but you should definitely look into obtaining coverage. In the event something ever comes up your insurance carrier will retain a lawyer on your behalf and be responsible for any potential indemnity payment (settlement or judgment).
I would also look into the corporate formation of ASR. Is ASR an LLC, S Corp, partnership, or something else? Is ASR even incorporated? Assuming ASR is an LLC or correctly incorporated, does ASR have any collectible assets? Is ASR following good business practices of not comingling business and personal funds or property (separate bank accounts, separate credit cards, equipment owned by the company/not individual, etc). Making sure ASR is correctly incorporated and following good basic business practices will help protect assets in the event litigation does occur.
I would also recommend consulting with a lawyer in your area that handles defamation type cases to get advice on best practices moving forward. They should be able to explain the various laws and protections in place for reviews (CRFA, Anti-SLAPP, etc). The price will hopefully be outweighed by the peace of mind that you should get from consulting with a knowledgeable attorney.
Sorry you have to deal with this. You would think the negative press alone would be enough to dissuade companies from going after honest and independent reviewers, but apparently not.
This already exists in the form of 1) established law 2) court precedent 3) journalistic norms. You're talking about developing something that already exists and is generally adhered to by any reviewer with their head screwed on straight.
No. Reviewers are allowed to have opinions and the reviewee can't get damages just because an opinion is expressed, even a completely wrong, even seriously damaging opinion. The only legal problem with a reviewer's opinion is passing off lies about concrete fact as "opinion".
If you go out of business and end up living on the street because a single reviewer expressed a negative opinion about your business... guess what, in the US there's no real legal recourse unless they lied. You may not like the law, but that's the law.
The whole point of this organization is that brands can and do use illegitimate legal threats to silence opinions they don't like. Expensive legal threats that are levied against reviews that DO adhere to legal and ethical standards, which again, already exist.
Similar threads
