Yelp's star-review system doesn't amount to content development, 9th Circuit says
A Washington locksmith, who allegedly tried to get around the Communications Decency Act in his lawsuit against Yelp by arguing that the site manipulates information and uses it as its own content in advertising, lost his federal appeal Monday.
Sharing and spreading user-generated star reviews with search engines does not amount to creating or developing content, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found Monday. The libel lawsuit was filed by Douglas Kimzey and involved a one-star review his business received in 2011, the Associated Press reports. Kimzey also argued that Yelp was liable under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, according to the Wall Street Journal Law Blog.
“Kimzey apparently hoped to plead around the CDA to advance the same basic argument that the statute plainly bars: that Yelp published user-generated speech that was harmful to Kimzey,” the opinion (PDF) reads. “We decline to open the door to such artful skirting of the CDA’s safe harbor provision.”
Kimzey found fault with two one-star reviews from a “Sarah K,” according to the opinion. He told the AP that the negative reviews were actually about another business. Yelp transferred the reviews to his listing, according to Kimzey, as a way to try and get him to advertise with them. The panel found that Kimzey, a pro se litigant, did not submit facts that supported his claim Yelp made up content using a third party’s identity.
The reviews led to a 95 percent drop in business, Kimzey says.
“If you have a one-star rating, people won’t go near it. They don’t care if you’ve been in business for one week or 25 years.”
See also:
ABA Journal: “Legal challenges over online reviews seek to separate fact from fiction”
