Well I certainly dont, but others do. I visited this site the other day and was flabbergasted.
DCS Sending Legal Notice To Reviewer (Golden Sound) Over an Old Review of Their Bartok DAC
I saw this You Tube video which was posted by Headphones.com which at the beginning talked about the site taking the side of Golden Sound (GS) & then GS himself going through the details of what happened (his side of the story).
https://youtu.be/R7NxRFT6FiI
While I am not taking any sides until DCS comes out with their story publicly. While we all are aware that many times companies force reviewers to remove the criticism of their products by employing different ways. But what should be the way forward about the reviews for reviewers and companies?
Can we as the end consumers and as a community come-up with the framework around reviews?
Regards,
Audio_phool
- ...
- 90 posts total
They could sue you, although it would arguably be frivolous and it's highly unlikely they'd prevail. But anyone can be sued at anytime by anybody for just about anything. Remember Monster Cable's threats against Blue Jeans Cable? That makes this DCS matter seem trivial. |
This whole fiasco is mind boggling. The fact that DCS shut down any comments as soon as they posted the two comments that are highlighted in this thread tells me all I need to know about them. Amazing watching business owners use social media to drive two audio companies potentially in the ground in just 6 months. |
libel laws are tricky. to my understanding, you can't be liable merely for stating an opinion (an opinion being a belief or viewpoint which may be supported by reason or evidence, but which cannot be proven true or false through evidence). however, merely framing a statement as an opinion doesn't automatically protect it--if the statement includes or implies the existence of defamatory facts it could be actionable. thus, merely stating that "in my opinion, this dac sounds bad" is protected, but stating that "in my opinion this dac sounds bad because it contains radioactive materials and was assembled by child slave laborers" probably isn't. looking at this cameron's review, i'd argue that it's classic protected, subjective opinion--even to the extent his opinions are based on (allegedly) false factual assumptions, there's no reason to believe that he knew the assumptions were false, or that said assumptions were defamatory in the sense of maligning dcs. to the larger point, i fully agree that dcs's hissy fit was a remarkably ill-advised, self-inflicted wound--consumers remember this stuff. |
- 90 posts total