Question

"Under the order, Google will be required to pass to Dr Kabbabe any personal details such as any names, phone numbers, location metadata and IP addresses linked to the account. " Is this the right direction for the world?  
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-aust...98190

Answer 1

You KNOW that if someone gave an anonymous bad review of Trump as POTUS - if they open up sharing who that is - Trump would be suing for defamation and tying them up in court even if the review was legit. But different countries have different legal practices regarding such things, so that should be taken into account.  

Comments

The US has some of the strictest libel and slander laws in the world, so this would not be the case. If it was then there would be dozens of cases in federal court against fake news stories and the companies that pushed them. The TDS is real.  

---

Actually there is an analogue of this going on right now. The Obama-appointed judge in the Stone case ruled that identities of all the jury members needs to be protected. Fair enough under the circumstances. The lead juror outs herself by appearing on CNN The public then goes through her social media stuff and finds out she is a TDS never-trumper activist. Now this has implications on the case and could jeapodise the prosecution. Nothing to do with "interference" as reported by the liberal biased media.  

---

@malefaction US libel and slander laws are strict, but that doesn't stop a defamation charge from tying you up in court for years with all the expenses that entails if someone cynical enough funds it. Trump has actually done stuff like this several times already without "winning" (just exhausted the opponent), wasn't making this political if you're concerned about that (but to say Trump sues people is a fair thing considering his track-record of suing people).  

---

Terence, I had no idea. This is shameful.  

---

There's no consistency in the application of the law at the moment. And it seems that those pointing the finger of the ones guilty of the same crime. Nobody gets prosecuted for bleach bit, nobody gets presecuted for withholding a billion in aid. Gen. Flynn serves his country loyally and patriotically for decades only to be put in jail by these grubbs for forgetting a couple of details of a conversation he had a long time ago. Nothing that impacts the facts of the procedings. Eric Holder obstucts congress and lies about a whole bunch of stuff and gets let off the hook, scott free. This is a guy who plainly declared that he is partisan democrat while wearing the AG hat. Now all the media banshies are screaming for Barr to resign. It's the fucking twilight zone out there with these nutters.  

---

The mainstream media, whether fox or cnn, are sell-swords. They're mercinaries. They propogate whatever narrative suits their owners and lying (often by omission) is a requirement that comes with the territory. You hav to sift through the rubble of the internet to get a sense of what's going on.  

Answer 2

Hell nah!  

Answer 3

Of course. After all, it's not without a proper judicial procedure.  

Answer 4

I kind of agree with this, the internet is such a powerful tool and in some manners it needs to be regulated. A business owner must be able to defend himself against faulty reputation!  

Comments

It needs transparency, not regulation. Big difference.  

---

@chancellery #libertariansunite all twelve of us.  

Answer 5

Yes, because that would result to less hate on the Internet.  

Answer 6

Seems like a good use case for tokenisation

Comments

Block Chain reviews.  

Answer 7

This is a good move, Lots of fake reviews are there in Internet, which can be controlled.  

Answer 8

Even the threat of being exposed would probably temper the out-of-control posts/reviews

Answer 9

The court order only applies to this particular case because, in effect, Google were obstructing the course of justice by not providing the information for the dentist to pursue their legal right. If the negative review was factual and true then the reviewer will be able to defend themselves. If it was lies and defamation then the dentist has the right to sue. All fair in my opinion. If you don't want to get sued, don't make shit up. It can only lead to reviews being more accurate, truthful and transparent. What Google will have to do is review their policies and practices to balance business owners legal rights with individual's right to privacy.  

Answer 10

Yes. Forward is the way.  

Answer 11

You shouldn't be able to destroy someone's business with a malicious review anon

Comments

@whitsunday What if it’s true? Doesn’t the consumer have the right to complain?  

---

@shirl yes but if it is false, the business can reveal the person and sue

---

@qp213 If he was actually his client he’s entitled to say whatever he wants about that business though right?  

---

@shirl no you can't just unload anything and think you are free from the risk of being sued whether you think it's factually correct or not. Factors of fair and reasonable, direct losses incurred, proportional are all factors, maliciousiness etc etc all come into play if you have to argue the point

---

@whitsunday What if I went to his business, got treated, had a terrible experience, and complained online about it? What even is the point of a review then? You can just sue anyone who ever says anything bad about your business then? I’m glad I’m not american jeez

---

@shirl news flash reviews are can be subjective BS. I'm not a lawyer, but I know you can be sued and you can win/lose and the criteria for not losing/winning isn't you are being truthful. I'll just add I had a guy arrested and criminally charged for leaving reviews for just sharing his experience.  

Answer 12

100% YES. We are taught from a very early age that actions have consequences, however it seems that for many they don't believe this. We MUST start bankrupting and jailing trolls and vindictive people who break the law.  

Answer 13

I say we also get a blood sample to confirm the identity.  

Answer 14

I run the fastest growing doctor review site in the US. We got subpoenaed for this data all the time but it’s rare the provider will follow through the courts to get it (thousands of dollars). At the end of the day, don’t commit libel. review sites can’t protect you from it. Have tons of case law if anyone is interested.  

Answer 15

Mixed Emotions: 1) from a business standpoint it sux to get anonymous reviews; 2) I have seen many lawsuits against people that left honest reviews. In the us, civil lawsuits can be filed for any reason and the court doesn’t provide a lawyer to defend them.  

Answer 16

This is completely pointless. What is the doctor going to do? Hunt them down? The best way for Google (and others) to work with local businesses to avoid review brigading and spam is to look at the health of the reviewer's account, the circumstances around the review, etc. But since reviews are just a small part of Google's business they don't care. So, unfortunately, this is the only way. Maybe it will force Google to "don't be evil. "

Comments

@malefaction no issue a defamation against them via a lawyer lol

Answer 17

Couple of my clients got negative reviews only cause they didn't want to prescribe strong pain killers to people that were abusing them. Of course in the review they didn't mention it but came up with other BS story. I have no issue with people leaving fair reviews, but those who make shit up should be held accountable for it.  

Answer 18

False sense of security. I could just go to an internet cafe or a library with a hood on if I want to troll. Not that I would. I believe in being public with my opinions. Since I stand by them fully.  

Answer 19

It's not a legislative problem as it is a software problem. Platform provided should allow the owners of business profiles to allow or disallow anonymnity. So for example, the only kind allowed to leave reviews are "verified" (in some way) users. Not necesarily "blue checkmark" but something similar. Failing to afford businesses defensibility in such a way would result in class action against them to sue for damages. So they're motivated to implement it. No extra legislation required. No orders to turn over private user-info that might retrospectively violate what the user understood to be contractual at signup. It gets back to the publisher vs platform argument/conundrum

Answer 20

What people are advocating for is ad-hock VIOLATION of privacy retrospective to a user-agreement (with the platform) that they entered into in good faith. This has all sorts of moral and legal issues. Opening the door because of some unfair incident has broader implications that tend towards chaos. Ot isn't good. Remember the word VIOLENCE comes from the word VIOLATE. The government is perpetrating violence. This is unacceptable. It is, in fact, LAWLESS. Proper structures need to be put in place to allow ad-hoc cases to be tested in judged in a court as described above.  

Answer 21

The Australian government is essentially rogue. They do what they want and they face zero accountability. The ignore the constitution and make up all sorts of nonsense to excuse it. Case in point, the constitution says you can't deprive people of water. So what do they go and do? they give private corporations rights to control dams built with public money and they shut down the biggest river in Australia. The department website whips up some BS story about how the constitution doesn't really apply. Add to that the over 40, 000 fracking wells scaring the the landscape - each of which use hundreds of millions of litres of water and pollute the water table of the great artesian basin. They sell the gas of cheaply to foreign companies. The bushfires get exacerbated because the droubt is exacerbated by having no ground water. But the media talks about climate change and shuts down any conversation to the contrary. Australians are apathetic and the media doesn't really do it's job. Life goes on.  

Answer 22

Worth reading about the Law to be forgotten . Passed in the US senate . ( Actually not sure if is a law) but is the right to start fresh. And get news articles removed from Google

Answer 23

I think so yes, GMB & reviews are suppose to give power back to the people and the businesses they serve. I have seen the opposite happen, "fake reviews being created, with no Support from Google to remove them" I should know I got a 1-star review (10000% fake) and there is ZERO I can do about it. Many hours spent talking to Google support, with a "your shit out of luck attitude. " His Review - Bad. By Davit S.  

Comments

Excellent response and exactly how I respond for my clients and myself. Disavow, offer the solution to the faked issue, and state the facts. Great stuff!  

---

@keitloa Thanks, read a few posts on Brightlocal and Whitespark on how to respond, but honestly, how does Google look at that and say. "This is a Real Review! " it honestly boggles my mind.  

---

They only care about one thing when it comes down to it and that's not the small business. They don't want to put resources into something they're not getting paid for and that's the bottom line imo.  

---

@keitloa 100%, in fact, I think the Review Metric, is just a better way to position GMB ads . pretty sure that is Googles next revenue move. Got Shitty Reviews, Can't Rank? BUY SOME ADS. works for both Organic and Local as a game plan.  

---

Yes and it's going to get worse. They're playing a game with a fine line and they may very well lose. No entity lives forever. Cases in point: Kodak and IBM.  

---

Talk to Ben Fisher, he handles these for our clients, affordably too.  
https://support.google.com/business...hl=en

Answer 24

Yes. People post shit for no reason I’m actually having a lawyer send an intent to sue to one and a cease and desist to another. One Deframing my company because his impatient ass couldn’t wait for a call back from Friday night until Monday morning. The guy sells cups ffs and I had already refunded him money over an issue while on the phone but little did I know he posted a nasty review where he said I didn’t. The other one used reviews as blackmail to get what they didn’t pay for.  

Answer 25

The Entire point of Google Reviews is to get a "Real, Trusted, Third Party" vote for or against any company being researched. Fake Reviews: Hate, Slander, 1-star Review, Spam, Negative SEO Google: This is Fine.  

Answer 26

Honestly it's about time. Remaining anonymous allows people to leave whatever they want for whomever they want with absolutely no sense of remorse or responsibility. People need to know they can't do stuff like that and get away with it. Reviews should consist of peoples truthful experiences and negative reviews should only be left after the business has been notified of the issue and given the opportunity to correct it, unless it's obvious that neglect was involved. Unfortunately there's a ton of shitholes out there that don't care about business and leave false or exaggerated negative reviews. This practice needs to be curbed.  

Answer 27

Proof of work and proof of stake is what is needed. Predicted this when bitcoin was flying

Answer 28

Accountability. imagine that.  

Answer 29

Online abuse is far more widespread than people realize. The American law normally referred to as Section 230 has done measurably more harm than good. We had plenty of innovation before that stupid law was passed. Now, thanks to it, anyone who wants to publish false information about other people can do so without consequences and this problem has affected every nation in the world.  

Comments

Another example of the law doing the exact opposite of what it was intended for. Protecting the People.  

---

@narcotize not so in Australia. Defamation laws are pretty strong here and, like most things, generally favour the rich who can bring a civil suit about. Sydney is known as the defamation capital of the world

Answer 30

I think it’s good to require Google to do the leg work here of rooting out bad-fake reviews. 100% google will defend honest bad reviews because google needs those—google does not need fake reviews and those fake reviews harm real people

Answer 31

Haters will always hate

Answer 32

It is impossible (nearly) to get Google to remove obviously fake reviews - for example, no profile pic, their only data is bad reviews, etc. There are "bad review farms" and they target professionals then ask you to pay for "reputation management" to remove a review. The other thing I've seen is competitors and even disgruntled employees, exes, leaving 1-star reviews. I have been successful in BEGGING and threatening Google to remove some reviews but not always successful. The best option I tell clients is to have a system to generate lots of positive reviews to negate the fake 1 stars. If Google wants its rating system to mean something they need to stop the fakes better.  

Answer 33

Interesting that Apple won't give up users data to the US gov but the UK forces Google to give personal data for a dentist who didn't like a review!  

Answer 34

It would stop competitors from leaving fake reviews

Comments

@gallion that was my thought.  

Answer 35

You should have to post your real name, when you did business and should be allow to make a review because of cost. You can always go somewhere cheaper. You get what you pay for.  

Answer 36

Absolutely. As the owner a computer repair business that received over 700 reviews in a 15 years, I have learned that the consumers have all the power. And it's not fair. A terrible person with no ethics can destroy a company's reputation with a bad review. And the company cannot do anything about it. If somebody writes something that's defamatory it should fall under any other law related to libel or slander. People should not be allowed to hide behind their merciless reviews. No, one person should have that much power over a business owners livelihood.  

Comments

@qp213 Portillo meh true but usually 1 review amongst many good ones wont sway people however many bad reviews. obviously the business is shit

---

@irrawaddy566 I disagree. How many reviews do you have for your business? Have you ever had a scathing full page review on Yelp that takes up the entire page and even more when you scroll down? Have you ever had a bad review? That's 10 paragraphs long with pictures? I have. And it Reduce my call volume by 90%. So, yeah, one bad review can have a disastrous effect. And just to prevent you from launching into some kind of attack on me and my business behavior that would warrant such a terrible review, This was a review from a lady that was dying of cancer, who I did outstanding work for, who wrote a bad review because she got a speeding ticket on the way home from the appointment. I bent over backwards for her because She was clearly ill. Oh, and told me she was. Suffering through chemo and stage 4 cancer. So I dropped everything to help her charged her almost nothing, and she returned. The favor by writing me a two-star review on Yelp. It was only about a paragraph long. When I messaged her privately, and Asked her What the speeding ticket had to do with my service, She changed the two star review to a one-star review and expanded it to 10 paragraphs and said that She was dying of cancer and I was harassing her. So yeah, one incredibly bad extremely long review can have a disastrous effect for business owners. Regardless of the overall review rating.  

Answer 37

Very cool!  

Answer 38

It should depends on the age of the account from where the review was posted. Any account with less age should not be considered for any review. Put this in a policy that any account less than 2 years of age would not be able to post any reviews”.  

Comments

That's kind of silly. So I have to create an account today and then wait 2 years before I can post the review I want to post? That would kill the whole review system.  

---

@leucas2838 Friedman to some extant but it will help eliminate the FAKE reviews being posted through new accounts.  

---

@adust there are better ways. They are just not interested in combatting fake reviews.  

---

@leucas2838 Friedman mine is simple

---

In this scenario, lame 'digital marketers' leaving fake reviews for 2+ years all of a sudden worth much more than they used to.  

Answer 39

And, what if he used a legit proxy/vpn. then what?  

Comments

@irritating May face account suspension, banned from google products, Or may face Prison Lol.  

---

@adust what? If the “anonymous” person understands how to cover his tracks, then no one will know his identity. a simple vpn+tor will accomplish complete anonymity

---

@irritating thats rite and people still does that. anyone can reset the laptop get a new connection, make a new google account and start reviewing but having an age limit would eliminate these kind of fake reviews.  

Answer 40

Great win for small businesses. The Way forward

Answer 41

Excellent. It is absurd that anonymous reviews are even possible.  

Answer 42

As it stands this is fine but not as policy without court intervention and as part of a legal procedure. In other words Google SHOULD resist. Those of you all gung ho - remember what starts today with Google reviews sets precedent for reviews everywhere. If you get a phone call from me because you say something about me here on facebook I don't think is true - don't complain facebook gave your number to me. ;)

Answer 43

Yes, I think so. Agree with @nudicaul3 in the comment above, it's crazy that you can give anonymous reviews which have the potential to seriously damage a business. Who knows who this person is, they could be a disgruntled client, or former employee, competitor.  

Answer 44

Absolutely Google should have to turn over the data. Google should not have the power to destroy the lives of countless business owners, and all of their employees, with completely fake or false information, yet they do.  

Answer 45

I have a fake review that needs an enquiry. it's anti SEO and Google loves legit SEO

Answer 46

On one end, if they turn over information about the fake review, they should also validate and scrutinize all other reviews including "real" ones too. It goes both ways. Nowadays there are too many reviews that aren't exactly real. They want the truth because its a negative review. I wonder what they would uncover if all the positive reviews were verified too.  

Answer 47

What if reviews are malicious ?  

Answer 48

Had a Hypnotherapy client who had a couple of bad reviews from people who weren't even clients of theirs. Google wouldn't take it off.  

Answer 49

If you want to review a product you should stand by your word. Yes, accountability is a must on these platforms

Answer 50

I have a similar problem with one of my stores. Some ass hole keeps leaving negative reviews, I can’t find the names that he/she is using in our customer database. Plus they are all very similarly worded with similar grammar. There is a new competitor that opened right by us and the bad reviews started as they opened. Also there google listing is flooded with fake positive feedbacks. Yelp is very good about filtering irrelevant and fake reviews. Google on the other hand just lets anyone leave any feedback they desire

Comments

@fixed I’ve had over 100 reviews similar to you. We reply, requesting more info and then flag the review google don’t care!  

Answer 51

Hmmm. I think one idea might be google provide whatever information it can, but leave the review in place. If the court decides the review is defamation, then google can remove it, if the court decides the review is legitimate, then it can stay? What about that?  

Answer 52

I'm in a back and forth over some shit with Facebook where they're using the 230CDA as a shield to allow Defamation despite it's violation of Arizona Law Title 44 chapter 37 1 & 2

Comments

Do they have your mugshot?  

---

@nudicaul3 Meacham would you like to see it David? I can make this happen for you sir! 3:-)

---

@melodymeloid Gugerty I'll take your word lol, but I agree with you. It should be an illegal practice for sure. It's basically guilty before proven innocent in the states unfortunately.  

---

@nudicaul3 Meacham I'm very much guilty good sir! Drugs, myriads of women of loose morals, it was a great 5 years what can I say! But i'll be GD if i'll sit by and let them spoil my autobiography before I finish writing it, or trap me into pandering it on Amazon Bookstore O:-)  
https://fuckfacebook.pro/about

Answer 53

It’s possible to have defamatory statements removed I’ve seen it happen locally here in Canada. I’ve even seen it where some businesses have won court cases over defamatory statements and where businesses were awarded damages. My father’s own company suffered because of negative reviews which lead me to create Elevatie

Answer 54

How do you prove if a negative review is real or fake? Dr Kabbabagegegege should just go make a few new accounts and bury that alleged fake review I mean get with the program doc!  

Comments

@angeliqueangelis Lee Apparently you just get a Subpoena Duces Tecum and run it to the vilest and scummiest of the scum lawyers that went to Stanford and Harvard scooped up by none other than Google Inc. Because apparently it's ok for them to just data mine and store your entire life without consequence, artificially arbitrate a heaping pile of slander by way of third party investors and businesses shielded by the 230CDA, lazily making making 50 bucks a click on 'Reputation Management' Adwords, and letting journalists feign concerns of atrocity with click ads via Google Adsense.