Discussion in 'Dumaguete City' started by Notmyrealname, Sep 25, 2020.
never forget, one "aw s--t" equals a thousand "attaboys"
Actually Trip Advisor is the publisher, not the writer. Trip Advisor as a company not only enables but ENCOURAGES reviews, positive or negative without regard to motive (malice).
Trip Advisor does not even give warnings to reviewers that they may be liable for local prosecutions of libel or slander.
Why do they not sue or prosecute the publisher along with the reviewer? It seems that the publisher, not the reviewer, published the review in such a way as to be illegal in the country it was shown (Thailand).
The probable reason is that, if they added Trip Advisor as a defendant in the lawsuit, they would be up against an experienced legal team and be much more likely to lose.
They had much better chances of taking out their revenge on the little guy and they succeeded.
What I get out if this is to beware, if you are thinking of making a negative review on one of these travel sites, even if truthful, you could be subject to criminal prosecution or a civil lawsuit.
And you are in your own if they do prosecute; the travel site will not have your back. This is true even though such reviews are the core reason many of their customers visit the site and that gives Trip Advisor big ad revenue.
I don’t think I would risk reviewing on these sites in the future.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I promise 100% never to forget it - but I don't understand what it means!
I'm pretty sure one can write a negative review if you only visit the place as a tourist. I don't think the Thai Government (or the Philippine Government) would request the extradition of, for instance, a Dutch national because the resort owner cannot stomach the negative review on Trip Report written by that individual. I'm even wondering if it would result in the 'blacklisting' of that individual by Immigration. But it's always wise to remember that the word is mightier than the sword.....
It might seem that is the probable reason but it is not. US (and many other countries) law states that websites with user generated content are not liable for user submitted content. Since these companies are US companies primarily operating out of the US (or other developed countries with similar laws) they do not give a crap about foreign laws (unless they can be held liable in a foreign country).
it means you can do a thousand good things but screw up just once and thats all they wll remember. think coming home drunk to your surprise birthday party. toilet seats and wives. absent mindedly microwaving an egg in the shell.
An honest review will usually include both praise and blame. A completely positive review, I discount as a shill, perhaps the establishment's manager. Completely negative I would discount as overly emotional, for whatever reason.
QUOTE="Notmyrealname, post: 229805, member: 5226"]Therein lies the problem - asking 'ordinary' people (those without legal knowledge) to write reviews but not say anything an owner could file a case on. Will this put off the negative reviews and they will all be glowing? Not much use if they are.
I have problems already reading these reviews when one person gives 10 and says the place was brilliant and another gives 1 and says it is a hell-hole (but I do take into account that one negative could just be an *sshole revenging for some minor problem).[/QUOTE]
We may be understating this. It appears to be more than just a lawsuit but a cybercrime (criminal prosecution) which brings it up to a whole new level.
From the article you referenced:
"Under Thailand’s tough criminal defamation laws, Mr Barnes could face up to two years in prison if found guilty"
Latest I saw on FB today, he got 2 years.
Since that is part of what I posted, I'm puzzled. Did you mean, "We may be misunderstanding this?" The action starts with the filing of a complaint which is a suit, per the article.