Negative online reviews can lead to threats of legal action from targeted businesses

that's called blackmail and it's illegal.

No, it's not. The company is within its rights. Problem is even if the complaint is legit, the threat of legal action is enough to deter people.

Actually, it's called "Barratry", and it is illegal. But it usually works too.

Anyone notice the really creepy part?

That was the reason I posted the story. Either someone was smart enough at the company to figure it out.............or her personal information was compromised.

That was the reason I posted the story. Either someone was smart enough at the company to figure it out.............or her personal information was compromised.

Or the site where she posted her review handed over her information in order to avoid liability.

As the story made clear, the company was able to identify her by information she posted. Guess you've gotta be smarter about what you post, generalize it more.

That was the reason I posted the story. Either someone was smart enough at the company to figure it out.............or her personal information was compromised.

Or the site where she posted her review handed over her information in order to avoid liability.
That was my point.

What's ironic here is the CLV Group just engaged in what some people call "The Streisand Effect".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

Now the whole world knows what a bunch of petty thugs work at the CLV Group. I hope they and their thug lawyers bankrupt themselves trying to squelch every comment in the world about them.

I doubt if they'll be able to get the personal information from the site posting those reviews. But they don't have to, can just sue the site itself, just as they could sue a newspaper putting out libel. (or is it slander).

Actually, it's called "Barratry", and it is illegal. But it usually works too.




If it's illegal she should go to the police.

They're doing nothing of the kind.

Squelching comment by threat of litigation is a common and unfortunately perfectly legal practice.

Actually, it's called "Barratry", and it is illegal. But it usually works too.

Anyone notice the really creepy part?



Good point, and yes that is also very disturbing. They could likely counter over privacy concerns.

What's good for the goose...

Can't see it as a winning business strategy for the company. They've just opened themselves up to internet mob rage. They'll get all kinds of crackpots posting at Yelp and Google reviews now dissing them. Lawyers letters may not deter them, if they have nothing anyway, or are adept at hiding their IP.

Or people will post that a CBC story indicates that they go after negative reviewers with a legal team--a true claim.

I thought that at first, but she must have been too specific. So, because of her complaints to their office, they were able to put two and two together and figure out who posted it.

Given that she probably gave them an updated address to forward her mail, it wasn't very hard to send her a letter to her new place.

Still, the whole episode stinks and as Zip said, this company has put a target on its back.

If this story goes viral, they could wind up with far more bad reviews than hers - and if there are enough (and sophisticated enough to hide their IP using something like Anonymizer.com), then this will come back to haunt them.

Actually, it's called "Barratry", and it is illegal. But it usually works too.




If it's illegal she should go to the police.

They're doing nothing of the kind.

Squelching comment by threat of litigation is a common and unfortunately perfectly legal practice.

Barratry doesn't always include monetary gain, it can also mean causing the other party to spend money to defend themselves from the groundless litigation. Some places even have another name for it - SLAPP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_ ... ticipation

And Police normally investigate crimes, and Barratry is a tort unless it's repeated often, then it's a crime.