President Signs Law Protecting Your Right to Review

["Dave Farber" <farber () gmail com>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne () warpspeed com>
> Date: December 23, 2016 at 4:28:00 PM EST
> To: Multiple recipients of Dewayne-Net <dewayne-net () warpspeed com>
> Subject: [Dewayne-Net] President Signs Law Protecting Your Right to Review
> Reply-To: dewayne-net () warpspeed com
>
> President Signs Law Protecting Your Right to Review
> The Consumer Review Fairness Act Is an Win for Free Speech Online, Despite Possible Flaw
> By Eliot Harmon
> Dec 21 2016
> <https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/12/president-signs-law-protecting-right-review>
>
> President Obama recently signed the Consumer Review Fairness Act of 2016 (H.R. 5111), which passed both houses of 
> Congress unanimously. The bill addresses a dangerous trend: businesses inserting clauses into their form contracts 
> that attempt to limit their customers’ ability to criticize products and services online. We’re pleased to see 
> Congress taking a big step to protect free speech online and rein in abusive form contracts.
>
> The CRFA tackles two different ways that businesses attempt to squash their customers’ reviews. The first is rather 
> straightforward: simply inserting clauses into their form contracts saying that customers can’t post negative reviews 
> online, or imposing a fine for them. For instance, the Union Street Guest House used such a contract and attempted to 
> fine guests over their bad reviews.
>
> The second tactic is a bit more roundabout: businesses put a clause in their contracts saying that they own the 
> copyright to customers’ reviews. Then, when they see a review that they don’t like, they file a takedown notice under 
> the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). One notorious example of that trick is a form contract for doctors 
> offered by a company called Medical Justice. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ordered doctors to quit 
> using such contracts in 2013, but similar practices live on across different industries. The CRFA voids both types of 
> contract clauses and makes it illegal for businesses to offer them.
>
> When we’ve written previously about the CRFA, we’ve noted a potential gap in the way the law was worded. Companies 
> may try to argue that they are allowed to craft contract clauses assigning themselves the copyright to customers’ 
> reviews so long as the reviews are not “lawful.” Companies may then attempt to remove web content written by 
> customers using the special censorship tools available to copyright owners under the DMCA, claiming that that content 
> is not lawful (for example, because it allegedly defames the company). If courts—or service providers who receive 
> takedown notices—accept that reasoning, then vendors could bypass the traditional protections for allegedly illegal 
> speech, having content removed immediately under the DMCA rather than going through a court as it normally would for 
> non-copyright speech claims. We are disappointed that Congress failed to clearly foreclose this abuse of form 
> contracts and the DMCA takedown process.
>
> [snip]
>
> Dewayne-Net RSS Feed: <http://dewaynenet.wordpress.com/feed/>



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/18849915-ae8fa580
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-aa268125
Unsubscribe Now: 
https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-32545cb4&post_id=20161224121535:934EB320-C9FC-11E6-BFA5-CB5FF194D7FA
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com