The new "Yelp bill" will protect consumer reviews

[DuckDodgers]

Customer agreements shall no more impose (or demand) legal constraints on the free expression of "honest" product and service reviews/opinions from users and consumers alike.
 

A member of the House of Representatives is offering legislation that would make it illegal for businesses to take action against consumers who write "honest" negative reviews online about products and services.

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) told the National Journal that the forthcoming measure would make it illegal for companies to have non-disparagement clauses in their consumer contracts.

"It's un-American that any consumer would be penalized for writing an honest review," Swalwell said. "I'm introducing this legislation to put a stop to this egregious behavior so people can share honest reviews without fear of litigation."

 

 

The Consumer Review Freedom Act follows last week's signature of Gov. Jerry Brown on a similar law in California that includes a $10,000 fine against companies that violate the so-called "Yelp bill." Swalwell's law, if passed by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama, would function nationwide.

 

US law would safeguard free-speech rights to criticize business online

 

[Captain_Slow]

what kind of shitty business takes actions against consumers for reviews?

 

they are just going to get more negative reviews

[Electrostatik]

Naming it after a company that's been accused of questionable business practices...hmm

[DuckDodgers]

what kind of shitty business takes actions against consumers for reviews?

 

they are just going to get more negative reviews

 

Express to Internet Hate: Bus company threatens redditor with lawsuit -- just one of the more notorious cases.

[Trik'Stari]

Interesting that they do this, yet they do nothing about a federal agency giving itself the authority (which is illegal, they can't just grant themselves authority to do shit) to shut down any business it wants, for any reason it wants, for 10 days, until a "trial" happens

 

[spoiler=Source: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/06/19/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-grants-itself-authority-to-shut-down-any-business-n1853590?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl] Last week the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, through the power of Dodd-Frank, passed a rule giving the agency unprecedented power to shut down businesses, no matter what the reason, at any time it wishes through a cease-and-desist order. Further, the rule puts businesses at the mercy of the CFPB and they cannot go back into operation until government approval or a court ruling is made over an issue. Subsequently because bureaucratic decisions and court rulings take a substantial amount of time to happen, businesses cannot survive during those waiting periods. Here are the details (bolding is mine):

In a notice published in today’s Federal Register, the CFPB has announced that it has adopted its interim final rule on temporary cease-and-desist orders (C&Ds) without change. The final rule takes effect on July 18, 2014.

The CFPB is authorized to issue temporary C&Ds under Section 1053© of Dodd-Frank. That provision authorizes a temporary C&D as an adjunct to a cease-and-desist proceeding brought under Section 1053 against a covered person or service provider. A temporary C&D is effective immediately upon service and remains in effect unless modified or terminated administratively by the CFPB or set aside on judicial review.

The new rule comes on the heals of revelations the Department of Justice has been smothering firearms dealerships and other "high risk" entities out of business by "choking" banks and stripping funding through Operation Choke Point.

Consumer groups are pushing back against the rule and issuing a warnings to businesses everywhere about what the rule means for them. The United States Consumer Coalition in particular is sounding the alarm:

"This unprecedented rule created by the CFPB grants the agency unilateral authority to literally shut down any business overnight. It is a doubling down of Operation Choke Point (OCP), the Administration's program to target lawful industries by intimidating banks from doing business with them. This rule allows the CFPB to immediately issue a cease-and-desist order, which terminates all business practices — and a hearing doesn’t have to be granted for 10 days, effectively shutting down businesses for at least 10 days. This is a 'guilty until proven innocent' tactic of the Administration that goes against every historical notion of justice under the law in America."

"The Administration got caught with their illegal intimidation tactics in Operation Choke Point, and now they are taking radical steps to ensure the goals of shutting down these lawful businesses are met. This is just the next step in using unaccountable agencies, with their ever-expanding agency powers, to meet the political goals of the Administration. This is a much more efficient way of shutting down lawful industries than just relying on intimidation. It is also no coincidence that this rule was released the day that CFPB Director Richard Cordray finished testifying at oversight hearings on the Hill."

"This is a direct attack on every free-market business in America, and every single business should be alarmed. No business should have to operate while questioning daily whether or not they will be the victim of a cease-and-desist order. This will cause uncertainty on Wall Street and uncertainty in the job market, leading to a loss of jobs and devastating the families that rely on them, while irreversibly damaging the economy and threatening consumer choice."


I have no doubt a few Senators will have a few things to say about this.The rule can be opposed and overturned through legislation and oversight.

"The best solution would be to pass the CFPB reform bill that Rep. Duffy introduced adding bipartisan oversight to the Bureau through an appointed commission," USCC Senior Advisor Brian Wise says. "Having a Director-led agency with this much authority puts too much control in the hands of one unelected man. Otherwise they could repeal Dodd-Frank but that isn’t practical at this point.”
Stay tuned.

This post has been updated.

[The_Strict_Nein]

What's the name of that law that says that says trying to hide negative comments just draws more attention to them, or something like that?

[Captain_Slow]

Express to Internet Hate: Bus company threatens redditor with lawsuit -- just one of the more notorious cases.

 

lol is that even real life?

[SpaghettiCarbonara]

What's the name of that law that says that says trying to hide negative comments just draws more attention to them, or something like that?

 

The Streisand Effect

 

It applies to any piece of information, not just comments or pictures.

[GlassBomb]

lol is that even real life?

I remember a hotel that would fine their customers $500 if they left bad reviews. Fun stuff.

[Trik'Stari]

I remember a hotel that would fine their customers $500 if they left bad reviews. Fun stuff.

That was in New York state wasn't it?

[Captain_Slow]

I remember a hotel that would fine their customers $500 if they left bad reviews. Fun stuff.

 

how can one not see that that's terrible business practice?

 

mind blown.

[JEW UNIT NY]

I thought this was already covered under freedom of speech? Wtf? So all this time companies were immune from the first amendment?