An unethical company is likely would consider a lawsuit to put such private site out of business. A collection of unethical companies would be an exponentially higher risk to such site.
back
2 comments
Sounds like a Streissand effect waiting to happen. Besides, IANAL, but I'm sure plenty of people here could find a lawyer to file for an easy anti-SLAPP defense.
Factual statements about bad employers are very much free speech. Judges aren't particularly fond of frivolous lawsuits. There are already mechanisms in place to quickly throw those away without wasting everyone's time and money.
All true, but anyone putting up a site would need the bankroll to handle such a lawsuit through to winning, and then be able to collect on the SLAPP judgement (which the non-paying employer would likely have put up obstacles to collection). That's the big problem with lawsuits — you start out in a losing position just because of the cost to defend.
So a random individual without the bankroll to defend is likely vulnerable, and this is a libel suit, so unlike a copyright suit, you can't solve it just by taking it down. You posted the allegation, now you must defend it. Yes, the truth is an absolute defense against libel, but you still need to defend it that far (through pretrial motions, discovery, etc.). Even getting to file for a dismissal is likely to be $five-figures with a good attorney, and you NEED a good attny. OFC, if you have a good case, a good firm may take it on spec, but....
And of course, how do you know all the postings on your site are actually fully factual and not exaggerated in any way?
Because, any honest employer falsely accused would be rightly very pissed off.
Tough problem.
>And of course, how do you know all the postings on your site are actually fully factual and not exaggerated in any way?
You don't, but you smile and just delete the content. And then you've done your part as a platform. You're very happy to delete things when notified, and you do it promptly. Then you get to publish a very factual transparency notice.
Someone will have archived the page already? Social media is upset when they hear that the big company tried to attack the small independent site to take down this page that They Don't Want You To See? That's out of your hands, you're a neutral platform and you've done your part.
You just need to fold immediately, and you're covered by all the safe harbor neutral platform protections. Same as forums, social media, any website with user-generated content.
Now that won't stop an asshole from suing you over frivolous nonsense. But it does make it easy to throw their suit away - like you said, if you have the spite and money to follow through with a defense.
> I'm sure plenty of people here could find a lawyer to file for an easy anti-SLAPP defense.
SLAPPs are only illegal in certain jurisdictions, not including federal or even many states.
>Factual statements about bad employers
and how is this hypothetical website you're hyping supposed to uncover the factuality of statements random people from the internet are posting?
Same way any other website with user-generated content deals with it. The website has broad immunity as a platform, but is expected to take down content that would be illegal when notified.
Random people on the Internet have been at it long enough that there is plenty of precedent to establish that you can safely host a platform. But then again, I am not a lawyer, I am not your lawyer, and for legal reasons this is not the legal definition of legal advice, etc.
I guess it needs to be upvoted by other verified users? say if user A is claiming that user C hasn't paid the bill,l. User B can come in and verify it also happened to them. or they need to sign in using Linkedin for credibility. and provide text or photo evidence?
Require strict KYC of all reviewers. This should be no privacy concern since it's about B2B contracts that operate in public between two registered businesses.
Don't publicize who wrote a review, but keep it on hand for subpoenas. You are probably not liable for defamation if you can identify who wrote the review - and they should be able to prove it's true. Ask a lawyer first of course.
yeah, I was thinking user can only register with valid Linkedin profile. We blur their images ofcourse, except for the person who owns, of course