B&B owners who took on TripAdvisor over faceless reviewers ...
B&B owners who took on TripAdvisor over faceless reviewers left 'crushed' as judge says he has no power to make web giant reveal the names of criticsMartin and Jacqui Clark accuse TripAdvisor of operating 'above the law'Couple took ?3billion organisation court to reveal names of their criticsThere were two negative reviews of their Inverness-shire bed and breakfastMr and Mrs Clark say the comments were false, fabicated and maliciousBut travel giant refused to reveal who the names of those who posted them508010985500'Very bitter': Martin and Jacqui Clark want the names of TripAdvisor reviewers made publicThe owners of a Scottish B&B last night accused TripAdvisor of operating ‘above the law’ after the couple lost a bitter legal wrangle over bad reviews posted on the global travel guide. Martin and Jacqui Clark went to court in an attempt to force the ?3billion organisation to disclose details of the writers of two negative online posts so they can sue the authors.The Clarks, who run the nine-bedroom Tigh na Cheo guest house at Kinlochleven, Inverness-shire, maintain that both reports posted within a month of each other were fabricated and malicious. They wanted to raise an action for defamation against whoever posted the comments, claiming the poor reviews damaged their reputation and cost them business.But their legal bid stumbled at the first hurdle yesterday when a judge at the Court of Session in Edinburgh rejected a request for a disclosure order to force TripAdvisor to reveal the names, addresses and other information on the authors’ identity.In a judgment that could have far-reaching implications for other victims of bad reviews, Judge Paul Arthurson, QC, ruled Scots courts have no jurisdiction in the matter.An angry Mr Clark, 55, said the ruling would allow TripAdvisor’s army of unverified reviewers free rein to post ‘anything on any pub, restaurant, guesthouse or hotel in the world and, frankly, get away with it’. He added: ‘This effectively means that TripAdvisor will continue to have a licence to defame and libel with impunity. It’s just unbelievable. My wife and I feel very bitter about it.’ In their petition, the Clarks maintained that the disputed postings purported to review events that did not take place, were not submitted by actual travellers and were not posted contemporaneously.?Both writers claimed to have visited the premises in September 2011, but the reviews did not appear until February and March the following year.05334000At an earlier hearing, Graeme Henderson, counsel for the Clarks, told the court they were applying to seek assistance from the company over the identity of the two individuals named in the reviews as ‘edna B’ and ‘dreckit’. But, the court heard TripAdvisor, whose headquarters are in Boston, Massachusetts, set out in its terms and conditions that users agreed that all claims against it arising from the site must be heard in the US state.Target: The owners of the nine-bedroomed Tigh Na Cheo guest house in Inverness-shire insist they were the victims of 'fabricated and malicious' reviews on TripAdvisorThe judge was told that Mr Clark accepted that he had ticked a box acknowledging that he agreed with those terms and conditions in the course of his use of the website. He said that the legislation under which the disclosure order was sought ‘does not empower the Court of Session with worldwide jurisdiction to ordain persons such as the respondents [TripAdvisor] to produce information’.The judge added: ‘I conclude that the approach contended for on behalf of the petitioners would require the court in turn to make a rather alarming entirely global assertion of jurisdiction.’ Speaking after the ruling, Mr Clark said: ‘It seems this company can effectively do what it wants in the UK – it’s above the law.’He added the upset caused by the case had prompted him and his 50-year-old wife to try to sell the B&B. Though considering their position over an appeal, Mr Clark said: ‘I don’t think we can go any further from here because it will just go on and on and I am not prepared to fork out another sizeable amount of money.’A TripAdvisor spokesman said it did not comment on individual cases of litigation but insisted it took fraud seriously.He said: ‘Every single review goes through our tracking system, which maps the how, what, where and when of each review, and we use sophisticated automated tools and algorithms to spot patterns of? unusual activity. We back that up with a team of over 200 content specialists, who work 24/7 to maintain the quality of our reviews.’TRIPADVISOR: THE WEBSITE THAT CAN BREAK A BUSINESSSince it was founded by entrepreneur Stephen Kaufer only 14 years ago, TripAdvisor has grown into the world’s largest travel website and one of the most controversial.With more than 200 million visitors a month worldwide trusting its recommendations to book trips, a run of good or bad reviews can potentially make or break a business.But there are consistent grumbles that the website is growing too powerful and its system of unverified reviews is too open to abuse.Three years ago, the Advertising Standards Authority began an investigation into the firm before ordering it to remove its slogan ‘reviews you can trust’ and banning it from claiming reviews are from ‘real’ travellers.In 2012, a new link was established with Facebook allowing users to see reviews written by members on their ‘friends’ list. As a result, a previously anonymous user was exposed as Peter Hook, a hotel executive, who had posted glowing reviews about his firm’s properties.The same year, KwikChex, a reputation- management company, deliberately submitted three fake reviews for a defunct restaurant. Just over a month later, the reviews were still on the site and the restaurant had risen to 17th best in London.Also in 2012, Helen Griffiths, a marketing manager from Salford, was ordered to apologise as part of a police caution for? harassment after posting 30 false and malicious reviews about a vegan restaurant, The Good Life, on TripAdvisor.?She admitted: ‘I made these comments based on absolutely no knowledge of the business, or any of the company’s staff, as I have never actually visited or eaten at the restaurant.’?Last year, fresh doubts about the global giant’s fraud detection system, based on anti-credit card and insurance fraud algorithms, were raised after a non–existent business briefly became one of the most highly rated restaurants in Brixham, Devon.A TripAdvisor spokesman said every one of the 60 reviews posted every minute was checked using the system, but added: ‘No system, verified or not, is perfect, and we are continually working to stay ahead of those attempting to cheat the system.’ ................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- guidelines on preschool kindergarten learning experiences
- va bedford healthcare system
- from the interesting narrative of the life of olaudah equiano
- naval terms phraseology goat locker
- b b owners who took on tripadvisor over faceless reviewers
- subject line fifty boston area summer recreation sites
- online resources for parents and caregivers
Related searches
- who took over homecomings financial
- who took over gmac mortgage
- who took over gmac loans
- took on thesaurus
- who lives on my street
- who lives on my street free lookup
- took over synonyms
- who worked on the illuminated manuscripts
- took on synonym
- who s on santa s good list
- how hitler took over germany
- who is on santa s nice list