San Francisco Man Sued for Bad Review on Yelp.com

One of the first things I did after moving to San Francisco six years ago was go onto Yelp.com to check out the reviews of my surroundings. I looked up reviews on local restaurants, doctors, supermarkets, hair stylists, stores and tourist attractions. I can remember that I needed to see a dentist and was so new to the city that I had no one to ask. I looked at the reviews on Yelp and chose one that was in my area. I connected with what people were saying about the "gentle dentist." After I went to my dentist appointment, I wasn't disappointed and was so happy that I had found Yelp's user reviews.

After living in the city and meeting people that were also new to the city I would recommend Yelp as a great tool to get to know the city. I recommended Yelp for the open honest feedback from the users. You can make up your own mind from what people are saying. Whether the review was positive or negative no one on Yelp was censoring what they had to say.

I have also wondered about the Yelp negative reviews. Were the users experiences at the restaurant or pharmacy so horrible that they needed to write and tell everyone not to go there. Would the Yelp user be so honest if they had waited a couple of days before posting their review? Would waiting to review then be a form of censorship? Should we in our Internet community of honesty wonder to ourselves before posting a negative review, can I be sued for sharing my thoughts?

Last week while eating at The Crepe House restaurant on Polk Street, I read this article in the San Francisco Chronicle. The story was about a twenty-six year old San Francisco man being sued by a chiropractor because of the two negative reviews that he wrote and posted on Yelp. Christopher's six paragraph review of the chiropractor stated that he felt that he didn't like the billing process and that the doctor was being dishonest with the insurance companies. The doctor contacted Christopher and asked him to delete his review as it was effecting his business negatively. Christopher's second review said that he felt that the doctor was harassing him into removing his review and that he wouldn't be pressured to remove it.

The doctor is now suing Christopher for libel and invasion of privacy and if the case isn't settled then the trial is set to go before the San Francisco Superior Court in March. Christopher has turned to the social websites Facebook, MySpace to raise awareness and money for his defense. He also started the website standforspeech.com .

Yelp's spoke person said that the doctor had also received many positive reviews and suing over this negative reviews only brought attention to the negativity. Can you imagine going to see this chiropractor after hearing about this case? I would be concerned that if I didn't like his service and posted about it then I too could be sued for expressing my opinion.

I believe that it can be a very slippery slope when we start censoring ourselves. I am able to express how I feel and if readers like it or don't like it they make the choice to read on, visit again or comment on it. If more and more cases like this are pursued, could a time come when I sit down at the computer to write to you and I have to censor my thoughts and feelings? How is it different from what Christopher wrote to what a friend of mine wrote on Yelp that she didn't like the Chinese food place that she recently ordered from. She wrote on her review on Yelp that she would never order from there again and questioned the kitchen cleanliness and operation of the restaurant. Is she too in jeopardy of going to court?

Should we censor the Internet like we censor movies? How do you feel about this case? Do you side with Christopher or with the chiropractor?
Digg this story.