I don’t know what was actually said in the review, but I can’t see how the company could prevail in a lawsuit over a bad review of a product. Did he really say anything that libeled or slandered the seller?
Scroll down to the reviews.
I read the letter from the attorney to him, and the review was quoted. It looks like he made expressed some ideas as statements of fact, rather than opinions. For example, he said the router was the exact same one as another router, just relabeled. Unless he can prove that, it could be a problem for him.
You can say anything you want in a review as long as you present it as your opinion and not as a statement of fact. He could have said that it appeared to HIM that the router was the same as the other one, for example. By saying it that way, he is expressing his opinion, but not saying it is a factual certainty.
I read them. He made some pretty concise claims that could be easily refuted if they aren’t true. I’d say he’d be better off just taking it all down.
Apparently, there are shady firms out there which can be retained to “repair” or mitigate reputation damage done by negative online reviews posted by unhappy customers. I hear them advertising on Washington, DC talk radio WMAL all the time. My guess is that this letter, which is likely an empty threat, originated at such an outfit.
I'm not a lawyer, so what follows is only my opinion.
When you make statements that the router you purchased is really another re-branded router and statements that directly imply the company itself is engaging in a false information campaign by posting positive reviews of their own product --- yes, he committed libel.
If he had simply kept his review to his dissatisfaction of the performance of the product and any experience with that company's customer service he'd be covered by freedom of speech.
BTW, this isn't the first time a company has gone after someone for posting a negative review of a product (that review being filled with libelous statements anyway..)
Read the review in the letter at the link. The guy stepped over the line.
The company’s demand letter was a fitting response to a defamatory statement (or 2), without regard to their product being ‘rebranded’.