Asus UK PR believes it is ‘legal to buy positive reviews’

Post by mellosouls » Sat, May 13, 2023, 5:56 PM UTC

r3trohack3r wrote: post #79

DizzyDoo wrote: post #66

My dentist here in Canada has signs up that advertise that you get a free electric tooth brush if you leave a 5 star review on Google. I've not done that, it seems quite wrong, but I would imagine this is also very much against Google's policies? I was surprised how clear and obvious the signage was. Seems to have worked though, the dentist's office has lots of 5 star reviews.

This sign always has the opposite desired effect on me. If I see a sign trading for 5-Star reviews, there isn’t any way for me to tell which reviews were written for a free burrito. So I immediately discredit all 5-star reviews the restaurant receives.

Post by pitaj » Sat, May 13, 2023, 6:01 PM UTC

LegitShady wrote: post #50

pitaj wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to Linus Tech Tips, the disclaimer was unintentional, they intend to honor the warranty, and they're working on removing the disclaimer.

>working on removing the disclaimer This is a sentence on a website. If they wanted it would be gone in 5 minutes. You don't need to "work on it".

Post by philipov » Sat, May 13, 2023, 6:11 PM UTC

pitaj wrote: post #84

oatmeal1 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does he know the disclaimer was unintentional vs. 'putting it in there to see if we can get away with it?'

It's impossible to really know because we don't have mind reading capabilities, but he believes that their intention was never to void warranties for this.

Post by gpderetta » Sat, May 13, 2023, 6:34 PM UTC

rsynnott wrote: post #61

mk67 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Damn, that sounds insane. Is the UK the only country in the world with this? What is the reason?

As mentioned elsewhere, the UK does _not_ have this, but there are libel systems, generally old-fashioned ones, where truth is not an absolute defence (a couple of US states still have criminal libel laws where truth may not be an absolute defence, though use of these presumably wouldn’t be constitutional, say).

Post by dataflow » Sat, May 13, 2023, 6:37 PM UTC

rsynnott wrote: post #58

pevey wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, truthfulness of a statement is an affirmative defense to libel/defamation, but believe it or not, that is not the case everywhere. Specifically, it is not the case in the UK.

Not sure why people believe this so frequently; it’s completely wrong. Truth is an absolute defence under both systems, though there are significant differences around burden of proof and importance of intent.