Legal fund for Reviewers/Erin?

[Somafunk]

Not in Europe. "Pedestrians have legs to get out of the way of vehicles."

Not in the uk, cars have to yield if pedestrians are crossing /waiting on the pavement to cross

As it should be, there is a hierarchy of potential damage to consider

 

[EarlessOldMan]

I consulted with ChatGPT and received the following feedback covering the options for Amir and Erin to either purchase liability insurance or to rely on a public trust. These options could cover legal costs related to defamation claims or similar legal challenges arising from reviews or evaluations published online:

"Both liability insurance and a public trust can offer valuable protection to reviewers facing defamation claims, but they serve different purposes and have distinct advantages and considerations:

1. Liability Insurance:
   • Advantages:
     • Immediate Coverage: Insurance provides immediate financial support for legal defense costs and potential damages.
     • Personal Protection: Insurance can protect the reviewer's personal assets from being at risk in case of a lawsuit.
     • Customized Coverage: Reviewers can tailor insurance policies to their specific needs, including coverage for defamation claims arising from their professional activities.
   • Considerations:
     • Premium Costs: Insurance premiums can be a recurring expense, and the cost may vary depending on coverage limits, deductible amounts, and the insurer's assessment of risk.
     • Coverage Limits: Insurance policies may have coverage limits and exclusions, so it's important to carefully review the terms and conditions to ensure adequate protection.
2. Public Trust:
   • Advantages:
     • Community Support: A public trust can rally support from the public, readers, and advocates of free speech, potentially providing a broader base of financial assistance.
     • Transparency: A well-managed trust can offer transparency in how funds are used for legal defense, enhancing credibility and trust among supporters.
     • Long-Term Sustainability: A trust can be structured for long-term sustainability, providing ongoing support to reviewers facing legal challenges.
   • Considerations:
     • Setup Complexity: Establishing and managing a trust involves legal and administrative complexities, including compliance with regulatory requirements and fiduciary responsibilities.
     • Fundraising Challenges: Depending on public contributions means relying on ongoing fundraising efforts, which may not always guarantee sufficient funds for all potential legal challenges.
     • Time and Resources: Managing a public trust requires dedicated time, resources, and oversight to ensure proper governance, financial management, and reporting.

Preference Considerations:

• Risk Tolerance: Reviewers should assess their risk tolerance and financial capacity to determine whether insurance premiums or reliance on public support through a trust aligns better with their circumstances.
• Complementary Approach: Some reviewers may opt for a combination of both insurance coverage and a public trust, leveraging insurance for immediate protection and using the trust as a supplemental resource or backup funding source.

Ultimately, the preferable option depends on the individual reviewer's situation, financial resources, risk assessment, and strategic considerations. Consulting with legal and financial advisors can help reviewers make informed decisions tailored to their specific needs and preferences."

As a lawyer, please let me implore people not to rely on ChatGPT or any other LLM AI for legal advice.

 

[EarlessOldMan]

Okay, now back to the Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance? thread.

As a lover of vinyl, let me explain the vinyl renaissance by noting that no one has ever really explained fashion trends.

 

[Universal Cereal Bus]

As a lawyer, please let me implore people not to rely on ChatGPT or any other LLM AI for legal advice.

As a lawyer, I advise people to find a legal representative qualified in their relevant jurisdiction. These people taking advice from robots will be very well-represented in robot court.

 

[EarlessOldMan]

As a lawyer, I advise people to find a legal representative qualified in their relevant jurisdiction. These people taking advice from robots will be very well-represented in robot court.

Yes yes a thousand times yes.

 

[ta240]

Not in the uk, cars have to yield if pedestrians are crossing /waiting on the pavement to cross

As it should be, there is a hierarchy of potential damage to consider

What gets me is the people that don't even look before crossing. And the ones that stop at the intersection, stand there looking to their right like they are going to head that way and then just walk across a different direction.

 

[CedarX]

A practical question relative to ASR forums. Let say I post some amateur measurements of a modest audio product... add a few personal comments, some of them "negative" based on my actual experience with the product. This is deemed pretty good and interesting enough for Amir to promote it as a review on ASR front page.... (purely theoretical, I know it'll never happen !!! ).

Am I potentially exposed to the furies of a mad manufacturer, with litigation threats, etc.? I'm not Amir and don't have all his credentials... I have no attorney friend either.

 

[ConnorG]

Stumbled across a reupload of his first video on YouTube. (Not affiliated, don’t sue me)

 

[Pinkynator]

These people taking advice from robots will be very well-represented in robot court.

Weeeeell..... The Klippel is basically a robot and we take its advice religiously.

 

[kemmler3D]

A practical question relative to ASR forums. Let say I post some amateur measurements of a modest audio product... add a few personal comments, some of them "negative" based on my actual experience with the product. This is deemed pretty good and interesting enough for Amir to promote it as a review on ASR front page.... (purely theoretical, I know it'll never happen !!! ).

Am I potentially exposed to the furies of a mad manufacturer, with litigation threats, etc.? I'm not Amir and don't have all his credentials... I have no attorney friend either.

Potentially, yes. In the US, anyone can sue anyone for any reason. The big question you have to deal with is whether they actually will or won't.

This is why the legal defense fund idea could be important. Reviewers would at least know they have some backup if some madman comes along and sues them for bad reasons.

 

[Multicore]

Here's my thought on it, if it were up to me and I were going to set it up right now -

It would be a trust, specifically for litigation or pre-litigation advice only, and funding would be limited to reviewers of audio equipment facing legal threats over their reviews. Eligibility for funding should be pretty easy to determine on a case-by-case basis.

I think there would also need to be a criterion as to whether the review was prima facie legitimate. If the trust determines that the review actually was very likely defamatory or negligent, the funds shouldn't be wasted on that.

I think it would need to be managed by a board of some sort.

I think your points about competency, conflicts of interest, etc. are good. A lot of details would need to be worked out while setting up the trust. Ideally a member who is an attorney can help set it up to avoid blowing all the cash in the process of creating the fund. So there also ought to be a stipulation that the reviewer would need to agree to deposit any funds raised related to the lawsuit back into the trust...

Anyway, yeah this gets very complex once you start thinking about it concretely. But I'm definitely in support of the idea after having watched this play out. Volunteer attorney definitely required for this...

I think the money would sit in the fund indefinitely, not to be returned to anyone. I think that's a feature, not a bug. If there's a pool of money out there, specifically to counter any audio reviewer facing this type of threat, this type of threat will be significantly deterred. And the reviewers will have a lot less stress about it.

If people like Eric Alexander knew (for example) that there was $250K of cash just sitting there, waiting to make him look stupid in court, even he would never send the kind of emails he's sent to Amir and Erin. As we know the only real danger a litigant like this poses is fiscal and temporary, but that can be a serious danger.

The analogy to a cancer gofundme* falls apart because you can't scare cancer off by having a healthy bank balance.

* HOWEVER - if anyone gets caught up in a lawsuit and actually needs the funding, they should definitely be encouraged to use that situation to fundraise, to avoid depleting the fund and ending back where we started.

If I were an indi reviewer, I would not want to lead with trying to establish a defense fund. (It can create its own headaches and can be established later.) I would lead with trying to set up regular communication among like-minded reviewers who share the common interest that a successful attack on one affects all of them. Those that really recognize that common interest will likely be willing to participate in some sort of roundtable meetings or alliance building. What to do is up to the group but my most urgent thought would be to rustle up a core group on the zoom, talk over what happened here, and ask if there's rough consensus that some collective preparation might allow more comfortable disposition of future disputes.

I'm sure y'all can think of useful things an alliance could do besides establishing defense funds. I can. But that's up to the group to hash out. Presuming this episode is now in post-acute care, if I were in Amir's or Erin's shoes I'd be keen to get my gang together to figure out how to prepare for the future. Pilots and ground crews have checklists to handle tricky situations.

Idk what back channels may have been established this week but it seems there were few at onset. I'd start with that.

As I am in fact not in Amir's or Erin's shoes, please dismiss anything I say as the presumptuois foolishness of an ill-informed bystander, as you see fit.

 

[DonM]

As a lawyer, please let me implore people not to rely on ChatGPT or any other LLM AI for legal advice.

As a lawyer, please let me implore people not to rely on ChatGPT or any other LLM AI for legal advice.

I removed that comment. However the readers of this thread should be aware that Erin and Amir do have the option of purchasing liability insurance or setting up a public trust (ie GoFundMe). And my last sentence in the comment removed stated, "Consulting with legal and financial advisors can help reviewers make informed decisions tailored to their specific needs and preferences." did remind everyone that ChatGPT was not an authoritative legal resource.

 

[gwing]

A practical question relative to ASR forums. Let say I post some amateur measurements of a modest audio product... add a few personal comments, some of them "negative" based on my actual experience with the product. This is deemed pretty good and interesting enough for Amir to promote it as a review on ASR front page.... (purely theoretical, I know it'll never happen !!! ).

Am I potentially exposed to the furies of a mad manufacturer, with litigation threats, etc.? I'm not Amir and don't have all his credentials... I have no attorney friend either.

I think the governing principle is that you ultimately have to take responsibility for anything you post on a forum, or publish anywhere, which is just one of the reasons why it is always best to think first before writing.

I guess this is the internet though and if you really want to not take that responsibility another option might be to make identifying your true identity a harder task than normal resources can accomplish.

 

[amirm]

Let me create a new thread on thoughts on an organization I call for now, "Right to Fair Review" association. I think there is fair bit we could do to be more ready for the next incident like this. The organization could also represent all fields in which case, there would be a lot more demand for it than just for audio.

 

[Duke]

It has been the darkest time since I started this site.

We thank you for using your superpowers for good.

 

[Count Arthur]

If I were an indi reviewer, I would not want to lead with trying to establish a defense fund. (It can create its own headaches and can be established later.) I would lead with trying to set up regular communication among like-minded reviewers who share the common interest that a successful attack on one affects all of them. Those that really recognize that common interest will likely be willing to participate in some sort of roundtable meetings or alliance building. What to do is up to the group but my most urgent thought would be to rustle up a core group on the zoom, talk over what happened here, and ask if there's rough consensus that some collective preparation might allow more comfortable disposition of future disputes.

I'm sure y'all can think of useful things an alliance could do besides establishing defense funds. I can. But that's up to the group to hash out. Presuming this episode is now in post-acute care, if I were in Amir's or Erin's shoes I'd be keen to get my gang together to figure out how to prepare for the future. Pilots and ground crews have checklists to handle tricky situations.

Idk what back channels may have been established this week but it seems there were few at onset. I'd start with that.

As I am in fact not in Amir's or Erin's shoes, please dismiss anything I say as the presumptuois foolishness of an ill-informed bystander, as you see fit.

We could call it: Fund for United Critics, Keeping Observation Free and Fair.

 

[teched58]

Let me create a new thread on thoughts on an organization I call for now, "Right to Fair Review" association. I think there is fair bit we could do to be more ready for the next incident like this. The organization could also represent all fields in which case, there would be a lot more demand for it than just for audio.

One potential pitfall is that engineering types may be willing to preemptively give up/negotiate away rights that journalists already have, which the engineers are unaware of.

Engineers have an instinct for conciliation.

Journalists have an instinct for combat.

P.S. My final observation is that a group as described, made up of tech review types, will have to dedicate lots of time to coming up the learning curve, via interacting with lawyers and journalists, to understand the current lay of the land. If you don't think my comments on engineers, which point towards this, are relevant, all I'll say is: Have you read all the legal comments in this thread from people who say "I'm not a lawyer, but..."? I rest my case!

 

[KSTR]

Let me create a new thread on thoughts on an organization I call for now, "Right to Fair Review" association. I think there is fair bit we could do to be more ready for the next incident like this. The organization could also represent all fields in which case, there would be a lot more demand for it than just for audio.

FWIW, here in Germany we have an independent foundation that's been doing reviews of customer goods and services since 1964: https://www.test.de/unternehmen/about-us-5017053-0/
It is very popular and well-respected.
In all these years there weren't many lawsuits with manufacturers... and only very occasionally a manufacturer did actually win.

 

[DonM]

The videos from tekton with the tittle "Erin's Audio Corner and ASR [Audio Science Review] of Tekton Design Mini Lore" and "We are NOT suing anybody! are private at this moment

That's interesting. I had submitted a formal request to Youtube for removal of "We are not suing anybody" yesterday on the basis that it was misleading. My request included the respective authoritative evidence.

 

[kemmler3D]

If I were an indi reviewer, I would not want to lead with trying to establish a defense fund. (It can create its own headaches and can be established later.) I would lead with trying to set up regular communication among like-minded reviewers who share the common interest that a successful attack on one affects all of them. Those that really recognize that common interest will likely be willing to participate in some sort of roundtable meetings or alliance building. What to do is up to the group but my most urgent thought would be to rustle up a core group on the zoom, talk over what happened here, and ask if there's rough consensus that some collective preparation might allow more comfortable disposition of future disputes.

I'm sure y'all can think of useful things an alliance could do besides establishing defense funds. I can. But that's up to the group to hash out. Presuming this episode is now in post-acute care, if I were in Amir's or Erin's shoes I'd be keen to get my gang together to figure out how to prepare for the future. Pilots and ground crews have checklists to handle tricky situations.

Idk what back channels may have been established this week but it seems there were few at onset. I'd start with that.

As I am in fact not in Amir's or Erin's shoes, please dismiss anything I say as the presumptuois foolishness of an ill-informed bystander, as you see fit.

I think that's a solid idea.