Proposal: Right to Fair Review (RFR) Association

[ayane]

I love this idea. Btw @amirm in your OP you made the initialism RFA/RFAA. Do you mean RFR/RFRA?

 

[delta76]

It is absolutely not fun to see the threats toward ethical & honest reviewers, but it will be worse if those threats materialized in lawsuits. Thanks for stepping up and doing the right thing Amir. Reviewers like you and Erin are rare, and should be/must be protected by the freedom of speech

 

[Salt]

Not a good idea as methodology is not developed enough

Disagree: SOTA means as good as possible at time, not infinitively.

 

[rdenney]

In any situation leading to litigation, and from my non-lawyer perspective, there are two things one must ascertain: 1.) is the law favorable to my defense, and 2.) do I have a good set of facts?

So, the first service of such an organization would be to provide a library of the characteristics of the laws in every state (starting with key states and building from there) so that reviewers could know their rights and responsibilities.

The second service is that initial consultation to determine whether one has a good set of facts for defending against a threat. This would help address the need for a local lawyer licensed in the state in question if a case actually goes to court. If a reviewer doesn't have a good set of facts for whatever reason, they can strategically retreat before things get out of hand.

This might lead to a third tier of service, which may be standardized response letters that are vetted for (or general to) every state, and available to members. The response letters would apply when a reviewer is challenged directly by the manufacturer, as was the case this week. Until there is a lawsuit, there is no requirement for a legal response--so this first response, if provided at all, should probably just claim rights appropriately without undermining good faith or a future defense.

The next level is a letter from from the manufacturer's lawyers. This is to me on the bubble of what standard response letters could cover--help from lawyers needed on how to efficiently respond to a "lawyer letter." Most lawyer letters I've seen are mere threats or fishing attempts, and the result of, "I want you to sue X!" "Well, Mr. Y, I don't think you have a case against Mr. X, but I could write a letter if you like just to see if he'll back off."

The first communication that actually demands a response to avoid a judgment is a lawsuit, which must be formally served. That's when the consultation will pretty immediately lead to finding a lawyer with jurisdiction in the state in question. Members would be advised to never respond to a lawsuit themselves--use a lawyer. At least in a lawsuit the plaintiff has to make their case well enough for the defendant to be able to respond in good faith. Three weeks seems to be the usual allowed response period.

The notion of setting review standards (beyond ethical standards) would be the intent to always have a good set of facts, but I think it would be too restrictive in practice and would homogenize review approaches too much. The whole point is for reviewers to be free to act in good faith, not to follow some prescription that would make their reviews like everyone else's. But there may be some standard language that would help them avoid undermining their position inadvertently.

I believe that individuals reporting their personal experiences with a product they possess is already pretty well protected in law. It's the "professional" reviewers--reviewers who have some visible claim to expertise sufficient to make their reviews authoritative--that have greater exposure.

Rick "just some suggestions for structure" Denney

 

[Mnyb]

Can reviewers register their LLC in the state with the best laws for this situation ?

 

[valerianf]

I am not sure that a new organization is needed to handle audio devices reviewing.
Audio devices are not much different than computers equipments.
Rtings and hundreds of websites are reviewing computer peripherals and they survived since many years.
How do they handle the manufacturers that are not happy with the review conclusion?
May be ASR website needs to be registered in a state that has friendly laws for critical reviews.

 

[ZolaIII]

Disagree: SOTA means as good as possible at time, not infinitively.

You have right to disagree of course. Should we go to court now?
Thing is how methodology progresses the earlier reviewed equipment which didn't go trough such rigorous scientific methodology process on such grounds didn't had a fair review. And that's a lot of equipment and don't mind regular folks like you or me but suddenly OEM's and brand manufacturers would gain real rights to complain about it and in that same association and beneath and behind of it simply as such association exists. That are broader implications to consider.

 

[Salt]

You have right to disagree of course. Should we go to court now?
Thing is how methodology progresses the earlier reviewed equipment which didn't go trough such rigorous scientific methodology process on such grounds didn't had a fair review. And that's a lot of equipment and don't mind regular folks like you or me but suddenly OEM's and brand manufacturers would gain real rights to complain about it and in that same association and beneath and behind of it simply as such association exists. That are broader implications to consider.

Agree, but. If SOTA technology is thrown onto equipment measured with older ones this should be reflected, not?

 

[kemmler3D]

Most lawyer letters I've seen are mere threats or fishing attempts, and the result of, "I want you to sue X!" "Well, Mr. Y, I don't think you have a case against Mr. X, but I could write a letter if you like just to see if he'll back off."

Indeed, a lot of people seem to be under the impression that receiving a C&D actually requires them to do something. When in fact, ignoring it or replying with a big middle finger emoji are often both perfectly adequate responses.

The notion of setting review standards (beyond ethical standards) would be the intent to always have a good set of facts, but I think it would be too restrictive in practice and would homogenize review approaches too much. The whole point is for reviewers to be free to act in good faith, not to follow some prescription that would make their reviews like everyone else's. But there may be some standard language that would help them avoid undermining their position inadvertently.

I agree that homogenizing review style, structure, or content would be an unwanted or at least unnecessary outcome. But giving reviewers a clear guidance on "here's what you need to do to stay on the right side of the law and win a lawsuit if it ever happens" can only help. Going beyond that would be too editorial for my taste.

 

[Ze Frog]

Potentially a great idea, especially if you can get a large swathe of other reviewer's from outside interested. Could actually lead to more honest reviews and others actually reviewing rather than influencing.

 

[ZolaIII]

Agree, but. If SOTA technology is thrown onto equipment measured with older ones this should be reflected, not?

No there are things that simply still don't have any sense are not adopted not to mention standardised so a lot more work to be done. But there is a lot of progress driven by hard work of pioneers. It never whose easy to be pioneer in anything, audio is actually on harder side from what you even can imagine with all the subjectiv Dioniz poetic influence along with "magic properties" and so on. If you want to go Apollonian you need to stay on that side no matter how tough things may become. So support yes and more of it but such association no.

 

[CedarX]

US only? Do the physical residence of the reviewers and where they post the review--which website, where is the site "located" (if there is such thing on the internet) play a role here?

 

[Salt]

No there are things that simply still don't have any sense are not adopted not to mention standardised so a lot more work to be done. But there is a lot of progress driven by hard work of pioneers. It never whose easy to be pioneer in anything, audio is actually on harder side from what you even can imagine with all the subjectiv Dioniz poetic influence along with "magic properties" and so on. If you want to go Apollonian you need to stay on that side no matter how tough things may become. So support yes and more of it but such association no.

But this is all not on topic of OP, is it?

 

[CapMan]

How much legal obligation falls on the equipment provider (Klippel / AP) to demonstrate the efficacy of their gear?

Interesting point of case law in the UK right now relating to a huge miscarriage of justice by the Post Office based on the presumption that computers are reliable (in this case the software was faulty)

https://www.benthamsgaze.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/briefing-presumption-that-computers-are-reliable.pdf

Probably going off topic - sorry!
(not a lawyer !)

 

[ta240]

This guy does automobile reviews and has opinions. He says anything on YouTube and he is still there.

The larger the company the more filtered and measured their response typically is. Small audio businesses don't tend have the layers of people between the initial, emotional reaction and public statement. Nobody at Nissan will contact you in the heat of the moment, it will be their attorneys that send the first communication and by then they will have had time to fill the company people in on all the possible outcomes and how strong their case is.

 

[tomtoo]

My first thought: you'd need a LOT of lawyers because there's not telling what state a hypothetical action could be filed. And laws are different state to state.

I'm still thoroughly convinced that this is something blown way out of proportion. Some idiot rants about suing. OK, go ahead, buddy. You'll do that right after your ABX test showing you can hear the difference between silver and copper?

It's a solution to a non-problem, IMO.

That problem is not as long you stay in the subjective realm. I can say this speaker sounds for me like a peace of grilled sh#t for me. But if i measure the measurements are always arguable.

 

[ZolaIII]

But this is all not on topic of OP, is it?

Yes it is if you look at it broad and open minded as those are all things you will run on too in real world.
Simply said you, me her (especially her) have right on their own opinion even if they know that's not exactly correct thing and they push it no matter what. Such things should never become cort subject but sometimes they do. Every good judge knows it's doxa and will try to nicely ask them to settle it out of court but it's only that much he can do.
Have a nice time and enjoy.

 

[ta240]

... OK, go ahead, buddy. You'll do that right after your ABX test showing you can hear the difference between silver and copper?.....

Things like that remind me of Michael Fremer talking about being an expert witness in a court case. He was literally allowed to tell the jury what they were about to hear and shockingly they heard what they were expecting to hear and his side won.

 

[SimpleTheater]

@amirm Just let me know what you need financially and you've got it. Please do this after 11pm ET any night, so I can sneak into my Dads bedroom and take his wallet and return it before he wakes up. Thanks for starting the process to protect reviewers!

 

[amirm]

US only? Do the physical residence of the reviewers and where they post the review--which website, where is the site "located" (if there is such thing on the internet) play a role here?

If we can get help from attorneys overseas, we could have coverage there as well.