New European Rules To Ban Fake Consumer Blogs And Amazon Reviews

from the always-ways-around-it dept

A few years back, a glitch at Amazon made it clear that plenty of authors were giving their own books anonymous positive reviews. This eventually resulted in Amazon putting in place new policies that tried to ban anonymous reviews. Apparently "fake reviews" like that, as well as fake consumer blogs claiming to be happy customers of a product, will now be banned in Europe. Of course, while it may seem like a good idea to ban fake reviews claiming to be from customers, where to draw the line gets pretty tricky. As is noted in the comments to that article, how do you deal with endorsements from celebrities who have never used the product they're endorsing? Or, what if it's a family member who puts up book review, rather than the author him or herself? It may seem like a good idea, but it seems impossible to really stop the process of fake reviews. Eventually, if stories come out about people or companies putting up fake reviews, it will cause damage to their brands -- and that level of self-regulation seems likely to be more effective than any law. Update: A good comment below suggests that the Times Online (the source of the original article) has got the details wrong, and the directive isn't nearly as bad as described.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 12 Feb 2007 @ 12:56am

    and this will be enforced how exactly?

    link to this | view in thread ]

  2. identicon
    John Middleton, 12 Feb 2007 @ 1:31am

    To be honest, I think the article has it wrong - DG SANCO of the European Commission, which deals with health and consumer protection, recently published its new Green Paper on reviewing the EU's package of consumer regulation. I have read their proposals and could see nothing in there that would have the effect this article has proposed. They do want to bring software sales and eBay-esque auctions into formal consumer laws, something The Times should have covered - how do you make some randon eBayer understand the hideous complexity of EU consumer protection laws. But as far as making writing false reviews illegal, I think not even the EU with their slightly twisted understanding of the internet would propose something that ridiculous.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  3. identicon
    Enrico Suarve, 12 Feb 2007 @ 2:12am

    Perhaps its just to make a statement

    I'm not sure if the times have it wrong or not as per post 2 but it seems reasonable to me to say "this is wrong and against the law"

    You don't have to actively look for offenders for a law to be worthwhile - it just gives you a little extra clout when they are found out. Case in point Amazon - they were only found out by *accident*

    Hotel reviewers as per the article will still be able to post false reviews but if they are found out will possibly get more of a slap

    Self regulation in industry fails far too often in my opinion "Honest we'll regulate ourselves - what's that? you don't like arsenic in your drinking water? eh?"

    If this is to become law I thinks its just a case of stating for the record it's not to be done.

    Think of it like the question on US entry visas "Are you currently or have you ever been a member of a terrorist organisation?" This would probably be the dumbest question to ask on a visa ever, if it were actually intended to catch terrorists (fair enough you might catch Richard Reid but he's a plank). The actual use of this question as far as I can figure is so that if you answer "no" untruthfully it's another nail in your coffin if you are captured - you just lied to the feds, and can be deported instantly for lying on your visa

    In short laws like this are not intended to stamp out a practice on their own, they are intended to make people think twice... "If you do this you are not being a bit naughty or 'using your initiative' - you are breaking the law..."

    link to this | view in thread ]

  4. identicon
    Shohat, 12 Feb 2007 @ 2:16am

    No need to enforce , only punish

    You can't enforce the illegality of murder either , only punish for commiting it .
    Just as simple . If a company gets caught , make it pay . No need to waste resources on enforcing it .

    link to this | view in thread ]

  5. identicon
    Bob Jones, 12 Feb 2007 @ 2:33am

    Another violation of free speech by the EU facists.

    Its perfectly legal to incite terrorism across Europe, I could go to France and stand in the streets yelling Bomb, Bomb, USA but god forbid I try to give a positive review of a book I have never read or a family member wrote - they best lock me up!

    link to this | view in thread ]

  6. identicon
    Enrico Suarve, 12 Feb 2007 @ 3:06am

    Re:

    Its perfectly legal to incite terrorism across Europe, I could go to France and stand in the streets yelling Bomb, Bomb, USA but god forbid I try to give a positive review of a book I have never read or a family member wrote - they best lock me up!

    One is freedom of speech as its basically a valid personal opinion, the other is basically a form of misrepresentation

    I'll leave it to you to figure out which is which ;0)

    link to this | view in thread ]

  7. identicon
    Shohat, 12 Feb 2007 @ 3:30am

    Re:

    Yes , there is a difference between fraud and free speech .

    link to this | view in thread ]

  8. identicon
    Overcast, 12 Feb 2007 @ 6:55am

    But still, it's thin ice... Next it will be a ban of blogs and other 'reviews' on various politicians.

    I'm no fan of a 'fake' review at all, but the sites - if they want to be seen a legitimate - should be responsible for that.

    Plus, if the server's in another country, how are they going to police this.

    It's just a big problem in general, everytime you turn around some government's saying "you can't say this...."

    At what point is the line drawn?

    link to this | view in thread ]

  9. identicon
    Don, 12 Feb 2007 @ 7:00am

    Site reviews are going to be a dinosaur soon

    I think that the "user review" feature on most sites will soon become another ignored item like banner ads and spam emails. Sure, some gullible buyers will still read and purchase based upon them (sadly, myself included). With no guarantees that the reviews are legitimate, more savvy shoppers will learn to ignore them altogether.

    Case in point, I recently bought an HP printer along with parts for a computer I was building. I'd never been burned by HP before, and they've always had good windows driver support. Turned out though that there were no 64 bit drivers for the printer and HP has no plans to develop 64-bit drivers for any of it's consumer printers. I went to the HP site and found that the printer in question has only 5 star glowing reviews (25 of them). I put in a review warning people about the absence of 64-bit drivers and gave the printer 1 star (since I couldn't use it). My review never showed up. Out of curiosity, I looked at several other HP products I owned and found that none of them had bad reviews. I tried posting a few more reviews and found that only those with praise of the product would show up.

    While it's probably no surprise that a company would set up a review system that only allowed praise for their products, it doesn't stretch too far to think that a retailer would do the same, especially if they were given an incentive by the manufacturer to do so (since we all know how ethical manufacturers can be).

    Amazon does not seem to be taking an active part in this type of private censorship. I believe they do censor some postings, since companies don't have to abide by free speech (the constitution is to protect people from the government, not private industry), it does make sense that they would want to censor some postings (for example hateful or vulgar content). But, will they some day? Money can be a strong factor. Plus, even eBay's feedback system is subject to fraud.

    While the internet has allowed people to expand the reach of their opinion and to extend the ability for information flow, the best bet people still have is to rely on the opinions of those they know and trust.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  10. identicon
    Overcast, 12 Feb 2007 @ 7:38am

    Actually, I think it leads people to a false sense of security.

    Soon, you'll see websites getting sued because it was a 'fake' review. Oh, I bought a new book and didn't like it - it was supposed to be fiction but it doesn't seem like fiction at all.

    But then, I really like the idea of Government telling me what to do, what to think, what to eat, what to believe, what to not believe, where I should work, when I should rest, what kinda of car to drive, what kinda of clothes I should wear, who I should sleep with, how to spend my leisure time, who I should accept, who I should reject...

    So yes, government should tell me what reviews are fake and which are true. I will believe it, of course; since it's law.

    But the face of Big Brother seemed to persist for several seconds on the screen, as though the impact that it had made on everyone's eyeballs was too vivid to wear off immediately. The little sandyhaired woman had flung herself forward over the back of the chair in front of her. With a tremulous murmur that sounded like 'My Saviour!' she extended her arms towards the screen. Then she buried her face in her hands. It was apparent that she was uttering a prayer.

    Yes... Government... our Saviour!

    link to this | view in thread ]

  11. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 12 Feb 2007 @ 7:39am

    This is one of the best articles written on teachdirt. I give it 5 out of 5 stars (*****). I highly recommend it!!

    link to this | view in thread ]

  12. identicon
    Gary Wallin, 12 Feb 2007 @ 8:04am

    EU Censorship

    It's not a good idea to censor books. And it makes little sense to censor book reviews. What next? Do they ban the self-promoting blurbs on the dust jacket written by the author's friends and supporters?

    The great blessing of freedom of speech is that it requires us to think critically about things we hear and read. We have the opportunity to be more than zombies digesting the pre-approved scripts of the authorities.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  13. identicon
    Enrico Suarve, 12 Feb 2007 @ 8:38am

    Still think its a valid move

    But then, I really like the idea of Government telling me what to do, what to think, what to eat, what to believe, what to not believe, where I should work, when I should rest, what kinda of car to drive, what kinda of clothes I should wear, who I should sleep with, how to spend my leisure time, who I should accept, who I should reject...

    Sorry I don't get this "The nasty government is telling me what to do all the time" tripe

    It's not like a law like this is telling you not to do something reasonable - they aren't telling you not to do something you enjoy or that should reasonably be interpretted as a right. They are telling you that it is unacceptable to be deliberatly misleading when selling a product

    That seems fair to me and it is their job after all - writing laws and all (its one of the things you pay/elect them for)

    No this is not going to be any substitute for consumers common sense - not much will be, ever. But this is saying that fake testimonials are bad

    I would assume in the above HP example it would be deemed that by only publishing positive feedback they are breaking this, again this seems fair to me

    No this won't be effective for companies with offices outside a country (I don't think it would actually matter where the actual server is based), but just because something won't fix ALL the problems in a system doesn't mean it shouldn't be used to try to address some of them

    That is if this is even a law (ref post 2)

    link to this | view in thread ]

  14. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 12 Feb 2007 @ 9:26am

    Wow, this is the second story today I've heard that the Times mis-reported on, and I've only read 3 stories today.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  15. identicon
    ehrichweiss, 12 Feb 2007 @ 9:58am

    stupid..

    As long as there are other reviews/blogs/sites that give opposing opinions on a product/service/blah then this is just a retarded take on things. I'm allowed to tout my product as kick-ass and so are my friends and family.....and so are the people who do not like it. If some retard wants to buy a product and doesn't know to search for "this product sucks" or "this product is a scam" then the problem isn't with the reviews. One must be willing to search for the bad as well as the good, and anyone who doesn't is likely the type that is so submissive that they will buy anything a salesperson tells them to.

    Of course this article is probably just to spread FUD since it's entirely unenforceable.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  16. identicon
    Joe Smith, 12 Feb 2007 @ 11:30am

    While they're at it

    they should make it illegal for politicians and bureaucrats to lie or falsely pretend they know what they are talking about when they don't.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  17. identicon
    Noel Le, 12 Feb 2007 @ 12:51pm

    not a big deal

    Which is preferable: folks on Amazon giving reviews for their own products, or Microsof "astroturfing" for reviews of Vista by giving away laptops? Both are lame, but as long as there is some media attention, I don't think either will get out of hand.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  18. identicon
    Overcast, 12 Feb 2007 @ 3:57pm

    Sorry I don't get this "The nasty government is telling me what to do all the time" tripe

    One step at a time, my friend - just wait until it's a law regarding something you are fond of.

    A new one everyday, isn't there? And none seem to give anyone *more* rights. Unless it's a corporation or the government - they are getting more rights all the time.

    They are telling you that it is unacceptable to be deliberatly misleading when selling a product

    And no, the law is far from reasonible. Who's to say if the review is really fake or not? Who will make that determination? And so what if it's decided in court 12 months after it was posted - how did that help anyone who read it and already purchased or did not purchase the item?

    Afterall the 'review' of a book is 'objective', right? Or is someone applying a mentality that it should be 'subjective'. Or are they saying what you should and shouldn't like - just because you don't like a book won't mean I won't like it either.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  19. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 12 Feb 2007 @ 5:24pm

    Fake reviews

    Bogus reviews are made more identifiable by sites like Yelp that allow you to view all the reviews of any particular yelper

    link to this | view in thread ]

  20. identicon
    |333173|3|_||3, 12 Feb 2007 @ 6:52pm

    A Typical EU Official...

    is said to have the organising capacity of the Italians, the flexibility of the Germans and the modesty of the French. He tops all that off with the imagination of the Belgians, the generosity of the Dutchand the intelligance of the Irish. Finally, for good measure, he has the European spirit of the English. (paraphrased from Yes Minister: The Devil You Know.

    Maybe noone should be able to legislate about the internet unless they have sufficinet technical knowledge to operate the Helldesk in the BOFH stories.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  21. identicon
    Enrico Suarve, 13 Feb 2007 @ 4:05am

    Re:

    One step at a time, my friend - just wait until it's a law regarding something you are fond of.

    I will and I do, Your logic seems to be that all laws should be fought regardless of worth as some might be bad? My logic is to only fight ones which I deem unjust or wrong - I don't see anything wrong with saying that being deliberatly misleading in an ad is against the law

    And no, the law is far from reasonible. Who's to say if the review is really fake or not? Who will make that determination?

    If it goes to court a jury of my peers would make this decision in the same way that they would for other laws, by weighing the evidence and assessing reasonable doubt.

    And so what if it's decided in court 12 months after it was posted - how did that help anyone who read it and already purchased or did not purchase the item?

    Same goes for any law - How does the prosecution of a murderer benefit the victim? It doesn't, it protects the rest of society from future attacks from the same perpetrator and hopefully discourages people from breaking the law in the first place - not all laws are enacted just to give the victim the ability to pocket cash

    After all the 'review' of a book is 'objective', right? Or is someone applying a mentality that it should be 'subjective'. Or are they saying what you should and shouldn't like - just because you don't like a book won't mean I won't like it either.

    Nope - its a review, a valid opinion either way an honest individuals ability to be subjective is not important and could not be legislated anyway. What the law (if it even exists) is saying as far as I understand is that posing as a customer and writing false reviews and/or hosting sites with review systems which are designed to be used in this way is wrong - and saying this is wrong seems right to me

    link to this | view in thread ]

  22. identicon
    Encompassed Runner, 17 Feb 2007 @ 11:53am

    Worse than Banning Fakes--Banning Real Ones...

    The fake positive reviews aren't so bad as long as critical reviews are also allowed as a check and balance. Unfortunately, with Amazon I have consistently had a problem with my reviews either not getting posted or being deleted (repeatedly, even after reposting) when it comes to products on Jews, Israel, or antisemitism. I've noticed that for Jimmy Carter's very anti-Israel and even anti-Jewish book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," very many negative but substantive reviews have disappeared, and the product page has been hijacked by a rash of vague 5-star spam reviews. My latest (and final if not corrected) problem with Amazon is their deletion (yet again) of my critical but accurate review of Martin Luther's antisemitic classic "The Jews and Their Lies." Their entire review system is dubious.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  23. identicon
    pervez, 22 Apr 2011 @ 2:22pm

    faking

    link to this | view in thread ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.