This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MrOllie (talk | contribs) at 10:22, 23 August 2016 (rv blanket restoration of inappropriate sources). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 10:22, 23 August 2016 by MrOllie (talk | contribs) (rv blanket restoration of inappropriate sources)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | |
| Available in | English |
|---|---|
| Created by | Ed Magedson |
| URL | www |
Ripoff Report is a website founded by Ed Magedson. The Ripoff Report has been online since December 1998 and is operated by Xcentric Ventures, LLC which is based in Tempe, Arizona.
Reports and rebuttals
Ripoff Report allows users over the age of 14 to complain anonymously about any firm or person. The site requires creating an account before "reports" can be submitted but does not verify the identity of users. Reports are not automatically added to the website: they must be approved first. According to the site's Terms of Service, users are required to affirm that their reports are truthful and accurate, but the site says that it neither investigates, confirms nor corroborates the accuracy of submissions.
Companies or individuals who have been named in a report may respond with a rebuttal at the bottom of the same webpage, which explains their side of the story, if the rebuttal is approved by Ripoff Report. There is no charge to submit a rebuttal, but they must have a registered account. Alternatively, to "repair the reputation" because of something that is written in the website, Ripoff Report asks them to pay for investigations of complaints and responses carried out by "Ripoff Report's pool of Arbitrators", and to edit the webpage.
Operations
Ripoff Report sells ad space on its website and offers companies the option to pay for complaint investigations, which can cost from US$5,500 to over $100,000. It also offers an arbitration program.
The site says that, with the exception of cases that are decided against the complainant in arbitration, all complaints remain public and unedited and authors are not allowed to remove their own reports even in cases where a mistake has been made.
In May 2013, Ripoff Report started a new service called "Ripoff Report Verified" that offers companies with no prior complaints an option to become "Verified". According to an interview with Search Engine Watch, for $89 per month, "Once a verified business gets any negative complaints, they would be alerted via email about the negative reviews and will be able to discuss a resolution with the person that left the negative reviews."
Legal actions
By creating an account, a user agrees to exclusive venue in Arizona for any legal dispute arising from his or her posting. In June 2013, a federal court in Maryland found that that this agreement did not prevent a user from suing both the author of a report and Ripoff Report in Maryland, because the user agreement applied only to the rebuttal, not to the report.
In the Blockowicz v. Williams case, 675 F.Supp.2d 912 (N.D.Ill. 2009), a federal district court in Chicago found that Ripoff Report was not required to comply with an injunction to remove reports because it had not been named a defendant in the original lawsuit.
In website pages of Public Citizen, it was noted that Ripoff Report has received some criticism of its "Corporate Advocacy, Business Remediation & Customer Satisfaction Program," particularly whether Ripoff Report sufficiently discloses all facts that would influence the public's perception of the program.
In July 2013 the Government of India ordered a block on accessing the site. The block was removed the next month.
In May 2014 the Australian search engine Yahoo!7 blocked the Ripoff Report after multiple defamation complaints. It was unblocked after about a week.
Ripoff Report's publisher, Xcentric Ventures, LLC, sued consumers and their attorneys for malicious prosecution in federal district court in Phoenix, Arizona in 2011. In August 2015, the United States 9th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the case. The decision held "The claim (of extortion) was tenable because a district court had previously held that similar allegations stated an extortion claim against Xcentric," the 9th Circuit wrote in its order.
References
- ^ "WHY CORPORATE ADVOCACY: YOUR REPUTATION IS IMPORTANT TO YOU". Ripoff Report. Retrieved 2016-07-07.
- "Federal Document listing address". News.justia.com. Retrieved 2013-01-22.
- ^ "Ripoffreport TOS". Retrieved 12 September 2012.
- ^ Tanner, Adam (9 May 2013). "Love It Or Hate It, Ripoff Report Is In Expansion Mode". Forbes. Retrieved 14 December 2014.
Asked about a comment alleging another woman had herpes, Magedson responds: "This f—— broad probably did something." He laughs when told about the downturn at Sarah Van Assche Interiors. If so much money was at stake, Magedson says, she should have sued her accuser for slander or paid Ripoff Report its $2,000 fee to conduct an arbitration.
- http://www.ripoffreport.com/assets/arbitration/files/Arbitration_Rules_October_2015.pdf
- ^ http://www.ripoffreport.com/assets/images/content/Pages/CAP/example_ripoff_article_lucas_after.jpg
- "Synergy Capital & Insurance Complaint Review Gardena, California: 624941". Ripoff Report. Retrieved 2014-02-09.
- "VIP Arbitration Program. Remove Rip-off Report? Better yet! Ripoff Report VIP Arbitration Program. Reputation Repair & Reputation Management services can't deliver. Complaint Review Tempe, Internet, Arizona: 626838". Ripoff Report. Retrieved 2014-02-09.
- This stated policy is disclosed to users in the site's Terms of Service: "ROR is a permanent record of disputes, including disputes which have been fully resolved. In order to maintain a complete record, information posted on ROR, subject to the Terms outlined herein, will not be removed. By posting information on ROR, you understand and agree that the material you post will become part of ROR's permanent record and will NOT be removed even at your request." (3 July 2016)
- Pierre Zarokian (18 July 2013). "Ripoff Report Launches Verified, a New Program to Shield Businesses From Negative Reviews".
- "Ripoff Report Verified". Retrieved 4 July 2016.
- John C. Greiner (2013-06-25). "Is a Ripoff a minimum contact?". Lexology. Retrieved 2014-02-09.
- Blockowicz v. Williams, 675 F.Supp.2d 912 (N.D.Ill. 2009), the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
- "Florida Appeals Court Recognizes That Section 230 Immunity Extends to Injunctive Relief — Even When the Content Provider Collaborates in Seeking an Injunction (CL&P Blog)". Pubcit.typepad.com. 2011-12-29. Retrieved 2014-02-09.
- http://www.citizen.org/documents/Giordano-Amicus-Brief-(2).pdf
- "Govt lifts ban from consumer complaint website". Daily.bhaskar.com. Retrieved 2014-02-09.
- "Yahoo7 Australia Drops Ripoff Report From Search Results After Defamation Complaints". Search Engine Land. 14 May 2014. Retrieved 16 December 2014.
- "Ripoff Report Is Back In Yahoo Australia's Search Results, But Not Completely". Search Engine Land. 23 May 2014. Retrieved 16 December 2014.
- http://www.courthousenews.com/2015/08/25/ripoff-report-publisher-hammered-in-9th-circ.htm
External links
- Sullivan, Bob (January 6, 2006). "Scam-fighting Web Sites". MSNBC.com.