Some insights into manufacturers reactions to negative reviews.
Fortunately, this seems to have ended well.
8 Likes
Yeah I saw this it was insane. I really hope audio brands stop doing this. Apparently a speaker manufacturer called tekton has been causing issues for a YouTuber called Erinās audio corner too.
2 Likes
Ended better for the reviewer than the manufacturer, what a PR disaster, schoolboy errors.
7 Likes
I think before manufacturers would threaten magazines or websites they would remove their advertising from the publication or website. This canāt be done to you tubers so now they are trying to bully them via legal means. Not a new behaviour just a new way for some manufacturers to continue being unpleasant jerks.
3 Likes
I was sufficiently irked by this that I sent an email to dCS over the weekend saying how disappointed I was with the way they were handling this issue (if true), and am so pleased to hear that they have come to their senses. (Not that my email made any difference! 
)
6 Likes
These legal actions are happening all over YouTube, manufacturers threaten to sue any poor review in hopes of scaring them offā¦ and in many cases it works. Most of the reviewers do not have the means to protect themselves in court and legal departments know this. This approach can backfire and dCS is a perfect case study on not what to do.
18 Likes
Sadly, referring to them is verboten on the forum so any comments naming them will be removed by Richard. But I once saw a demonstration of theirs (and not naming anything, Iām hoping Richard leaves this) where ātheyā put a scope on a digital coax output. The output clearly had some noise with some voltage spikes which were never explained ā¦ because the presented of the said publication said, āsee these voltage spikes, thatās what jitter is on a digital connection and now you know what jitter is too!ā
I was just struggling for anything to say that did not include really vile insults and four letter words. I came up blank.
But it does highlight a problem I see with this hobby. It can be technical and the amount of details and knowledge is vast. More vast than even the most ardent qualified expert. But it is also knowledge presented like an iceberg. The amateur grasps just the tip of knowledge and thinks they know it all but they are unaware of the other 90% even exists in their ignorance. That publication is very much like that.
- The novice looks at subject matter and thinks, āThis is so complex. I hardly understand any of this.ā
- The moderately experienced person looks at subject matter and thinks, āIāve cracked it. I understand this. Iām an expert.ā
- Then, if they ever get over themselves to become an expert they look at subject matter and realise (again), āThis is so complex. I hardly understand any of this.ā
A lot of forum members are on the second of those categories too.
6 Likes
And the true experts say ā¦ every day is a school dayā¦ā¦
BTW I really donāt think consumer audio replay is unduly complex from an electronics and mechanics perspective. I think the psychological and cognitive perspective is likely where the true complexities lie.
Assuming a review is objective and substantiated, any company who aims to suppress this by using the courts should be boycotted in my opinion. The appropriate behaviour would be to challenge objectively or ignoreā¦ corporate bullying, vexatious claims or intimidation should end in failure for the company concerned.
A colleague of mine many many years ago had a web site name called easypeasy ā¦ with a graphic of a lemon aligned to the expression āeasy peasy lemon squeezy ā . It was a reseller website of gadgets and labour saving productsā¦ he started trading in the early 2000sā¦ Easyjet then several years later via their lawyers required him to change his name of his web site and businessā¦ he stood his groundā¦ though he felt intimidatedā¦ in the end I understand easyJet made him an out of court financial offer to buyout his nameā¦ which was accepted. Just goes to show if you are sure of your rights donāt let yourself be intimidated.
Parking fines where you have the evidence that you been wronged is another area you should always challenge if necessary in courtā¦ so many organization just donāt expect the common person to challengeā¦ and their cases collapse when you doā¦ again they rely on intimidationā¦ but that is another matter.
14 Likes
Iāve spent most of my life under the following two assumptions:
- Iām a moron.
- Eventually other people will also see it.
14 Likes
How happy is the moron,
He doesnāt give a damn.
I wish I were a moron,
My god, perhaps I am.
19 Likes
ā¦thank you Gordon
3 Likes
ā¦and as Naim have said (especially Steve S. IIRC), just because it tests better on a rig, it doesnāt necessarily mean it sounds better (the latter of course being a highly subjective evaluation in itself).
2 Likes
Iāve removed the dealerās video here. Would members please not post unauthorised links to commercial sites or their social media. Thanks.
1 Like
Absolutely 100% agree. Even if the review is stupid, wrong, or suspicious. Sadly, a lot of companies get in on heavy handed litigation these days.
Luckily in the UK with negative reviews. You can only seek a legal remedy for a negative online review if it is defamatory . Defamation is when a person or companyās reputation is harmed or is likely to be harmed by something false. Therefore if your review is stated as your opinion and not as fact unless you are sure of your facts then you are legally safeā¦ in the UK at least, and of course you take a company to civil court if they intimidate you or try and suppress your opinions through a vexatious claim.
2 Likes
I went to grammar school in the late 1960ās/early 1970ās & was constantly told that I, & my fellow pupils, represented the top 20% of the countries intelligence quota.
I have spent a lot of my life since then thinking āif I am the top 20%, god help usāā¦
16 Likes
Sadly itās all to common. A well known enterprise software company that Iām unable to name for reasons I wonāt go into, is known to make more money via litigation and taking other companies to court than it does from selling itās software. Their litigation team is considered a profit centre.
I wonder if ātheir ā disguised intention is to promote their own Chinese products and disqualify the west competition.
The grammar school certainly didnāt teach you grammar though! Sorry, I couldnāt resist.
5 Likes
Who knows. But this specific case, neither the manufacturer or reviewer come off great. Iād steer clear of the pair of them.
1 Like