Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

<b><i>Online Extra:</b></i> Yelp Fends Off Suit Seeking Pay for Posters

By Marisa Kendall
August 31, 2015

Lawyers for Yelp Inc. scored a victory in August over plaintiffs who had demanded to be paid for reviews they posted to Yelp's website.

U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg of the Northern District of California ruled people who review businesses on Yelp cannot be classified as Yelp's employees and therefore are not entitled to compensation.

“Plaintiffs use the term 'hired' to refer to a process by which any member of the public can sign up for an account on the Yelp website and submit reviews,” Seeborg wrote, “and the term 'fired' to refer to having their accounts involuntarily closed, presumably for conduct that Yelp contends breached its terms of service agreement.”

Seeborg concluded it's reasonable to infer that reviewers don't perform any services for Yelp. At most, he wrote, they could be considered volunteers.

Yelp prevailed on motions to dismiss and to strike the suit under California's anti-SLAPP law. The company's lawyers also defeated motions for sanctions and for preliminary certification as a collective action. Seeborg granted plaintiffs leave to amend, though he wrote “it appears dubious that plaintiffs will be able to allege in good faith facts sufficient to show any type of employment relationship.”

Florida attorney Daniel Bernath, representing plaintiffs, had'claimed'Yelp profited on the work of unpaid writers and compared the company to a “21st century galley slave ship.”

Yelp, represented by its senior litigation director, Aaron Schur, and Pasadena solo Adrianos Facchetti, said in a statement the company was “happy to see common sense prevail in this case.”

Yelp users post on the website “because they want to spread the word about great local businesses in their neighborhood,” a representative wrote, “not because they expect payment.”

In an e-mail, Bernath blamed the outcome on home-field advantage. In May, Yelp won a bid to transfer the case from Los Angeles federal court to San Francisco, where the company is headquartered.

'

'


Marisa Kendall'writes for'The Recorder, an ALM sibling of Internet Law & Strategy. She can be reached at'[email protected].

'

Lawyers for Yelp Inc. scored a victory in August over plaintiffs who had demanded to be paid for reviews they posted to Yelp's website.

U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg of the Northern District of California ruled people who review businesses on Yelp cannot be classified as Yelp's employees and therefore are not entitled to compensation.

“Plaintiffs use the term 'hired' to refer to a process by which any member of the public can sign up for an account on the Yelp website and submit reviews,” Seeborg wrote, “and the term 'fired' to refer to having their accounts involuntarily closed, presumably for conduct that Yelp contends breached its terms of service agreement.”

Seeborg concluded it's reasonable to infer that reviewers don't perform any services for Yelp. At most, he wrote, they could be considered volunteers.

Yelp prevailed on motions to dismiss and to strike the suit under California's anti-SLAPP law. The company's lawyers also defeated motions for sanctions and for preliminary certification as a collective action. Seeborg granted plaintiffs leave to amend, though he wrote “it appears dubious that plaintiffs will be able to allege in good faith facts sufficient to show any type of employment relationship.”

Florida attorney Daniel Bernath, representing plaintiffs, had'claimed'Yelp profited on the work of unpaid writers and compared the company to a “21st century galley slave ship.”

Yelp, represented by its senior litigation director, Aaron Schur, and Pasadena solo Adrianos Facchetti, said in a statement the company was “happy to see common sense prevail in this case.”

Yelp users post on the website “because they want to spread the word about great local businesses in their neighborhood,” a representative wrote, “not because they expect payment.”

In an e-mail, Bernath blamed the outcome on home-field advantage. In May, Yelp won a bid to transfer the case from Los Angeles federal court to San Francisco, where the company is headquartered.

'

'


Marisa Kendall'writes for'The Recorder, an ALM sibling of Internet Law & Strategy. She can be reached at'[email protected].

'

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers Image

In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.