DCS Sending Legal Notice To Reviewer (Golden Sound) Over an Old Review of Their Bartok DAC

peter_s

I don’t believe that DCS is being “driven to the ground” and (having some exposure to the company) do believe David’s explanation that the DCS USA employee acted independently and was indeed fired for these transgressions. The quality of the products speak for themselves.

I’m inclined to agree. It’s rather interesting how a vocal few have treated this as something approaching an international crisis. I suspect few of them were potential DCS customers anyway.

moto_man

Cameron, I have 35 years of high profile litigation experience in the defamation area and I’ll defend you for free.

What are you going to defend him against? There is no lawsuit. It's just a tempest in a teapot.

loomisjohnson

libel laws are tricky. to my understanding ...

Libel laws vary greatly by nation, and supposedly (according to @audio_phool) the companies involved here aren’t U.S.-based. Still, DCS behaved pretty poorly here before finally apologizing, and the YouTuber uses it all for clicks.

moonwatcher

... If I get say a Ford Mustang and I think it is a dog compared to a Dodge Charger, that is my opinion, take it or leave it. Ford can’t sue me for saying what I think, right?

They could sue you, although it would arguably be frivolous and it's highly unlikely they'd prevail. But anyone can be sued at anytime by anybody for just about anything.

Remember Monster Cable's threats against Blue Jeans Cable? That makes this DCS matter seem trivial.

audio_phool

... neither dCS is an American company nor Golden Sound is an American Resident, so First Amendment is not applicable in the first place.

Quite so. I didn’t know where Golden Sound was based. I didn’t bother to watch the 30-minute video. I thought the issue involved headphones.com, which appears U.S. based.

I tried to explain this to cleed by givig an example of Hong Kong but he is not able to understand

My response to your Hong Kong example was pretty clear:

Hong Kong is a whole different kettle of fish. Good luck to you though if you want to work towards passing any special protections in HK.

jastralfu

Audiogon can remove any post it wants ... YouTube can remove anything it wants for any reason.

Of course.

The First Amendment has no bearing here as this issue is between two private parties.

The First Amendment offers multiple protections for actions taken against you by a private party.

jastralfu

... the point is that it only applies to government restrictions not private parties ...

That is simply not true. The government cannot make any law that impinges on freedom of speech. For example, it can’t pass a law that says you can’t criticize Audiogon. That would be restricting your First Amendment rights.

(Strictly speaking, the government could pass a law saying you can’t criticize Audiogon. But such a law would be unconstitutional and would not withstand scrutiny in the courts.)

And in this case we’re specifically talking about speech not religion, the press, assembly or redress of grievances.

A YouTuber opining on the Internet is, functionally, the press. He’s protected under the First Amendment. But even if it were your post - a random, one-time post - you’d still be protected.

Of course this doesn't apply outside the US. As Americans, the First Amendment is a precious gift.

audio_phool

dCS MD David Steven has responded on the dCS forum. Here is the link.
https://dcs.community/t/a-response-to-recent-claims-regarding-dcs/6722

Thanks for sharing, @audio_phool. As a matter of public relations, this looks like one of "shared blame" and that the goldensound and headphone.com people are milking it for all of the drama and excitement that they can. After all, it's good for clicks.

jastralfu

The First Amendment has no bearing here as this issue is between two private parties.

The First Amendment is very much at issue here, and can certainly be invoked in cases of libel or slander. That is, what I publish is protected by the First Amendment notwithstanding your private (non-governmental) objections. Of course, the First Amendment is not an absolute shield against a claim of libel, but it’s a big hurdle to overcome.

audio_phool

Cleeds you are not talking about anyone outside US, what’s your solution there?

I understand you’re concerned with what could transpire in Hong Kong but that isn’t really a concern of mine. I’m ok with leaving that for you to resolve.

jastralfu

This amendment applies only to government restrictions on speech, specifically Congress shall make no law infringing it.

There is much, much more to the First Amendment than that. It actually has five major pillars.

audio_phool

I think you missed what I was getting at, you are going to have manufacturers and reviewers all over the world ...

Good luck to you in solving the world’s audio reviewing problems.

... just talking about the first amendment is irrelevant ..

It may be irrelevant to you, but the First Amendment is anything but irrelevant. As I noted, it protects those publishing in the US, notwithstanding your claim to the contrary:

First amendment is applicable only if both manufacturer and the reviewer are in US.

Those enjoying First Amendment protection would be foolish to compromise any of it by entering into any sort of agreement that would seem to appeal to you.

audio_phool

First amendment is applicable only if both manufacturer and the reviewer are in US.

That is completely mistaken. If you live in the U.S. and publish in the U.S, you are protected by the First Amendment.

... what if the reviewer was in Hong Kong ...

Hong Kong is a whole different kettle of fish. Good luck to you though if you want to work towards passing any special protections in HK.

audio_phool

... there needs to be some standard guidelines set for reviewers and manufacturers.
Because of the lack of regulation a manufacturer can pressure the smaller reviewers in not publishing the negative reviews. Or vice a versa ...

What would you do, dilute the First Amendment? There is already a process in place for dealing with things like this.