Yelp hands over user info in jewelry store defamation case [Updated]

Yelp has handed over account information for a previously anonymous account, named "Linda G," to a Massachusetts jeweler seeking to sue the user.

The company was ordered by a municipal court judge to hand over the user's name and address after Boston-based Pageo Jewelry provided documentation to Yelp and to the court indicating that the user's review may be false.

Public Citizen's Paul Levy, who had taken the case on Yelp's behalf, told Ars Technica that after seeing Pageo's documentation at a hearing, he's off the case. A Yelp spokesperson said that the company has complied with the court's order.

"Yelp goes to great lengths to protect its users' rights, and that includes making sure that businesses comply with all necessary legal requirements when it comes to taking their critics to court, including providing legally sufficient evidence in support of their claims," Yelp PR Manager Rachel Walker told Ars via e-mail. "We went to court in this case after the business refused to provide the evidence the First Amendment requires, and eventually succeeded in having the business provide the facts they believe support their case."

The user behind the Linda G. account deleted her account after Yelp handed over her information, which resulted in the deletion of all her reviews, including the one in dispute. She later created a new account, also named Linda G., which has posted a "not recommended" review on the Pageo Jewelry Yelp page. It reads in part:

I have been a customer in this store many many times in Newton, Boston and Nantucket and have purchased many pieces in this store in FACT I wrote an honest review on here and it has become quite controversial, in the news, in the globe and in several places on line... These people have taken yelp to court to find out who I am to sue me using their own family member as an attorney who is a personal injury attorney."

These people stated I was a "yelp terrorist", a "natzi". Both not true as in the records I indicated that I wanted nothing from them in return..

YOU cannot get blood out of a stone , but I will gladly fight for my rights and the rights of others in the United States of America and in this case the state of Massachusetts. Shame shame shame.

Neither Pelz nor attorneys for Pageo Jewelry responded to requests for comment. The user behind the Linda G account didn't respond to an inquiry sent via Yelp's messaging system.

“No idea who she is”

In court papers (PDF) demanding Linda G's identity, Pageo lawyers describe Linda G's statements as "a bizarre series of convoluted fictions" without "an iota of truth."

"I have read Linda G's postings and I have no idea who she is," states Pageo co-owner George Pelz in his affidavit (PDF). He's tried to communicate with her to find out "what exactly she is talking about," but, "unfortunately, she has simply responded with further attacks on me and my business."

Linda G claimed to have been a loyal customer who spent "100s of thousands of dollars" at Pageo, but Pelz told the court that "consumers who spend large amounts of money at our store are few and we know them well."

She also describes selling some of her jewelry back, which is a "very rare event" at Pageo, Pelz explains. "We are not a pawn shop." Pelz would "expect to know" a customer who had sold goods back. Finally, in her review, Linda G claimed to have met Pelz at a fundraiser, which Pelz has no memory of.

"I have a physical condition which unfortunately is exacerbated by the emotional distress this has caused me," he says. "This has been extremely stressful to be publically [sic] humiliated and bullied by a person who I have no idea who she is."

Pelz's sister and Pageo co-owner Pam Lerner Swartz submitted her own affidavit, echoing Pelz's points—she has no idea who Linda G is, and any high-value customer also re-sold jewelry would be personally known to her.

Meanwhile, Linda G's original review was removed when the user deleted her account. The current Linda G account is a new one, and has been active on a Yelp Talk page, discussing the controversy. On September 23, she wrote:

I am ok with them knowing who I am, Scared because they are scary people, but believe that I will be fine since it is public. YOU dont know the whole story and sweetheart they have LIED, so they should be the ones that are worried. Have you ever heard of counter suing someone?

Pageo's lawyer, Tim Lynch, filed his own affidavit (PDF) saying that Yelp's statement to the court that it had offered to "meet and confer" was an exaggeration. Yelp responded to him only via e-mail, through an account identified as "Freida" from "Yelp Support."

"Yelp affiants do not inform the court that while they say they wanted to talk, they do not offer or supply a phone number to call," Lynch writes. He attached the correspondence, as well as e-mails with Paul Levy, to his affidavit.

Levy told Ars he tried to get the paperwork from Pageo before the hearing, but it wasn't forthcoming. "I would have made a judgment," he said. "Instead they dumped them [the documents] on us."

Levy says he went into the Pageo v. Doe case realizing the plaintiffs may put in affidavits that would change the nature of the case, and he no longer views it as a good test case for the rules around the anonymity of online reviews.

He also noted that Judge Robert McKenna, the Boston Municipal Court Judge overseeing the case, was visibly upset at him during the hearing earlier this month. Among other things, McKenna was bothered by the earlier Ars Technica coverage, which he described as "fanning the flames" of the dispute.

Update: On Sept. 24, after Yelp gave Linda G.'s user info to the plaintiff, jewelry industry publication JCK Magazine reported receiving an email communication from George Pelz in which he says he now knows who she is. Pelz said Linda G was a "marginal" customer who bought and returned some jewelry for full credit more than a decade ago. Pelz still insisted the review is still "fictional" because Linda G didn't sell the jewelry back.

Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated that Yelp deleted the original review. In fact, the original review was deleted by the user, when she deleted her original Linda G account and created a new Linda G account.

Yelp did delete one review written by the second account, because it violated the company's terms of service. A company representative explained that the deleted content was a link to the original Ars Technica article, which violates Yelp's content guidelines because it was not a review reflecting a personal experience.