Doctors Warned: Eliminating Online Reviews Poses Risks


Doctors who attempt to limit patients' ability to post online reviews about their medical care might be risking legal liability as well as ethics complaints, a group of law professors warns on a new site.

The site,, launched on Wednesday by the Santa Clara University High Tech Law Institute and The Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic at the University of California Berkeley School of Law, aims to counter the efforts of the 3-year-old anti-review company called Medical Justice.

When Medical Justice emerged, the company stunned proponents of free speech by devising a new way to discourage negative comments online. Rather than threaten patients with libel actions -- which tend to be difficult to prove -- Medical Justice decided to use copyright law to nix unfavorable reviews.



The company, conceived by Dr. Jeffrey Segal, drew up a contract for doctors to ask patients to sign. This form, called "Mutual Agreement to Maintain Privacy," purports to assign the copyright interests in any future reviews patients write to the doctors. In exchange, the doctors promise to protect patients from "unwanted marketing information" -- anonymous targeting by marketers.

If patients sign the forms and later post unflattering reviews, the doctors can go directly to the publisher's site and demand their removal.

The strategy can work because the immunity laws that protect online publishers when users upload unlawful material don't apply to posts that infringe on copyright. Instead, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's safe harbor provisions protect publishers from copyright infringement liability for users' posts, but only if the publishers take down material upon request.

Medical Justice's technique, however, drew criticism from digital liberties advocates. They question whether doctors should be presenting patients with these types of agreements. Now, some law professors are also warning that the strategy is legally questionable.

"We need doctors to understand that nothing comes for free. This particular form is not in their best interest," says Eric Goldman, director of the High Tech Law Institute. "Simply presenting the form to consumers might be an illegal practice," adds Goldman, who previously served as general to the review site The new Doctored Reviews site refers to a case in New York, where former Attorney General Eliot Spitzer took action against Network Associates (now McAfee), for including language in its terms and conditions requiring consumers to obtain permission to publish reviews. Spitzer obtained an injunction requiring the company to remove that language from its terms.

Medical Justice has not yet responded to Online Media Daily's inquiries about the new site. But Segal reportedly has said that doctors could use these contracts to convince sites to take down "fictional or fraudulent" posts by competitors or others. It's not clear why that's the case, however, because in that scenario whoever posted the review wouldn't be the same one who assigned the copyright to the doctors.

3 comments about " Doctors Warned: Eliminating Online Reviews Poses Risks".
Check to receive email when comments are posted.
  1. Wayne Spivak from SBA * Consulting, LTD, April 14, 2011 at 7:40 a.m.

    Doctors who are afraid of feedback are part and parcel of the medical mediocracy that is medical care in the US.

    It would be amazing how the behavior of the medical establishment would change should everyone have access to the ridiculous and annoying wait times and double booking (which got the airline industry into so much hot water).

    Wayne Spivak
    SBA * Consulting LTD
    <a href=></a>
    Twitter: @WSpivak

  2. Paula Lynn from Who Else Unlimited, April 14, 2011 at 9:08 a.m.

    Because there are more privacy issues at stake here, posts may need to be more edited, such as other patient names or staff names not involved in the complaint. They also need to be more detailed. Patients have the right to vent and express their experiences not just for themselves, but to forewarn future patients. That said, there are patients who expect more than medical personel are ever able to deliver.

  3. Mike Donatello from Opinions expressed are personal, April 14, 2011 at 11:55 a.m.

    Many, many patients have unrealistic expectations of medical professionals (e.g., arriving 20 minutes late and expecting to be seen without rescheduling; ignoring the possibility of procedural risks and then rushing to sue when complications arise). If I were a physician, I would quickly drop any patient who chose to post a one-sided review.

Next story loading loading..