Roving damage to reputation and moderating comments

[tanjimajuha20]

At the end of March, the Novosibirsk supplier of electronic components "Microsan" filed a lawsuit against the employer review service Dream Job, owned by HeadHunter, "for the protection of exclusive rights to a trademark", and at the beginning of May - a lawsuit against HeadHunter itself with a demand to remove from hh.ru the link to reviews about itself from Dream Job. This follows from the data of the arbitration case file.

As a source familiar with taiwan whatsapp resourcethe process explained to RBC, the essence of the claims is "defamatory comments" posted on HeadHunter and Dream Job. Currently, there is only one review about the company, and the rating on Dream Job is 4.7 out of 5, RBC has verified.

Another source familiar with the situation explained that Mikrosan had a rating on the HeadHunter website, which the company hid on its own. However, the standard explanation remained: "The employer hid their ratings, you can see them on Dream Job." Mikrosan is demanding that HeadHunter remove it as well.

Earlier, in November last year, Mikrosan filed a lawsuit against the territorial office of Roskomnadzor for the Siberian Federal District, demanding that access to information on the employer review site antijob.net be restricted. The court granted the claim, but in mid-June, the territorial office of Roskomnadzor for the Siberian Federal District filed an appeal. Negative reviews of the company are still posted on the site.

RBC sent a request to Mikrosan, HeadHunter and Roskomnadzor.

How to remove negativity from the internet
This is the first such dispute for HeadHunter, but various companies periodically sue other online players over negative reviews and comments. The outcome of such cases may depend on the content of the review or comment.

For example, in December 2022, Beaton, a manufacturer and supplier of asphalt concrete mixtures and concrete, filed a lawsuit against VKontakte and Yandex to declare user complaints that the company was harming the environment untrue and defamatory. In the case of VKontakte, the court initially rejected the claim, but in April of this year, it upheld the plaintiff's appeal and overturned this decision, obliging the social network to remove comments. Comments on a number of publications are currently closed. In the dispute with Yandex, the court sided with Beaton and ordered the comments to be removed, but this decision was overturned at the appeal stage. The court concluded that Yandex is not the author and distributor of the information; the authors of the comments do not transfer them to Yandex for distribution, but post them themselves. The dispute reached the Supreme Court, which returned Beaton's cassation appeal. When Sibprom had similar claims against 2GIS, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the court of first instance, which recognized the information as defamatory and ordered the service to remove it.