Update: There are some new wrinkles in this case. Original article: Let\'s say you left a negative comment on eBay. Maybe the seller does not deliver in time or they are not completely honest with the product. Whatever. When do you feel you need to delete or edit feedback? What if the buyer corrected their mistake or compensated you in some way. What then? Would you reconsider if the buyer sued you for compensation? An eBay seller sued a buyer after leaving a negative comment on the site and refusing to cancel-and the buyer did not give up. Negative feedback exceeded the unexpected $1. 44 postage. According to the complaint, Amy Nichols purchased the microscope parts from Med Express on February. Due to the purchase, Nichols generated the freight ( In addition to the purchase price of $175, there are $12). Med Express accepted her payment via PayPal and shipped the device. An extra $1 when it arrives at Nichols. 44 postage due. Who\'s on the right? Is there any reason for the seller (or business) Sue for negative comments? Should the buyer be instructed to cancel the review? Is it all about something that can prove defamation? Where are you drawing lines? Let us know in the comments. Nicholls, operating under eBay\'s name chimera _ studios, was released on February 26, \"orders arrived at postage without prior communication from the seller. This is a negative feedback on eBay. Med Express quickly responded, \"Sorry-not sure the postage is due. This happened a lot (sp) Recently from USPS Med Express has been rated 298 in the past year, only 2 of which are considered negative. Their percentage of positive feedback was 99. 3%. \"When informed of the issue, Med Express immediately offered to reimburse Nichols for the postage. Despite this offer, before giving Med Express a chance to repay her, February 26, 2013 was clearly the result of $1. 44 postage due, posted negative feedback and comments on the transaction on eBay website, and gave Med Express low rating in the detailed seller rating section of eBay feedback forum, resulting in negative feedback from Med Express. In doing so, Nichols made false and deliberate slander of the good reputation of Med Express. Med Express went on to say that Nichols caused irreparable harm to them and lost their customers and income. They seek not only the ban on removing negative feedback, but also damages ( Both punitive and retaliatory). There seems to be no dispute over the facts of the case. In a letter to Med Express, Paul Levy ( Representative Nichols) It is clear that the feedback about them is true, and Med Express acknowledged this in communication with him. Litigation itself is the definition of frivolous. \"In a sense, what seems to be arguing between you and your client is that your client is willing to pay $1. 40 is a full display of the confession that Nichols should forgive. But the point she points out in the message to you is that the problem is not money, it is trouble. She said she was willing to pay $1. In terms of shipping, she also posted 40 feedback as the company that shipped the product should be able to do better. This view may or may be wrong, but it is not an infringement to cover it up and express it. Of course, there is no reason to seek damages, attorney fees and bans. \"When consumers consider whether to do business with Med Express, it is likely that they will consider this bullying,\" Levy said . \". \"In addition, the relief you seek is harmful to consumers. Your other potential buyers are interested in getting to know the history-over and over a period of time you use the shipper repeatedly, knowing the issues that may cause the user to have to pay the due postage. \"Remember the Med Express response to Nichols? \"This has happened a lot (sp) Recently from USPS? Of course, Levy does not think this is the most important part. All in all, Ohio law and the First Amendment prevent Med Express from filing a lawsuit for this negative review. EBay is not the only online place where comments are a problem for the court. A few months ago, a judge ruled that after she accused the company of stealing jewelry from her home, a woman had to edit part of her comments about contractors on Yelp and Angie\'s List. A later decision overturned the decision, ruling that her post was free of speech before it was proved to be defamatory. There are many far away In this case, and the impact in the above eBay case. On the one hand, the court cannot generally protect anything the commenter says under the umbrella of freedom of speech. This will open the door for false comments and plain light The lies against the enterprise attempt to smear. We know it\'s illegal. On the other hand, it is dangerous to set a precedent that companies can successfully win such lawsuits. At this point, the open season is a dangerous slope for Internet users and their legitimate complaints. Do we really want the court to be blocked by litigation for one thing? Sentences like \"God, the worst burger ever? What do you think? Where is the line? Do you think the eBay case we discussed is very dry? Can you foresee a situation where such things become more complex and the right decisions become more difficult to tell? Let us know in the comments.