Yelp Cannot Misrepresent Its Filtering Methods.

Yelp operates a website that serves as a free social media website and search engine, available to the public at no charge. Users who register may post reviews about local businesses, and can rate a business using a star rating of one to five stars, with five stars being the highest rating. Yelp constantly battles the problem of unreliable reviews, which generally are reviews written by friends, employees or relatives of the business being reviewed, paid reviews, and negative reviews written by business competitors. As a result, Yelp developed filtering software with the aim of identifying reviews likely to be unreliable. Plaintiff owns a restaurant and for several months purchased advertising on Yelp’s website. Plaintiff sought an order enjoining Yelp from making any statements concerning its filter which were untrue or misleading, filtering user reviews on the Yelp website while falsely advertising that the unfiltered reviews posted were fair, trustworthy, or unbiased. Yelp filed a special motion to strike pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, which the trial court granted. On appeal, plaintiff argued that under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.17, if an action is prosecuted solely in the public interest, the action is not subject to the provisions of the anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16. The Court of Appeal reversed, stating: “We conclude that the commercial speech exemption of section 425.17, subdivision (c) applies to Yelp’s statements concerning the accuracy and efficacy of its review filter, and therefore find the trial court erred in granting Yelp’s special motion to strike under section 425.16.” (Demetriades v. Yelp, Inc. (Cal. App. Second Dist., Div. 1; July 24, 2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 294, [175 Cal.Rptr.3d 131].)