This came up this morning. Should be highlighted in my opinion to discourage other manufacturers from attempting the same thing. TLDR: DCS Audio has threatened a 7-figure lawsuit towards GoldenSound for a negative review of one of their DACs. Beyond ridiculous… IMO
Video below goes over the details.
The Review in question is located here.
I was just checking out this video man. This is purely bulls**t by the brand. What did they thought of that the reviewer with such a good following take this lawsuit happily? strange.
Watching the video now.
Also, it seems that Linustechtips is offering help.
I’m always curious, what goes through these people’s heads that makes them come to the conclusion ‘Yep, this is a genius plan. No way this can backfire’
That said, has dCS released any statement of their own (might be a bit early though)?
Not a public statement. The video came out hours ago. I’m sure they will be scrambling to say something once they get notice of it, if they haven’t already.
And yeah, the PC space has had similar problems with manufacturers in the past. I’m not surprised they would be willing to offer help. It affects the youtube review space as a whole when manufacturers believe they can force positive reviews by threatening litigation whenever someone posts a negative review of a product.
I see the comment, nice!
dCS about to feel the wrath of the internet. Absolutely a clown play on their part. It’s obvious that nobody at that place took any time to think about how this would play out.
So…you have companies paying for positive reviews on one side…and now someone is trying to sue a reviewer for a negative one? FUCK YOU AND HOPE YOU BURN
Total shit. Sounds like a Hidisz move.they tried on me.
But Hidizs doesn’t sell $20k+ DACs 
So true they got pissy over a poorly tuned IEM. A 20k is something else.
This is going to be a riot of fun since dCS’s claims do not appear to hold water and since they were given ample opportunity to state exactly what things in the review that they had issue with and failed to do so after a very generous period of time. Moreover and depending on the State, they could be counter-sued for their potentially claimed damages times three simply for threatening to sue. I am not an attorney, but this is the way that I see it. They tried strong-arm tactics, ignored the context in which the review comments were made, ignored the fact that brief review quotes which were out of context were in fact posted by a third party and not the party who is the subject of their threatened lawsuit, and they ignored the fact that some statements, when reviewed in the context in which they were made, were not in fact about their own product. DCS instead decided that a legal shotgun technique was their best course of action, and that this was likely at the behest of a less than honorable attorney. The problem with a shotgun is that it can accidentally shoot the owner in the foot. Here, this would appear to be the case. I have no idea about dCS or their products, yet now dCS is burned into my brain with other companies from which I will never purchase products.
Total BS. dCS may think Cameron ruined its brand – he didn’t; it was a SUBJECTIVE review – but the company is doing a fine job destroying its reputation with these thin-skinned, heavy-handed, baseless threats.
I will NEVER even CONSIDER a dCS product after this. F*ck them.
Hoping more channels put a spotlight on this, totally BS - putting aside the facts that Cameron was right for the most part (hear me out for a second). There is a valid way to actually talk to someone if you have disagreement, THIS IS NOT IT!
This only “good thing” about this is it happen to someone who has a larger platform (i would consider headphone larger than most smaller reviewers (126K on the headphone show channel, and 40K on GoldenSound channel) and expose that kind of behavior. im really hoping that dSC get a world of hurt by this BS and show that this is not acceptable to any reviewer regardless of platform or subject matter (so long as the facts support it)
Kinda ironic that dCS manufactures audio equipment that replays artists and their music, music being one of the last bastions of free expression, being able to write what you want and perform it however you like without being chastised or censored.
Then along comes dCS flying in the face of all those honourable values is crazy just crazy, I really hope this is the first nail in the dCS coffin as bullying, control and censorship is never cool.
FUCK - I didn’t realise you and Goldensound were both equivalent in such victimization…
Did he also sell the ‘for review only’ issued dCS Bartok on the second hand market before it was commercially released as IIRC happened in your Hidizs tribulations… Did Hidizs actually send you a legal letter threatening a defamation claim or a theft/fraud claim…? Crazy stuff!!!
I thought the drama here was more equivalent to Erin & ASR’s issues with Tekton - provide a negative review - get told it’s factually wrong - offer to rerun tests or correct any mistakes if they can be pointed out (this shows good faith but does not need to be replied to as the claimant does not have to inform the alleged defamer and so weaken their potential legal case) - nothing was provided by the company - so reviewer doesn’t address the issue and keeps the review up - subsequently gets a legal letter relying on the defendant party to have shallow pockets, time limitations and anxious concerns to intimidate them (considering the capacity of the law firm dCS are using, that anxiety should be lessened) as the claimant knows if it goes to court it will likely be thrown out for frivility as the burden is on the plaintiff to show the falsity of the alleged defamation in Utah (and most US States) and in this case jurisdictional issues (Goldensound was based in the UK at the time of the review) in addition to the claimant probably wanting to play jurisdictional tourism and move the case to England where we see libel as a strict tort and so reverse the burden to the defendant. Looking not just at precedent that has changed substantially in the last 5 years to account for situations such as these (Lachaux v Independent Print) but also court sentiment - the High Court gave in it’s recent reviewer libel case of BW Services v Trustpilot which had a verdict handed down 3-4 weeks ago against the claimants attempt for damages & injunctive relief.
Problem is:
I am a previously mutli-jurisdictionally qualified but now non-practicing corporate solicitor who makes this disclaimer as libel was never my main practise area and I do not hold or know any/all the facts of this particular case so am just providing some positional commentary - birds view down - for the community - nothing here should be acted on by any parties without independent 3rd party legal advice.
Sorry but…
It’s been deleted and I respect that but it was a good point 
… I’ll be there and see what folk have to say?
“dCS are sponsoring an exhibiting at canjam London this weekend”…
I think high end audio is pretty cliquey/close way more than the ChiFi FOTM, fly by night please let me keep that $200 set and I’ll suck your cock reviewers.
I think some proper music lovers and dCS buyers find all this legal sabre-rattling uncomfortable and disconcerting
Saw the video too and agree, such a shame. I hoped that they’d find an amicable resolution with the email Golden sent them but it sounds like they cannot take constructive criticism. I mean they can’t think that the product will be a one-size-fits-all, this is a subjective hobby after all. I am hoping that they rethink things and have an open discussion and find common ground, otherwise if they keep charging ahead on this, dCS will keep loosing fans/customers and actually hurt themselves more than a respected, honest reviewer.
The engineers at dCS need to rise up and make sure the Sales and Marketing guy and his staff are ousted, and fire inside/outside counsel, and do it all very publicly if they want to save their company’s reputation.
Your not worth the effort LOL
