Manufacturer threatens lawsuit over negative review

Audio Gear Talk dCS
28

After reading headphones.com official response to this statement, speaking directly with Andrew Lissimore and carrying out an internal investigation, I have since discovered that parts of this statement were incorrect I am deeply sorry to learn this. My statement was issued in good faith and based on information I believed to be accurate. I have since discovered that certain information regarding this matter, provided to me by an individual at dCS, was not correct. This individual no longer works at dCS

We will be reaching out to Cameron to confirm that no legal action will be taken and to apologise for any distress that this situation has caused.

Torben

11 Likes
29

One can certainly have an opinion about a company’s ethics even if one didn’t purchase their goods and isn’t planning to.

12 Likes
30

Just what I wanted to say really. :+1:

I’d say I’m a bit of a fan and follower of dCS, and see them and their products as aspirational. (The admittedly older stuff of theirs that I’ve heard has always impressed - some of the finest sources I’ve heard.) I’d also say I enjoy the content of a number of online reviewers and take an interest in that space.

I was very pleased to see the latest response to this from dCS. Had a feeling someone had ‘gone rogue’ and overstepped the mark.

1 Like
31

The sh.t hit the fan and someone had to pay.
Problem mitigated, bussiness as usual.

2 Likes
32

Sadly, dCS was on my wish list, not anymore. I would also not buy a Tesla anymore either. This action by dCS is not a good PR move and will hurt them more than this reviewer’s opinion (review). I don’t understand a lot of what he is saying. Staying with my Lumin U1-X

1 Like
33

I watched the youtube a few days ago and it seems to me that dCS is a little (lot) arrogant. There have a reviewer who Im sure would be happy to work with them to improve their product and all they do is lawyer up. He’s a reviewer who i will now follow, the all positive reviews to me are really suspicious and hard to take seriously, im not interested in puff pieces, i want honesty.

2 Likes
34

After reading some reviews on their dacs, I was going to audition a couple of the dcs dacs. Not anymore.

35

not at all good. Having said that, the final reaction from dCS is ‘correct’ and they clearly had some internal communication problems, and lack of guidance from the top to senior managers about their approach to negative reviews.

It looks like a very, very small group of people causing the problem (1 person ?) that was compounded by poor communication and possibly a disconnect between US and UK on ethics.

As I say, I think their final response is fine, and so does Cameron, so if they learn and correct the weaknesses then fair enough. I think it was essentially triggered by “one bad apple” who is supposedly now removed…

3 Likes
36

The problem is that trust, like respect, is hard won and easily lost.

Without implying (or even knowing) about the the scale of the damage caused by this incident, it may take a long time for it to be repaired.

6 Likes
37

I have also never heard of the Streisand effect. [Moderated]

38
4 Likes
39

Wow, SHAME on dCS. Shame on you guys. I have a dCS Rossini Apex, but this kind of behavior is beyond unwelcome. So much to me that I will no longer buy any more dCS products. You guys are so concerned about bad reviews? Well you just created the ultimate bad on on yourselves.

2 Likes
40

Yeah, they all say this kind of thing once they get caught behaving poorly. Had they not been caught none of this would have been done or said.

It’s corporate malfeasance. And it’s easy to disavow when you say it was a ‘rogue employee who wasn’t acting in accordance to your wishes’. Just blame the bad egg and move on huh dCS? That ploy is old and unproductive.

This whole thing rubs me the wrong way. As audiophiles we want honest, upfront reviews of gear and how it sounds. We rely on reviewers and publications to be honest. And when they’re all walking on eggshells because companies are litigious over a whiff of a bad review everyone loses.

Of all companies. The industry leader feels threatened so much they need to levy threats against a reviewer? That just says so much about the industry that disgusts me.

3 Likes
42

This all bewilders me…I remember viewing Goldensound’s MQA expose, which turned out to be fatally flawed, and vividly remember the combative tone, aimed at fuelling a fire, and engagement.
dCS is a small company, of excellence…what is the value here? Is innovation so widespread we can afford to diminish another creative company?
Why is anyone sympathising with an opportunist vs a company that actually makes stuff? I can go to a local bar and hear opinions.

5 Likes
43

This is how I read it too.

I doubt David Steven would have claimed a meeting was held between Cameron, dCS and Andrew Lissimore to resolve matters unless someone had categorically told him such a meeting had taken place.

It would seem the former VP of sales and marketing had overstepped the mark numerous times, then lied to his bosses when questioned about it.

The MD has acted swiftly once fully availed of all of the facts.

One individual can do an awful lot of damage to an organisation, especially when that individual holds a relatively senior post.

I don’t think it’s fair to hold grudges against dCS. The tone of the communications from its MD is a world apart from the litigious, threatening verbiage in the original emails and letters sent to Cameron. dCS has done the right thing, and rid itself of a toxic individual whose behaviour is clearly at odds with the company’s culture.

The old adage is so true - it only takes the one bad apple.

I wish dCS the very best and hope the business can recover from the adverse publicity this unfortunate chain of events has generated.

23 Likes
45

You should flock to social media to decry the use of such an unknown phrase to denote self-perpetuating negative attention :slight_smile: (see also: recursion)

EDIT: clarified due to missing word, cheers @Johan_Mak

46

It is wise to respect history. Clues to the present.

1 Like
47

I read the note from dCS managing director. I can appreciate frustration from a vendor when a reviewer accesses their product without their knowledge and doesnt involve them in properly configuring the product for tue review, which is what dCS claimed happened. This can be frustrating because high end audio reviews should involve the manufacturer for proper setup, and if this review was using an unoptimized setup the review can be misleading. Its a tough situation. In no way should a threat of litigation come in, however IF the reviewer knowlingly didnt follow common protocol and they refused to work with dCS to address the shortcomings in the review, then there could be some fault on both sides.

There’s always three versions of every story:

The victims version
The accused’s version
The real version.

48

Herr Heeren,
Social decrying? Do you invent this term yourself? Try to make your point in clear English, please.

59

Now it makes sense.
By the way: I did not mean to write anything bad about Barbara Streisand.
@S_Heeren, Thanks for the addition of the missing word

Nu begrijp ik het.
Tussen haakjes: ik had niet iets gemeens in gedachten voor Barbara Streisand.
@S_Heeren, Dank voor het toevoegen van het ontbrekende woord.