OLG Cologne on a “one star” rating of a competitor

The Cologne Higher Regional Court has ruled that a rating of a competitor with one out of five possible stars on Google without any discernible reason (in this case merely professional contact) could constitute a sweeping disparaging value judgment within the meaning of Section 4 No. 1 of the German Unfair Competition Act (UWG) and thus lead to a warning by the competitor.

Key Facts

Cologne Higher Regional Court decides that a negative review without a recognizable reason can be considered disparaging.
A rating of one out of five stars is not regarded as a mere expression of opinion.
The evaluation is based on a factual core combined with a subjective opinion.
Inadmissible abusive business criticism is deemed to exist if there is no factual reference.
Negative reviews can have considerable legal consequences and costs.
There are numerous legal rulings on this subject that should be observed.
Careful consideration should be given to negative reviews on Google, especially for competitors.

(1) The evaluation of a competitor by awarding one of a possible five stars in an Internet service is a general disparaging value judgment within the meaning of Sec. 4 No. 1 UWG even if a professional contact existed, but this contact was precisely no recognizable basis for the evaluation.
2. star ratings of entrepreneurial services on Google profiles are not understood by the addressed public as a pure expression of opinion, but as a personal evaluation of a service actually used (cf. BGH, judgment of March 1, 2016 – VI ZR34/15 – jameda.de). In this respect, such evaluations contain a factual core to which the subjective evaluation is linked. A general disparagement which, in the absence of information about the specific circumstances to which the disparaging statement relates, does not reveal this factual reference, is exhausted in the disparagement and is therefore inadmissible entrepreneurial defamatory criticism (BGH, judgment of 19.05.2011 – I ZR 147/09 – Coaching-Newsletter; BGH, judgment of 12.12.2013; OLG Frankfurt, judgment of 27.03.2014 – 6 U 75/12; OLG Frankfurt, decision of 15.07.2021 – 6 W 40/21).

The bottom line is that you should always think twice before giving someone else, let alone a competitor, a negative review on Google. In the meantime, there is a whole series of relevant decisions on the subject complex and a quickly typed assessment can result in a rat race of trouble and costs.

Author: Marian Härtel

Marian Härtel ist Rechtsanwalt und Fachanwalt für IT-Recht mit einer über 25-jährigen Erfahrung als Unternehmer und Berater in den Bereichen Games, E-Sport, Blockchain, SaaS und Künstliche Intelligenz. Seine Beratungsschwerpunkte umfassen neben dem IT-Recht insbesondere das Urheberrecht, Medienrecht sowie Wettbewerbsrecht. Er betreut schwerpunktmäßig Start-ups, Agenturen und Influencer, die er in strategischen Fragen, komplexen Vertragsangelegenheiten sowie bei Investitionsprojekten begleitet. Dabei zeichnet sich seine Beratung durch einen interdisziplinären Ansatz aus, der juristische Expertise und langjährige unternehmerische Erfahrung miteinander verbindet. Ziel seiner Tätigkeit ist stets, Mandanten praxisorientierte Lösungen anzubieten und rechtlich fundierte Unterstützung bei der Umsetzung innovativer Geschäftsmodelle zu gewährleisten.