Another Abusive “Yelp Law” Lawsuit Fails–Scott v. Ulta

If you aren’t familiar with the mass-lawsuit campaign to weaponize California’s “Yelp Law,” Civil Code 1670.8, maybe start here to get up to speed. In short, California banned contract provisions that purport to restrict consumers from reviewing the business. Plaintiffs are now doing drive-by litigation, claiming that TOS provisions improperly restrict consumer reviews even when the TOS clearly does not say that. Previously, California appellate courts denied a private right of action for parts of the law. This ruling, also precedential, takes a different approach. It rejects the plaintiffs’ tendentious reading of the defendant’s TOS. By applying common-sense readings to TOS provisions, this case further thwarts the plaintiffs’ bar trying to turn the Yelp Law into a general purpose nuisance-litigation tool. Ulta’s TOS had the following two provisions: In the trademarks section: “ULTA’s trademarks and trade dress may not be used in connection with any product or service that is not…