Faced with a case between two competitors on the backdrop of digital accessibility, the Paris commercial court ruled that denigration on social networks is condemnable, when it is not based on a sufficient factual basis.
On November 27, 2023, the Paris commercial court made a landmark decision by ordering the company Koena, specializing in computer systems and digital accessibility, to pay substantial damages to its competitor, the company Facil’iti. . The first cited had broadcast degrading messages against the second, on social networks. The judge did not procrastinate.
Denigrating remarks from one competitor to another, on social networks
In 2021, the Koena company made harsh tweets about Facil’iti’s digital accessibility solution. According to Koena, that of its competitor did not meet the needs of people with disabilities and did not comply with the General Accessibility Improvement Framework (RGAA). She also launched a call for testimonials on social networks, to discredit her competitor’s solution.
“ Let’s stop the misleading messages! No, @FAcilit’I does not make its site accessible to people with disabilities, but only modifies the appearance of the pages: this solution does not meet the needs of Internet users »
“ So to be clear, @FACIL_ITI does not make #forms, #clickable images or other obstacles encountered by #Internet users with #disabilities accessible (our highlighting), and does not ensure compliance with the #RGAA! This is not a miracle #DigitalAccessibility solution! »
The two tweets in question.
Facil’iti asked Koena, on April 21, 2021, to remove her messages. But the attempt was successful, which justifies the referral to the Paris commercial court. The latter, in his judgment, recalled that denigration consists of spreading malicious information with the aim of harming a competitor, regardless of its accuracy. The judge also underlined the absence of neutrality and moderation in Koena’s comments, referring to the term “untruthful”, used according to him ” without sufficient factual basis and without measurement “.
Justice decides and sets limits
The court insisted on the fact that the use of the term “digital accessibility”, praised by Facil’iti, is not exclusive to only those actors subject to the RGAA. The benchmark, imposed on the State, local authorities and certain companies, is not the only method here to achieve this famous objective of accessibility.
The Koena company was ordered to pay 11,256 euros in damages to the Facil’iti company in compensation for the material damage suffered, to which must be added 5,000 euros for moral damage, and 10,000 euros for of article 700 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Facil’iti demanded more than 115,000 euros in compensation. The judges considered that the two denigrating tweets, which accused Facil’iti’s solution of not complying with accessibility standards, exceeded the limits of free criticism, due to a lack of nuance and factual basis.
The conviction we are telling you about today highlights the importance of accountability in public criticism, particularly in the area of technology and accessibility. Companies must exercise constructive criticism and avoid excessive statements that could harm the image of their competitors, if they do not want to be caught by the patrol.
Source : Legalis
3