Complaint: medical "copyright over your comments" contracts are illegal

[DainBramaged]

When our own Timothy B. Lee stepped into a Philadelphia dentist's office earlier this year, he had an unpleasant experience: the dentist required him to sign over control of all copyright in future online commentary related to that dentist. Here's how Tim described the visit:

When I walked into the offices of Dr. Ken Cirka, I was looking for cleaner teeth, not material for an Ars Technica story. I needed a new dentist, and Yelp says Dr. Cirka is one of the best in the Philadelphia area. The receptionist handed me a clipboard with forms to fill out. After the usual patient information form, there was a "mutual privacy agreement" that asked me to transfer ownership of any public commentary I might write in the future to Dr. Cirka. Surprised and a little outraged by this, I got into a lengthy discussion with Dr. Cirka's office manager that ended in me refusing to sign and her showing me the door.

The contract in question came from Medical Justice, which claims to be "relentlessly protecting physicians from frivolous lawsuits." Over the last few years, the company has pioneered a strange niche in the medical business: providing contractual templates that first barred patients from commenting about their doctors online and later gave doctors the power to veto negative reviews.

Is this legal? The Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) filed a complaint today with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) arguing that Medical Justice was itself engaging in "deceptive and unfair business practices" through the sale of these contracts.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/11/complaint-medical-copyright-over-your-comments-contracts-are-illegal-1.ars

[Poll_Blind]

1. That's really disturbing. I wouldn't have imagined such audacity in a million years, either. nt

PB

[MedicalAdmin]

2. If a medical office has this form as a prerequisite to treatment...

Run, do not walk, away. It means that they fuck up on a regular basis and are desperate to control the public damage that their incompetence causes.

That is just my opinion but based on my experiences, our clings docs love it when someone does an online review because they know it is going to be positive. Results get that.

[FSogol]

3. +1 n/t

[EC]

4. Something like that would make me wary

of the dentist's work...if he has to go to extremes to protect his rep. If he were good, there would be no problem with good reviews being posted, but he's afraid of bad ones, why? Is he that bad?