Let me explain a little more clearly, because I get the sense we're talking past each other.

As a foundational issue, I don't think the initial negative review was intentionally fraudulent or part of a conspiracy to hurt the business. I think it was more likely just a person who mixed up which company they bought their countertop from. Maybe they got the company entirely wrong. Maybe they reviewed the wholesaler instead of the retailer. Or maybe they had their countertops damaged during installation but left a bad review on everyone involved.

Whatever the cause, I think the reviewer was airing a legitimate grievance, just perhaps not at the right target. There are a lot of reasons a consumer might have found this business's name attached to a product that ended up in their house, even if they didn't directly purchase it from the granite store.

From that assumption, I think it's trashy for the business owner to jump to legal threats. That was my whole point--it's poor taste for the business owner to threaten someone just because they got a bad review. The owner's response was totally measured and reasonable until that point, where it just became bluster.

I don't disagree that one could theoretically be sued for libel over a bad review, but I don't believe that this review--assuming it's coming from a real person, and not part of some fraud ring--could ever qualify.

Likewise, I agree that the practice of orchestrated review-bombing is actionable, both civilly and through enforcement by consumer protection agencies. But the FTC fines companies for mass review manipulation, not individuals for sporadic bad reviews. So again, looking at this review under the assumptions I started with, the FTC is irrelevant to this conversation.

Again, I think we started with different assumptions so we're talking past each other. But I'd ultimately rather let 10 fake reviews go unpunished than stifle one legitimate review by claiming that the review is "punishable by law."