Imo
a :
1 : There are refuted openings like Marshall Defense (with the confusion of two gambit variations which would not be refuted) or Latvian Gambit and there are trash openings like Damiano Defence.
These are really bad openings for players who actually want to improve their chess.
2 : London system and Caro Kann are openings that are played by GMs.
So these can't really be bad openings and it doesn't make much sense to think one dude who want to improve his chess can't do it with these openings.
b : If we are newbie (not in the meaning I am not gosu so I am a noob and a noob is a newbie so I am newbie because I am not gosu) Caro Kann, French, Pirc, Alekhine, Scandinavian even Sicilian in theory are not recommended because they don't sufficiently respect the basic principles of openings but normally we are not forever newbies so the idea that an opening is bad because of its low level only makes sense when we are newbies after that it becomes more subjective to say that an opening is bad and the opening doesn't matter as much (tactics, endgames, strategies can be much more important)
c : Opening can have a great psychological impact therefore it's up to us to choose an opening (among the valid ones) that we believe to be enough good (because when we win it's ok but when we lose if immediately afterwards we accuse the opening it's not ok).
d : Generally when we find our opening is ultimately not good we end up changing it and our old opening will have taught us.
c : The London system and the French Exchange variation there will be hatred, rage or annoyance (I mean to me it's not a rumor) but "Caro Kann is so hated", I have to have faith in dude trust me.
There's room for a variety of approaches in chess, and the best opening is the one that suits your taste and helps you enjoy the game.