5 ms·
I feel obligated to point out that you guys are discussing the exact issue that the case will hopefully set some precedent for: that is, what constitutes an acc
by saraid216 13y ago
I feel obligated to point out that you guys are discussing the exact issue that the case will hopefully set some precedent for: that is, what constitutes an acceptable delay.
My guess is that it will shake out that any delay is actionable for a suit, but communications are a mitigating factor. It depends a lot on what kind of defense Altius goes for.
- dragonwriter 13y ago> I feel obligated to point out that you guys are discussing the exact issue that the case will hopefully set some precedent for: that is, what constitutes an acceptable delay. We're really not, we're discussing what the suit actually says. What is actually an acceptable delay is a separate question.
- enjo 12y agoI would be SHOCKED to see this go to trial. Not over $25k. The money is long ago spent (I'd bet) so the whole thing is a real waste of time.
- zecho 12y agoI'm inclined to agree on the specifics of this case, but not in the abstract. Kickstarter and other crowd funding entities represent an interesting dearth of case law. Here, consumers aren't necessarily protected by either consumer laws or by investment laws. Considering large corporations have purchased Kickstarted projects and major films have been produced with crowd funding, these are very important issues to begin sorting out.
- dragonwriter 12y agoThe amount at issue in the suit isn't just the dollar value to make restitution to the victims (which itself might be more than just a straight refund), but also the $2k per offense civil penalty under the applicable consumer protection law. Depending on how offenses are counted under that law, the penalties may be more significant on their own than restitution.