3 ms·
It's easy to make an attack on a politician and dismiss things, but I think it's much more likely that someone (Bob Ferguson) is trying to set a precedent on cr
by orik 12y ago
It's easy to make an attack on a politician and dismiss things, but I think it's much more likely that someone (Bob Ferguson) is trying to set a precedent on crowdfunding and their obligations to the funders.
- nostromo 12y agoMakes sense. But they should wait for a better case. This seems like a founder that underestimated the amount of time and resources required to start a company and produce a product. It sucks, but it happens. Maybe a better case would be the guy that lit the backer rewards on fire because he got tired of their pestering. (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/73258510/sad-pictures-for-children/posts/759318 https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/73258510/sad-pictures-f...)
- jamesaguilar 12y agoI dunno. If I were the AG, I'd want to go after someone who was mentally competent to defend themselves. Everything I'm reading about this Pictures for Sad Children guy seems to indicate that he's at a minimum severely depressed and perhaps not quite all there. Plus, there seems to be near zero chance of recovering damages, and a default judgement does little to establish precedent.
- BryantD 12y agoNah. Ed Nash had the art, he had USPCC print the proofs; the only remaining thing he needed to do was give USPCC money. He didn't. His backer tiers were similar to other card deck backer tiers, so it's not like he didn't get enough money from the Kickstarter. He either kept the money or (more likely) spent it on some other aspect of his promotion business earlier, in the hopes that he'd get the money to print the cards from somewhere else. Kickstarted card decks are really simple and low risk as long as you have the art. USPCC does a couple of dozen of these every year.