Author Topic: After being shown evidence for fraud Indiegogo removes anti fraud guarantee  (Read 3047 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TommyGunn

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 34
  • Country: ca
http://pando.com/2014/04/03/after-pando-shows-clear-evidence-of-fraud-on-indiegogo-company-responds-by-deleting-anti-fraud-guarantee/

so yeah, this actually happened. I really think they are the reputation and future of crowd funding.
 

Offline CrosseyeJack

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 25
  • Country: gb
They haven't actually removed their anti fraud guarantee. If you read the wording it was never there in the first place. It isn't like igg would refund users if there perks never showed up. The old wording basically said that their system would detect all fraud which could leave igg in a tight spot if lawyers ever got involved.

The actual part that seems to "protect":-DD users is still there.
Quote
Indiegogo requires campaign owners to fufill their Perks as a part of our Terms of Service. Perks are manged solely by campaign owners; we do not guarantee or take any legal responsibility for Perk fulfillment. Contributors can use our Terms of Service as a document in the court of law, should you choose to take legal action against a campaign owner for failing to fulfill a Perk. 

Though igg say (and always have) that its up to the users to take action against campaign owners, but the old wording could also mean that if something slipped though igg's check they have bascially said "Yup, this checks out" when igg couldn't possibly to that with every campaign that goes though the site.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2014, 05:52:30 pm by CrosseyeJack »
 

Offline Legion

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 357
It's basically the same as Kickstarter's:

Quote
Kickstarter's Terms of Use require creators to fulfill all rewards of their project or refund any backer whose reward they do not or cannot fulfill. This information can serve as a basis for legal recourse if a creator doesn't fulfill their promises.
 

Offline 8086

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1086
  • Country: gb
    • Circuitology - Electronics Assembly
The naysayers re. crowfunding are the people that do not understand it. End of story.

Indiegogo changed their terms from the impossible to the possible. That's a good thing. This story is being used as an example by those aforementioned ignorant people.
 

Offline Bored@Work

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3932
  • Country: 00
The naysayers re. crowfunding are the people that do not understand it. End of story.

No, we are the people who have brains. We don't believe it is a good idea to hand our money over to some random potheads on the Internet with no guarantee at all to get the promised item in return. We also don't believe that the situation is improved by having a middleman in between, taking a significant share of the money, but otherwise giving a flying fart. Further, we don't believe it is a clever idea to promote the rise of a new type of breading ground for criminals.
I delete PMs unread. If you have something to say, say it in public.
For all else: Profile->[Modify Profile]Buddies/Ignore List->Edit Ignore List
 

Offline 8086

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1086
  • Country: gb
    • Circuitology - Electronics Assembly
The naysayers re. crowfunding are the people that do not understand it. End of story.

No, we are the people who have brains. We don't believe it is a good idea to hand our money over to some random potheads on the Internet with no guarantee at all to get the promised item in return. We also don't believe that the situation is improved by having a middleman in between, taking a significant share of the money, but otherwise giving a flying fart. Further, we don't believe it is a clever idea to promote the rise of a new type of breading ground for criminals.

I think 'naysayers' was the wrong word. If people understand the system and that there are no guarantees, there is no problem. I have concern about your 'brains' however since you decided to include 'potheads' when clearly that is not actually the case, or indeed at all relevant.

I'm talking about the people that think it's literally preordering and there is no risk involved, who then turn around and complain about things like the change to igg's terms as if they're being shady, when they're just bringing them in line with what is actually possible in reality.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2014, 05:23:49 pm by 8086 »
 

Offline CanadianAvenger

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 179
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf