|
|
|
|
|
by sologoub
3936 days ago
|
|
First of all, I'm expressing an opinion, which you are free to disagree with, and, in fact, your disagreement is just an opinion as well, which you are fully entitled to and I thank you for sharing. That said, the evidence is that this case sets the following precedents:
- Failing a project could lead to substantial liability, even exceeding the amounts collected. (Previously, failing a project led to reputation damage and likely inability to raise more funding.)
- Backer funding is being treated as pre-paid goods/services and is essentially a loan. (I'd call it interest-free loan, but there are fees involved in payment processing and refunds.)
- Rewards are considered merchandise or goods sold. (Does this open the door for sales/use taxing? There could be other implications here, such as need to register to collect/remit these taxes.) Crowdfunding started as a way to give ideas and less formal ventures a shot at becoming something. The amount of money now involved is definitely sizable and the fraudster comment you made speaks to that. Unfortunately, the formalization and the precedents here will likely change the spirit of crowdfunding very rapidly and make it a lot less appealing to legitimate projects. Fraudsters will likely find ways to skirt these precedents by establishing corp structures or what not that will shield their personal assets from much of the civil liability. To me, this is a sad day. |
|