Did you read the article you posted? Note the judge's ruling was was based on the specific wording around "ordering" a product, and not necessarily indicative of what might apply in a situations where its a donation, pledge or deposit.
"The words of District Judge Clark:
That document is important in my view for this reason: it says 'this order'. Not 'this pledge' but 'this order' has been successfully added to your campaign. That would appear to be something that was probably in my view provided by Indiegogo but there’s no clarification of that. It makes it clear, 'this is an order'. This was successfully added to your campaign. This is the information that was provided to the claimant at the time.
As far as the defence of the defendant is concerned, at no stage do they deny there was effectively an agreement to provide the Vega Plus. Their defense is very much on the basis of, 'we’re going to produce it, he’s going to get it, it’s just a bit late'. There was an estimated delivery date of September 2016."
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
If a creator is unable to complete their project and fulfill rewards, they’ve failed to live up to the basic obligations of this agreement.
This part here is very critical and really not speaking in your favor. Because on KS they made it sound like they only needed the KS money to finish the game in 2017.
Clearly they failed the basic obligations they stated on KS.
Lol, you should read the whole thing.
And can we move on? I'm more than willing to go over this whole TOS with you, if you want on DM, but we've been asked to move on from the topic.
You mean the part where he explained that it was always obvious to him that the KS money would never be enough?
But yes let's move on, you guys will always defend him on this and arguing over that is pointless.
To me he is just a blatant liar and liars don't get second chances or the benefit of the doubt from me.
You are too emotionally invested in this to have a rational conversation.
Did you read the article you posted? Note the judge's ruling was was based on the specific wording around "ordering" a product, and not necessarily indicative of what might apply in a situations where its a donation, pledge or deposit.
"The words of District Judge Clark:
That document is important in my view for this reason: it says 'this order'. Not 'this pledge' but 'this order' has been successfully added to your campaign. That would appear to be something that was probably in my view provided by Indiegogo but there’s no clarification of that. It makes it clear, 'this is an order'. This was successfully added to your campaign. This is the information that was provided to the claimant at the time.
As far as the defence of the defendant is concerned, at no stage do they deny there was effectively an agreement to provide the Vega Plus. Their defense is very much on the basis of, 'we’re going to produce it, he’s going to get it, it’s just a bit late'. There was an estimated delivery date of September 2016."
As I mentioned and Kefo added, there are other cases regarding crowdfunding that have shown that, even with "pledges", a creator can be held liable if they mislead backers or are dishonest about the current situation/plans of the project with their backers.
If a creator is unable to complete their project and fulfill rewards, they’ve failed to live up to the basic obligations of this agreement.
This part here is very critical and really not speaking in your favor. Because on KS they made it sound like they only needed the KS money to finish the game in 2017.
Clearly they failed the basic obligations they stated on KS.
Lol, you should read the whole thing.
And can we move on? I'm more than willing to go over this whole TOS with you, if you want on DM, but we've been asked to move on from the topic.
You mean the part where he explained that it was always obvious to him that the KS money would never be enough?
But yes let's move on, you guys will always defend him on this and arguing over that is pointless.
To me he is just a blatant liar and liars don't get second chances or the benefit of the doubt from me.
You are too emotionally invested in this to have a rational conversation.
And you are bias free and neutral about this project.
If a creator is unable to complete their project and fulfill rewards, they’ve failed to live up to the basic obligations of this agreement.
This part here is very critical and really not speaking in your favor. Because on KS they made it sound like they only needed the KS money to finish the game in 2017.
Clearly they failed the basic obligations they stated on KS.
Lol, you should read the whole thing.
And can we move on? I'm more than willing to go over this whole TOS with you, if you want on DM, but we've been asked to move on from the topic.
You mean the part where he explained that it was always obvious to him that the KS money would never be enough?
But yes let's move on, you guys will always defend him on this and arguing over that is pointless.
To me he is just a blatant liar and liars don't get second chances or the benefit of the doubt from me.
You are too emotionally invested in this to have a rational conversation.
And you are bias free and neutral about this project.
Never said that, but that doesn't mean I'm not able to have a rational conversation without emotions getting in the way. You've made it clear in this post, you have a personal grudge against them, and are unable to have a rational conversation.
I'm asking for very simple evidence. I'll even simplify it further. Show me a case where a court ruled that the Kickstarter TOS is invalid. You know why I know this hasn't happened? Because kickstarter would of changed their TOS if that had happened, like they have in the past.
You aren't ordering a game when you back something through crowdfunding. No product exists yet at all, only the idea that one will get developed if enough people support it. All the perks and final bonuses from the packages are nothing more than incentives. I don't understand people who back crowdfunding campaigns and then try to get refunds, what's the point? If you're of the opinion your investment failed and is beyond salvaging then move on. You can't go to a company and request a refund after the stock you invested in tanks.
And with crowdfunding if you fail to deliver then you need to either give refunds, start posting your books online to show backers you spent the money wisely or come up with a plan on how you are going to deliver something that is close to what you promised all those people that gave you money.
Show me where there are guarantees in any Kickstarter? There aren't any because there can't be. To Kickstart is to help get an idea into production. Some will succeed, some will fail, it is the way of business. If you don't believe in the product don't donate to kickstart it.
I am not sure why anyone would financially support something that states there is no refund policy just to cry later that they can't get a refund. I mean really? Talk about feeling entitled.
If a creator is unable to complete their project and fulfill rewards, they’ve failed to live up to the basic obligations of this agreement.
This part here is very critical and really not speaking in your favor. Because on KS they made it sound like they only needed the KS money to finish the game in 2017.
Clearly they failed the basic obligations they stated on KS.
Lol, you should read the whole thing.
And can we move on? I'm more than willing to go over this whole TOS with you, if you want on DM, but we've been asked to move on from the topic.
You mean the part where he explained that it was always obvious to him that the KS money would never be enough?
But yes let's move on, you guys will always defend him on this and arguing over that is pointless.
To me he is just a blatant liar and liars don't get second chances or the benefit of the doubt from me.
You are too emotionally invested in this to have a rational conversation.
And you are bias free and neutral about this project.
Never said that, but that doesn't mean I'm not able to have a rational conversation without emotions getting in the way. You've made it clear in this post, you have a personal grudge against them, and are unable to have a rational conversation.
I'm asking for very simple evidence. I'll even simplify it further. Show me a case where a court ruled that the Kickstarter TOS is invalid. You know why I know this hasn't happened? Because kickstarter would of changed their TOS if that had happened, like they have in the past.
To me it's not about the TOS of KS but about the faith in a developer. If the developer has been caught lying then I don't support them - period.
You aren't ordering a game when you back something through crowdfunding. No product exists yet at all, only the idea that one will get developed if enough people support it. All the perks and final bonuses from the packages are nothing more than incentives. I don't understand people who back crowdfunding campaigns and then try to get refunds, what's the point? If you're of the opinion your investment failed and is beyond salvaging then move on. You can't go to a company and request a refund after the stock you invested in tanks.
And with crowdfunding if you fail to deliver then you need to either give refunds, start posting your books online to show backers you spent the money wisely or come up with a plan on how you are going to deliver something that is close to what you promised all those people that gave you money.
Show me where there are guarantees in any Kickstarter? There aren't any because there can't be. To Kickstart is to help get an idea into production. Some will succeed, some will fail, it is the way of business. If you don't believe in the product don't donate to kickstart it.
It just won't end...
They are selling a product. People are making a PURCHASE. This is self-evident in the screenshot Dleatherus showed... Also, Kickstarter ended in 2016.
We have shown the opinion of the American Bar Association about the TOS... We have shown the FCC rules related to internet commerce...
At this point it's obvious some folks just won't budge. That's fine.. but can we not all just agree to move along until a few weeks pass and we start again? If anyone WANTS a refund... go get one. If nobody in this thread wants one.. let's go forward!
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
At this point it's obvious some folks just won't budge. That's fine.. but can we not all just agree to move along until a few weeks pass and we start again? If anyone WANTS a refund... go get one. If nobody in this thread wants one.. let's go forward!
Well, I will be damned Slapshot, we finally agree on something. hehe
Did you read the article you posted? Note the judge's ruling was was based on the specific wording around "ordering" a product, and not necessarily indicative of what might apply in a situations where its a donation, pledge or deposit.
"The words of District Judge Clark:
That document is important in my view for this reason: it says 'this order'. Not 'this pledge' but 'this order' has been successfully added to your campaign. That would appear to be something that was probably in my view provided by Indiegogo but there’s no clarification of that. It makes it clear, 'this is an order'. This was successfully added to your campaign. This is the information that was provided to the claimant at the time.
As far as the defence of the defendant is concerned, at no stage do they deny there was effectively an agreement to provide the Vega Plus. Their defense is very much on the basis of, 'we’re going to produce it, he’s going to get it, it’s just a bit late'. There was an estimated delivery date of September 2016."
As I mentioned and Kefo added, there are other cases regarding crowdfunding that have shown that, even with "pledges", a creator can be held liable if they mislead backers or are dishonest about the current situation/plans of the project with their backers.
I can only address the posted examples. I have been unable to find case decisions specifically related to refunds of deposits or donations.
My guess is very few exist or could be considered precedence setting.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Did you read the article you posted? Note the judge's ruling was was based on the specific wording around "ordering" a product, and not necessarily indicative of what might apply in a situations where its a donation, pledge or deposit.
"The words of District Judge Clark:
That document is important in my view for this reason: it says 'this order'. Not 'this pledge' but 'this order' has been successfully added to your campaign. That would appear to be something that was probably in my view provided by Indiegogo but there’s no clarification of that. It makes it clear, 'this is an order'. This was successfully added to your campaign. This is the information that was provided to the claimant at the time.
As far as the defence of the defendant is concerned, at no stage do they deny there was effectively an agreement to provide the Vega Plus. Their defense is very much on the basis of, 'we’re going to produce it, he’s going to get it, it’s just a bit late'. There was an estimated delivery date of September 2016."
As I mentioned and Kefo added, there are other cases regarding crowdfunding that have shown that, even with "pledges", a creator can be held liable if they mislead backers or are dishonest about the current situation/plans of the project with their backers.
I can only address the posted examples. I have been unable to find case decisions specifically related to refunds of deposits or donations.
My guess is very few exist or could be considered precedence setting.
Did you read the article you posted? Note the judge's ruling was was based on the specific wording around "ordering" a product, and not necessarily indicative of what might apply in a situations where its a donation, pledge or deposit.
"The words of District Judge Clark:
That document is important in my view for this reason: it says 'this order'. Not 'this pledge' but 'this order' has been successfully added to your campaign. That would appear to be something that was probably in my view provided by Indiegogo but there’s no clarification of that. It makes it clear, 'this is an order'. This was successfully added to your campaign. This is the information that was provided to the claimant at the time.
As far as the defence of the defendant is concerned, at no stage do they deny there was effectively an agreement to provide the Vega Plus. Their defense is very much on the basis of, 'we’re going to produce it, he’s going to get it, it’s just a bit late'. There was an estimated delivery date of September 2016."
As I mentioned and Kefo added, there are other cases regarding crowdfunding that have shown that, even with "pledges", a creator can be held liable if they mislead backers or are dishonest about the current situation/plans of the project with their backers.
I can only address the posted examples. I have been unable to find case decisions specifically related to refunds of deposits or donations.
My guess is very few exist or could be considered precedence setting.
For example, I "donate" considerable amounts of money to my church, am I entitled to a refund if the pastor suddenly goes way off message?
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Did you read the article you posted? Note the judge's ruling was was based on the specific wording around "ordering" a product, and not necessarily indicative of what might apply in a situations where its a donation, pledge or deposit.
"The words of District Judge Clark:
That document is important in my view for this reason: it says 'this order'. Not 'this pledge' but 'this order' has been successfully added to your campaign. That would appear to be something that was probably in my view provided by Indiegogo but there’s no clarification of that. It makes it clear, 'this is an order'. This was successfully added to your campaign. This is the information that was provided to the claimant at the time.
As far as the defence of the defendant is concerned, at no stage do they deny there was effectively an agreement to provide the Vega Plus. Their defense is very much on the basis of, 'we’re going to produce it, he’s going to get it, it’s just a bit late'. There was an estimated delivery date of September 2016."
As I mentioned and Kefo added, there are other cases regarding crowdfunding that have shown that, even with "pledges", a creator can be held liable if they mislead backers or are dishonest about the current situation/plans of the project with their backers.
I can only address the posted examples. I have been unable to find case decisions specifically related to refunds of deposits or donations.
My guess is very few exist or could be considered precedence setting.
Basically, misleading or misrepresenting the product, your current resources, plans and progress opens you up to litigation from backers.
EDIT- the court quoted phrase appears to be "deceptive tactics."
Do you guys read the sources you post?
This guy literally lied about hiring several artist. Spent money on moving to Oregon, rent, miscellaneous equipment, and licences for a separate project.
I find it weird, that out of dozens of games that have missed their kickstarter dates, and the millions of people who have backed these games, many with no refund policy...
And you can't find me one example of a lawsuit that has been successful because of missing the kickstarter date.
I think maybe this entire thread is better tabled for a month than to talk about legal issues with crowdfunding. Who knows, maybe SBS will have something substantive to update us with then.
I find it weird, that out of dozens of games that have missed their kickstarter dates, and the millions of people who have backed these games, many with no refund policy...
And you can't find me one example of a lawsuit that has been successful because of missing the kickstarter date.
I think if you look at the Star Citizen stuff you may find relevant info
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Did you read the article you posted? Note the judge's ruling was was based on the specific wording around "ordering" a product, and not necessarily indicative of what might apply in a situations where its a donation, pledge or deposit.
"The words of District Judge Clark:
That document is important in my view for this reason: it says 'this order'. Not 'this pledge' but 'this order' has been successfully added to your campaign. That would appear to be something that was probably in my view provided by Indiegogo but there’s no clarification of that. It makes it clear, 'this is an order'. This was successfully added to your campaign. This is the information that was provided to the claimant at the time.
As far as the defence of the defendant is concerned, at no stage do they deny there was effectively an agreement to provide the Vega Plus. Their defense is very much on the basis of, 'we’re going to produce it, he’s going to get it, it’s just a bit late'. There was an estimated delivery date of September 2016."
As I mentioned and Kefo added, there are other cases regarding crowdfunding that have shown that, even with "pledges", a creator can be held liable if they mislead backers or are dishonest about the current situation/plans of the project with their backers.
I can only address the posted examples. I have been unable to find case decisions specifically related to refunds of deposits or donations.
My guess is very few exist or could be considered precedence setting.
Basically, misleading or misrepresenting the product, your current resources, plans and progress opens you up to litigation from backers.
EDIT- the court quoted phrase appears to be "deceptive tactics."
Do you guys read the sources you post?
This guy literally lied about hiring several artist. Spent money on moving to Oregon, rent, miscellaneous equipment, and licences for a separate project.
Do you read the posts you respond to? Pretty sure I clearly denoted the point at which creators open themselves up to litigation. When the creator offers misleading information about the project or misrepresents something about the project to backers, they become liable.
How much market research you think it would take to make a convincing argument that no reasonable person working in the industry would truly believe an MMORPG can be created in two years for less than, what, 5 million?
Did you read the article you posted? Note the judge's ruling was was based on the specific wording around "ordering" a product, and not necessarily indicative of what might apply in a situations where its a donation, pledge or deposit.
"The words of District Judge Clark:
That document is important in my view for this reason: it says 'this order'. Not 'this pledge' but 'this order' has been successfully added to your campaign. That would appear to be something that was probably in my view provided by Indiegogo but there’s no clarification of that. It makes it clear, 'this is an order'. This was successfully added to your campaign. This is the information that was provided to the claimant at the time.
As far as the defence of the defendant is concerned, at no stage do they deny there was effectively an agreement to provide the Vega Plus. Their defense is very much on the basis of, 'we’re going to produce it, he’s going to get it, it’s just a bit late'. There was an estimated delivery date of September 2016."
He asked for an example and I gave it to him. He didn’t specify it had to be worded a specific way or that the moon had to be aligned with Jupiter while Saturn rotated the wrong way and Pluto rocketed towards the earth.
Lets not shift goalposts further since he already tried and failed multiple times
You aren't ordering a game when you back something through crowdfunding. No product exists yet at all, only the idea that one will get developed if enough people support it. All the perks and final bonuses from the packages are nothing more than incentives. I don't understand people who back crowdfunding campaigns and then try to get refunds, what's the point? If you're of the opinion your investment failed and is beyond salvaging then move on. You can't go to a company and request a refund after the stock you invested in tanks.
And with crowdfunding if you fail to deliver then you need to either give refunds, start posting your books online to show backers you spent the money wisely or come up with a plan on how you are going to deliver something that is close to what you promised all those people that gave you money.
Show me where there are guarantees in any Kickstarter? There aren't any because there can't be. To Kickstart is to help get an idea into production. Some will succeed, some will fail, it is the way of business. If you don't believe in the product don't donate to kickstart it.
I am not sure why anyone would financially support something that states there is no refund policy just to cry later that they can't get a refund. I mean really? Talk about feeling entitled.
You do know I pulled that right from Kickstarters TOS but reworded it right? Kickstarter clearly states either a product must be delivered or you have to show how you spent the money and backers are very much free to sue the shit out of you if you fail to do any of that to their satisfaction.
I find it weird, that out of dozens of games that have missed their kickstarter dates, and the millions of people who have backed these games, many with no refund policy...
And you can't find me one example of a lawsuit that has been successful because of missing the kickstarter date.
I think if you go back and read the links I posted then you would see I gave you one. But that doesn’t fit into your narrative and you will probably try to shift the goalposts again anyway
You aren't ordering a game when you back something through crowdfunding. No product exists yet at all, only the idea that one will get developed if enough people support it. All the perks and final bonuses from the packages are nothing more than incentives. I don't understand people who back crowdfunding campaigns and then try to get refunds, what's the point? If you're of the opinion your investment failed and is beyond salvaging then move on. You can't go to a company and request a refund after the stock you invested in tanks.
And with crowdfunding if you fail to deliver then you need to either give refunds, start posting your books online to show backers you spent the money wisely or come up with a plan on how you are going to deliver something that is close to what you promised all those people that gave you money.
Show me where there are guarantees in any Kickstarter? There aren't any because there can't be. To Kickstart is to help get an idea into production. Some will succeed, some will fail, it is the way of business. If you don't believe in the product don't donate to kickstart it.
I am not sure why anyone would financially support something that states there is no refund policy just to cry later that they can't get a refund. I mean really? Talk about feeling entitled.
You do know I pulled that right from Kickstarters TOS but reworded it right? Kickstarter clearly states either a product must be delivered or you have to show how you spent the money and backers are very much free to sue the shit out of you if you fail to do any of that to their satisfaction.
And the product is still being worked on isn't it? Therefore there was nothing fraudulent that took place. This, of course, is assuming we are still talking about CoE.
You aren't ordering a game when you back something through crowdfunding. No product exists yet at all, only the idea that one will get developed if enough people support it. All the perks and final bonuses from the packages are nothing more than incentives. I don't understand people who back crowdfunding campaigns and then try to get refunds, what's the point? If you're of the opinion your investment failed and is beyond salvaging then move on. You can't go to a company and request a refund after the stock you invested in tanks.
And with crowdfunding if you fail to deliver then you need to either give refunds, start posting your books online to show backers you spent the money wisely or come up with a plan on how you are going to deliver something that is close to what you promised all those people that gave you money.
Show me where there are guarantees in any Kickstarter? There aren't any because there can't be. To Kickstart is to help get an idea into production. Some will succeed, some will fail, it is the way of business. If you don't believe in the product don't donate to kickstart it.
I am not sure why anyone would financially support something that states there is no refund policy just to cry later that they can't get a refund. I mean really? Talk about feeling entitled.
You do know I pulled that right from Kickstarters TOS but reworded it right? Kickstarter clearly states either a product must be delivered or you have to show how you spent the money and backers are very much free to sue the shit out of you if you fail to do any of that to their satisfaction.
And the product is still being worked on isn't it? Therefore there was nothing fraudulent that took place. This, of course, is assuming we are still talking about CoE.
I would assume it’s still being worked on but still means you are entitled to a refund on non delivery
Did you read the article you posted? Note the judge's ruling was was based on the specific wording around "ordering" a product, and not necessarily indicative of what might apply in a situations where its a donation, pledge or deposit.
"The words of District Judge Clark:
That document is important in my view for this reason: it says 'this order'. Not 'this pledge' but 'this order' has been successfully added to your campaign. That would appear to be something that was probably in my view provided by Indiegogo but there’s no clarification of that. It makes it clear, 'this is an order'. This was successfully added to your campaign. This is the information that was provided to the claimant at the time.
As far as the defence of the defendant is concerned, at no stage do they deny there was effectively an agreement to provide the Vega Plus. Their defense is very much on the basis of, 'we’re going to produce it, he’s going to get it, it’s just a bit late'. There was an estimated delivery date of September 2016."
As I mentioned and Kefo added, there are other cases regarding crowdfunding that have shown that, even with "pledges", a creator can be held liable if they mislead backers or are dishonest about the current situation/plans of the project with their backers.
I can only address the posted examples. I have been unable to find case decisions specifically related to refunds of deposits or donations.
My guess is very few exist or could be considered precedence setting.
Basically, misleading or misrepresenting the product, your current resources, plans and progress opens you up to litigation from backers.
EDIT- the court quoted phrase appears to be "deceptive tactics."
Do you guys read the sources you post?
This guy literally lied about hiring several artist. Spent money on moving to Oregon, rent, miscellaneous equipment, and licences for a separate project.
Do you read the posts you respond to? Pretty sure I clearly denoted the point at which creators open themselves up to litigation. When the creator offers misleading information about the project or misrepresents something about the project to backers, they become liable.
How much market research you think it would take to make a convincing argument that no reasonable person working in the industry would truly believe an MMORPG can be created in two years for less than, what, 5 million?
Which the date, by the kickstarter TOS, is not a guaranteed date... As shown here...
“The Estimated Delivery Date is the creator’s estimate. The date listed on each reward is the creator’s estimate of when they will provide the reward — not a guarantee to fulfill by that date. The schedule may change as the creator works on the project.”
And, no I think there is a 0% chance that you could use "market research" to file a claim against them. You would honestly need proof that they, themselves knew there was no possibility of them releasing the game on time. THey would say, "We believed a new tech called spatial OS would allow us to create our game, extremely quickly, and we underestimated the time it would take to hire a competent staff". THey would point to the multiple times they've said this.
I find it weird, that out of dozens of games that have missed their kickstarter dates, and the millions of people who have backed these games, many with no refund policy...
And you can't find me one example of a lawsuit that has been successful because of missing the kickstarter date.
I think if you go back and read the links I posted then you would see I gave you one. But that doesn’t fit into your narrative and you will probably try to shift the goalposts again anyway
My goal posts have always stayed the same man, and no you haven't.
Comments
"The words of District Judge Clark:
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I'm asking for very simple evidence. I'll even simplify it further. Show me a case where a court ruled that the Kickstarter TOS is invalid. You know why I know this hasn't happened? Because kickstarter would of changed their TOS if that had happened, like they have in the past.
I am not sure why anyone would financially support something that states there is no refund policy just to cry later that they can't get a refund. I mean really? Talk about feeling entitled.
If the developer has been caught lying then I don't support them - period.
You call that emotional.
I call that rational.
They are selling a product. People are making a PURCHASE. This is self-evident in the screenshot Dleatherus showed...
Also, Kickstarter ended in 2016.
We have shown the opinion of the American Bar Association about the TOS...
We have shown the FCC rules related to internet commerce...
At this point it's obvious some folks just won't budge. That's fine.. but can we not all just agree to move along until a few weeks pass and we start again? If anyone WANTS a refund... go get one. If nobody in this thread wants one.. let's go forward!
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
https://www.polygon.com/2017/12/13/16767590/star-citizen-refund
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
My guess is very few exist or could be considered precedence setting.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/06/feds-take-first-action-against-a-failed-kickstarter-with-112k-judgment/?amp=1
Basically, misleading or misrepresenting the product, your current resources, plans and progress opens you up to litigation from backers.
EDIT- the court quoted phrase appears to be "deceptive tactics."
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Do you guys read the sources you post?
This guy literally lied about hiring several artist. Spent money on moving to Oregon, rent, miscellaneous equipment, and licences for a separate project.
And you can't find me one example of a lawsuit that has been successful because of missing the kickstarter date.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
How much market research you think it would take to make a convincing argument that no reasonable person working in the industry would truly believe an MMORPG can be created in two years for less than, what, 5 million?
Lets not shift goalposts further since he already tried and failed multiple times
“The Estimated Delivery Date is the creator’s estimate. The date listed on each reward is the creator’s estimate of when they will provide the reward — not a guarantee to fulfill by that date. The schedule may change as the creator works on the project.”
And, no I think there is a 0% chance that you could use "market research" to file a claim against them. You would honestly need proof that they, themselves knew there was no possibility of them releasing the game on time. THey would say, "We believed a new tech called spatial OS would allow us to create our game, extremely quickly, and we underestimated the time it would take to hire a competent staff". THey would point to the multiple times they've said this.