Attorney General Madigan Files Suit Against local affiliate marketer
- Thread starter pocketrockets
- Start date
Hello friend,
I just read lawsuit and it say only $50,000. That no sound like lot. It probably just 1 or 2 day profit for them so they still have lot money for live good life even after cost of hire lawyer.
Good luck bro
read the comments. have fun. the consumers are speaking up...
Oprah and Dr. Oz -- Colon Ads Are a Load of Crap! | TMZ.com
Oprah and Dr. Oz -- Colon Ads Are a Load of Crap! | TMZ.com
You missed the paragraph just above that...
An order requiring Defendants to pay restitution to all consumers who have suffered injury as a result of Defendants' unlawful acts and practices.
This is the kicker to the whole thing. Who knows how far they want to go with it.
This is a good example of why it makes sense to have defense arrangements with a trusted law firm. Here's what I mean. There's a reasonable chance that some of these guys will get their bank accounts and other related assets frozen. This means that they cannot easily pay for an attorney to represent them. As you can imagine, this works to the advantage of the government prosecutor. It helps them "force" the defendants into agreeing to a punitive settlement. What's the solution?
Before there's ever a whiff of danger, have a serious conversation with a reputable attorney. Explore the ways of setting aside money to the firm/lawyer ahead of time in case your assets are frozen. You have to do this carefully. But the basic idea is that you've at least allowed yourself the ability to put up a fight if you're sued by the government.
Before there's ever a whiff of danger, have a serious conversation with a reputable attorney. Explore the ways of setting aside money to the firm/lawyer ahead of time in case your assets are frozen. You have to do this carefully. But the basic idea is that you've at least allowed yourself the ability to put up a fight if you're sued by the government.
Affiliates aren't really part of the allegedly fraudulent transaction between the advertiser and the consumer... we aren't charging them anything...
But I'm pretty sure Amirouche LLC was also an advertiser.
In terms of actually being an affiliate, it's physically imposible (if it wasn't tracked) to determine how many consumers were displayed the allegedly fraudulent advertisements and "flogs". We split test traffic. Are they suing him over banners ads than and have evidence from traffic sources/ads that have provided records...? If so that's an interesting case.
Yeah, that was taken straight from the file complaint against Larby and his LLC -- not from any of the other 40 affiliates.
Agreed.
Everyone is focusing on the $50,000 number and not what it says, you should re-read it. It says UP TO $50,000. Meaning, if the consumer suffered damages and want to be compensated for their losses, they can only seek UP TO $50,000. If they want more, they'll have to sue them in a higher court.
The companies didn't bill any of the consumers anywhere near even $2,000 (upsells etc is something they won't be held accountable for because its a very good chance they don't own those). So even with thousands of angry or dissatisfied customers that do want to be paid back the money they weren't able to get a refund for and any fees associated with it, it won't be anywhere even remotely close to the $50,000 mark.
You should also know that if the defendents lose, they not only have to cover their own legal fees, but also the prosecution's fees, AND the entire cost of the whole investigation that has been building up for all these months. THOSE are the bigger expenses I believe. In Larby's case, they are suing his company and him personally, so if he were to lose, his company can file for bankruptcy, but he may also have to do so personally if he can't cover those debts. That's why these things usually like to be resolved as quickly as possible through a settlement agreement, because the AG does in fact like cash like the rest of us, they also look like heroes, they get a nice lump of cash for the state and they show that industry that they aint fuckin around.
That's just the financial counts, the AG is also trying to ban him for life from ever being able to market continuity offers/products, from using the words "free trial" or "free" kinda stuff, and also to stop selling shit to people in IL, but the rest of the country is fine. This part of the lawsuit seems pretty tough to win for the AG, but they add it in to show that they are aware of what he and the companies did, and it makes them look like they are standing up for the people in their state too (but the rest of the country can go fuck themselves lol).
All people really give a shit about is the money part anyway, so thats why there's such a huge emphasis on it, even though technically speaking, this part of it should be more of the focus, but you know how it is, cash rules everything around me CREAM get tha moniez dolla dolla bill ya'll -- Even for the AG.
This is all about setting an example and warning the rest of the industry to stop fucking with people or else... First the AG's hit, and if it continues on that scale or bigger, then the FTC comes into town (after a press conference/warning phase of course 5-10 years later).
The Oprah shit is different. Its a Trademark suit because she doesn't want people not only tarnishing her reputation, but also banking so hard off her brand and assets (Dr. Oz, Rachel Ray, not her ass assets). Fucking with the Harpo attorneys is a shitstorm all in itself, but I would imagine its going to be just a domino effect of settlements. Possibly expensive too, but no one knows yet so its pointless to even speculate (they do have a reputation of being hardcore though).
Then again, I'm not a lawyer so what do I know.
ABC News just posted this video interview with Dr Oz on the current lawsuits
(I recognize of few of those Acai websites, lol)
I'm starting to notice the various news sources really start to pick up this story -- gotta feeling this is going to be all over the media over the next few days.
(I recognize of few of those Acai websites, lol)
I'm starting to notice the various news sources really start to pick up this story -- gotta feeling this is going to be all over the media over the next few days.
Towards the end of that video the dude whips out a bottle of Acai Berries that a co-worker had in her purse. LMAO
It's pretty insane that so much money has been made off those POINTLESS fucking berries. There is ZERO scientific evidence that it helps lose weight.
Definitely one of the greatest scams in history.
And chances are this is going to be all over the media in the next few days. Let's just hope they only attack weight loss and don't bring up other "free trial" stuff like biz ops.
It's pretty insane that so much money has been made off those POINTLESS fucking berries. There is ZERO scientific evidence that it helps lose weight.
Definitely one of the greatest scams in history.
And chances are this is going to be all over the media in the next few days. Let's just hope they only attack weight loss and don't bring up other "free trial" stuff like biz ops.
They are going after the advertisers. The lawsuit from Oprah and Oz is mostly going at the advertiser but does mention a few affiliates specfically.
This is going to become a feeding frenzy among the AG's and the FTC. Oprah's list is loooooong. I will publish the list after I go through the whole thing. I don't believe you can tie this to any one network. They have obviously found these ads all over the place and the advertisers they are going after are numerous. They even go as far as to mention specific SEO strategies the affiliates were using to promote their sites.
More to come.
This is going to become a feeding frenzy among the AG's and the FTC. Oprah's list is loooooong. I will publish the list after I go through the whole thing. I don't believe you can tie this to any one network. They have obviously found these ads all over the place and the advertisers they are going after are numerous. They even go as far as to mention specific SEO strategies the affiliates were using to promote their sites.
More to come.
So the blame could go to:
A. The advertiser for having the offer.
B. The Network for taking the offer.
C. The affiliate for promoting it this way
D. The Ad Network the affiliate is using who approved it.
E. ABC for allowing it to be displayed on there site who profits from it...