I’m glad they’re going after what seems like a pretty obvious scam (the campaign had a pretty simple, straightforward set of goals and raised more than enough money to achieve them, yet the artist whose work was to be used was never paid, the supposed manufacturer was never approached to make the cards, the campaign’s been silent for almost a year after half a year of excuses before that, etc.); the idea that Kickstarter is a platform for “paying for goods” is problematic enough without also going after the wrong targets. Fraudulent activity is unacceptable, but I feel kind of mixed about what this might mean for the future, though. Kickstarter has always asserted that campaigns had a legal obligation to fulfill the rewards they promised, but until now, unless one of the backers was a lawyer willing to take the issue to court, it was completely unenforceable. Which in many cases is just as well, as I’ve seen backers mutter about wanting to initiate a lawsuit after a campaign promised - and delivered - “X” but some backers were hoping for “Y” (or some other flavor of “X”) and were disappointed with the result. I’m afraid legal action might expand to include campaigns that made good faith efforts to fulfill their promises but failed to do so, even when they were being highly ambitious and were obviously working on projects with no certain outcomes. Kickstarter is being treated by many backers as a pre-order system, but it isn’t and it shouldn’t be. There’s a certain amount of risk involved in Kickstarter, but it should be minimally risky for both backers and for creators. If would-be creators have a personal tragedy or make a mistake that renders them unable to fulfill their promises, they shouldn’t be left in a position of being completely legally or financially fucked over.
3 Likes
