Fraud on Indiegogo, they don't care

[Khris]

Take a look at this:
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/home-quantum-energy-generator

Some asshole tricked 286 suckers into giving him a total of $18,064, for something that cannot work (an energy generating(!) perpetual motion machine).

It was pointed out to Indiegogo that this was fraud, but they sent back a generic "we'll look into it" reply.

[bicilotti]

I was going to write a grumpy post on how "We are reaping the fruits of the crowd-funding frenzy" and that "Kickstarter/indiegogo/etc. are an awesome 2.0 tool in the hand of scammers"

but

• The backers have been (at least for now) updated regularly
• I don't see any difficulty in manufacturing and shipping the perks (sweaters, key-chains, etc.). So probably not much trouble there

So if there is no mens rea and the guy actually tries to build a prototype of this particular machine (whether he succeeds or fails), I wouldn't call it a scam.

[AGA]

Plus the people who got 'scammed' are too stupid to be allowed money.

[m0ds]

Plus if he succeeds in perpetual motion he'll be killed by the US Government anyway so it was a lose-lose situation from the start.

(Worth reading into the amazing number of those who have met their untimely deaths after working on perpetual motion and free energy devices)

[Snarky]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that's probably because people who work on perpetual motion machines are exactly the kind of people who get themselves killed in interesting ways (whether that's blowing up their kitchen while conducting hare-brained experiments or getting in too deep with various criminal enterprises).

[Stupot]

I wouldn't be surprised if this was some kind of stunt by Morgan Spurlock or someone designed to highlight some point about crowdfunding, perhaps the folly of people funding things just because they want to be part of the crowd and not necessarily because they actually want or understand the product being offered.  Expect some kind of documentary about it in the coming months. 

[selmiak]

People sell books about free energy and other rather pseudoscience subjects such as hollow earth theories en masse, so the people pledging there are the same kind of people buying these books so I think these kind of people kind of know what they did when they gave him their monies. And if he ships the hoodie for $1000 the deal is fine, it's the same waste of money as ording a book from him. And if he indeed finds some teslaesque wireless electrity transportation method or even gets energy out of the aether or his own nostrils, even better

[kconan]

  They will produce free energy for everyone, but can't ship a tote bag internationally.  The guy has a variety of patents and designed products on commercially successful cars, but can't drop 7k on his own prototype.  The "updates" are rambling on about truth and light.

  Stupot+ might be right about it being designed for something like a documentary on fooling suckers.  Ponch's browser history has less red flags than that campaign.

[InCreator]

Now how exactly is selling hope for better future a fraud?

Spoiler

isn't that what every major religion, ever, does?

[close]

Especially if it comes with awesome sticker or key chain?
And you cannot really go for truth and start Indiegogo project named "Stress & Planetary Guilt relief for 7K"
Those 286 or whatever people want to feel that they made a change and helped towards better planet.
I think they got what they paid for, no matter if he succeeds to pick up a physics textbook or not

I'd fund this project if he'd die mysteriously. But then again, it wouldn't be of any use anymore.

[Ponch]

  Stupot+ might be right about it being designed for something like a documentary on fooling suckers.  Ponch's browser history has less red flags than that campaign.

My browser history is between me and the agents of my government who monitor our every move online, thank you very much.

[Khris]

I guess my main question would be, doesn't this harm Indiegogo? It didn't go viral or anything, so I guess not.
But I'd be reluctant to use Indiegogo if they don't clamp down on "projects" like that.

What's keeping me from starting a similar project and milking some gullible people with too much money (except my morals)?

Also, yes, selling hope is fraud. You can give hope, but taking money for nothing is fraud in my book.

[bicilotti]

I guess my main question would be, doesn't this harm Indiegogo?

The whole crowd-funding industry is booming, people keep throwing money at projects and (most importantly) ks/igg/etc. keep getting a sweet 5%~ cut. It is quite sensible for them to monetise before the frenzy ends (i.e. enough projects go banana to make the average backer be more 'conservative' with his/her money).
I guess a more precise answer would involve calculating the 'net present value' of lost revenues from 'reputation hits' (scams / project being delayed / etc.) versus the cost of implementing a fraud preventing system / insurance / etc. Regarding this: I followed a recent crowdfunding trainwreck (The Doom that came to Atlantic City); Kickstarted repeatedly stated that it didn't want to be involved in the matter.

Also, yes, selling hope is fraud. You can give hope, but taking money for nothing is fraud in my book.

I guess you are using the term "fraud" as a metaphor, so I will refrain from commenting.

[Khris]

What do you mean, as a metaphor?
I'm saying it's wrong to sell hope, false hope that is, and I consider doing so to be fraud. Granted, it may not be fraud in the legal sense, but it's still fraud, isn't it?

The point is, even if the guy is a sincere believer, it's still a scam. Sure, the backers aren't promised a working power generator each, but if you don't consider this to be fraud, at which point do you?

If I started a funding campaign to construct a bowling ball that rolls uphill, is *that* fraud?

[Radiant]

Granted, it may not be fraud in the legal sense, but it's still fraud, isn't it?

No. Fraud is a legal term, so if it's not fraud in the legal sense, then it isn't fraud. Duh

[Ali]

I have to agree with Khris that the word 'fraud' can be used outside of its legal sense. It is a legal term, but it's also just a word.

It's not a metaphor to use the word 'fraud' to describe something you believe to be a fake, even if no crime has been committed.

[Andail]

Of course this is utter bullcrap - now whether it's technically fraud is maybe a matter for discussion, but they explicitly say, repeatedly, that these machines do work, which of course they don't, so it's definitely false advertising.

These aren't a bunch of kids who say that they will try to make a machine, and want people to jump aboard because it would be a cool trip for everyone, no this has a way more serious, professional-sounding tone.

Naturally, if there was any substance in this, they'd be fully financed long ago, and rich and famous by now, instead of forced to turn to a crowdfunding site to afford some 7000 bucks' worth of workshop equipment.

[qptain Nemo]

Naturally, if there was any substance in this, they'd be fully financed long ago, and rich and famous by now, instead of forced to turn to a crowdfunding site to afford some 7000 bucks' worth of workshop equipment.

Well, looking back at Tesla and such and thinking to what enormous disadvantage such an efficient alternative energy source would put many rich and powerful people of today, I'm not sure about very rich and famous. However, the need to crowdsource some measly $7000 when you have the blueprints for such tech in your hands is indeed ridiculous and is the biggest red flag here in my opinion.

Not to mention how suspiciously trivial it's all meant to be. You'd think extracting energy from such novel source would be trickier and require more resources and hardware. And bringing actual mechanical motors into it is also a telltale sign, I suppose, even before descending into deeper physical details.

[bicilotti]

What do you mean, as a metaphor?

it may not be fraud in the legal sense, but it's still fraud, isn't it?

I meant this. Fraud is a legal concept, you are using it in another field (ethics maybe?). I can only guess you mean some sort of morally reprehensible behaviour.

The point is, even if the guy is a sincere believer, it's still a scam. Sure, the backers aren't promised a working power generator each, but if you don't consider this to be fraud, at which point do you?

I personally would consider it morally reprehensible if there were knowledge and/or consent in deceiving the backers.
If the guy really believes in this machine and tries to build a prototype, I would call him/her a fool/ignoramus (a charismatic one, it seems).

It's not a metaphor to use the word 'fraud' to describe something you believe to be a fake, even if no crime has been committed.

Ah! I may be at a disadvantage with a native speaker, but using the word "fraud" to describe "something you believe to be fake" is a metaphor, in the same way the merriam-webster lists "murder" to mean (among other things) "something that is very difficult or unpleasant".




...I am feeling really weird "defending" some perpetual motion machine. 

[Ben X]

bicilotti, I think the problem here is that you're using "metaphor" incorrectly. That would help differentiate something from being literal rather than it being used in the legal sense. Perhaps "informal" would have worked?

Myself, I would normally assume someone using fraud to describe an act, to be using it in the legal sense, but not necessarily if they are using it to describe a person.

[Ryan Timothy B]

I agree that it sounds like a news channel scam. Just with how they can't ship outside of the US sounds as though they'll interview those who purchase it.

What's that copper colored tube he's dropping what appears to be a magnet into? Is that real or fake? It looks awesome.