You're probably right RE: Virginia law. Technically, DBAs and trade names are supposed to be registered (at least in my state).  But, people don't register DBAs or trade names, especially small businesses, b/c they don't think about it, know about it, or lack the time and resources to do it. There's no DBA police roaming the streets looking to shut down deficient filers - talk about stifling free enterprise. In many situations, failure to register or file business org documents is harmless and can be remedied by simply filing the proper paperwork.  For example, in some situations, a business can even hold itself out as a corporation, not actually be registered as such, get sued, and then claim the corporate shield in the suit. Courts can be pretty forgiving. Anyway, I'm all for skepticism and calling out shady practices - I just don't think this raises many, if any, here (at least in my book).

I bet that's a function of a website template. Also, it is possible for a company named X to do business as Y (i.e., a brand).  For example, "Dunkin' Donuts" is a brand name that lots of franchisees do business as. No big deal.

EDITED - poor sentence structure

Compared to what happened w/ the CTS Miner debacle, this group looks a lot more legit (not concluding either way).  Consider the following:

1. http://ucc.state.ri.us/CORP_DRIVE1/2013/0603/000000000/3571/201322153490_1.pdf

Of course, they probably should be registered in VA as a foreign entity - that's how we'd do it my state at least.

2. This may be the other corporate officer: http://www.lederbergblackman.com/biol.asp (good credentials for an attorney, notwithstanding the BU Law degree (I'm a BC Law guy)).

3. http://www.linkedin.com/groups/RevUp-Render-Inc-2962765?trk=groups_guest_item_list_abbreviated-h-dsc&goback=%2Egna_2962765

4. http://www.youtube.com/user/RevUpRender/videos

Clearly dealing w/ real people here.  That's a good start. Again, I'm not taking a position on the ultimate legitimacy - just sharing info.

Phoenix,

Don't know if you said this already, but have you contacted law enforcement? If you haven't already, you might take a look at Interpol as a resource (I don't really know that much about them, but you might give it a look).

http://www.interpol.int/Member-countries/Americas/United-States
http://www.interpol.int/Crime-areas/Cybercrime/Cybercrime

OP,

I read both of your posts.  I think your observations are mostly correct notwithstanding their delivery or tone.  I suspect, though, growing pains are inevitable and necessary. Even really severe growing pains (what the community may have to endure after today's news).

Question: What specific standards/credentials/benchmarks do you propose for cutting through the B.S., identifying leaders, etc.?

Regarding picking community leaders, you suggest considering the "ability to fight back" as a standard.  I'm not exactly sure what you mean here.  If you mean someone that is taken seriously by the community as well as major players not outside the community (i.e., regulators, banks, etc.) because they have a certain experiences/credentials, then I agree and would like to see more deliberation about such credentials.

Your observations are also relevant to the mining community. If you haven't already, you should take a look at the thread about CTS Miner.

Anyway, interesting article/post. Thanks.

fwiw:

https://twitter.com/GinelliSaunders
https://twitter.com/Unique_PR

RS was the only one w/ an email address and the website didn't say she was part of the company (if I remember correctly), only a spokesperson for.  She may have been used as a proxy. Who knows.

A few days ago I started a long-winded thread, partly in response to this announcement, to address two serious and related problems with mining hardware companies: 1) the practice of taking pre-orders and 2) the lack of disclosure by hardware companies. Cheshyr and I have been going back and forth productively sharing ideas on how to develop community norms RE: disclosure practices. Norms for product announcements may help filter out the fraudsters by limiting their ability to use this forum (won't stop them from using other forums). I'd invite any of you with ideas, especially given the new information about CTS, to join our conversation.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=430511.0

Also, wasn't this conversation supposed to be moved to Scam Accusation sub-forum?  I guess it doesn't matter now since CTS isn't taking orders any longer.

Might have been me.  See post #36.  I found them by googling their address - wanted to see if Crypto Tech Systems turned up.  Found CMS and then searched for them in LinkedIn and found one of their Directors.

Cheshyr,

You didn't stagnate the discussion - I got busy with work and didn't come back the thread until today (Sat.).

I like your list - let's build on it. Hopefully others will contribute, and from there we can put together a ideal product announcement/company disclosure checklist for folks to use in making product announcements as well as evaluating said announcements.

Just to summarize (for others): The practice of taking pre-orders has contributed to a lot of bad behaviors (unrealistic representations, scams, etc.). To me, it is outrageous that companies take in millions of dollars (BTC too) upfront, including their profits, without an operating history, definitive product development progress, or providing consumers any security for their pre-orders (stock, promissory note, etc). Consumers should steer product manufacturer behavior by identifying, promoting and practicing certain norms. One type of norm worth developing is disclosure practices by mining companies.

Additional commentary:I read a post this morning by ProfMac on the HashFast thread where he suggested avoiding pre-orders unless the orderer received stock in the company as collateral for the order (to be clear, it wasn't necessarily a position he was advocating, mainly just a comment among several).  This is similar to the point I was making in my original post (#5). ProfMac's post made me think about the process of making various types of investments because, for many miners, buying mining gear is a several thousand dollar investment.

First, when I'm evaluating stock, I tend to look at  fundamentals.  I want to see balance sheets, etc. Similarly, in the Bitcoin mining world where pre-orders are common, it might be useful to know what assets and liabilities are on a producer's balance sheet before throwing more cash at them - financial data would communicate a degree of legitimacy and viability about the operation. Second, from my professional life I know that banks, lenders, and investors are unlikely to put money with a project when the company and/or its principals have no skin in the game themselves. It would be useful to know what skin the mining companies have in the game before placing a pre-order (consumers should not be the only ones taking the risk). Finally, this past week I have been helping some people buy the assets of a paper company. We discovered through a search of our state's UCC database that the seller had failed to disclose that the assets were encumbered by liens. Obviously, this new information impacts my clients' desire to invest their capital into acquiring the seller's assets. Again, similar info might be useful to Bitcoin miner buyers before they pony up thousands of bucks for pre-orders from an untested company (or even a tested one for that matter).

More food for fodder...

 

I've had a really good experience w/ Bitmain's AntMiner products (both U1s and S1s).  I have no experience with any other products, so can't comment on anything else. I know you can get Ants using a credit/debit card from legit dealers now - you might consider that route to protect yourself.

On a related note, consider avoiding pre-orders - there's a lot of risk (at least for me).

Take a look at some of the picture threads so you get an idea of what has actually been delivered and is working in the wild.


Happy mining.

I agree that stalking-like behavior should be discouraged, but most honest companies do not hide their officers and credentials from public view.

I wonder to what extent that behavior would stop if companies provided adequate disclosure about their officers and their credentials? Dunno, honest question.

That said, there's probably some middle-ground between privacy and adequate disclosure. 

Keeping gender/sex; race, etc. out of criticism/scepticism about a company is probably a good policy. Let's not degrade 50% of the population, we need them for Bitcoin's legitimacy.

Thanks for the feedback - just random thoughts.  I think the most important practice that could be adopted in the short-term is generating a template for how one makes their initial announcement (i.e., what initial information do we expect?).  The bar could be low enough for DIYers, but high enough filter out noise.

For Example:

NAME
CONTACT INFORMATION
PRINCIPAL OFFICERS AND CREDENTIALS
BUSINESS STRUCTURE (Corporation, LLC, etc.)
PLACE OF BUSINESS
MISSION
PRODUCTS
TIMELINE TO MARKET

etc.

(pardon the typos, I’m writing this between meetings at work; also pardon the length)

Anybody here a fan of the show Arrested Development?

Last season we learned a little about George Michael’s software project, “Fakeblock.” You may recall that Fakeblock was a farce (read up on Fakeblock if you need a little more background:
http://arresteddevelopment.wikia.com/wiki/Fakeblock). Incidentally, there are two issues related to Georege Michael’s Fakeblock con that are worth noting as a preface to my larger point: 1) George Michael did not intend to let the con continue because he always planned to deliver; and, 2) despite the intentions, the con was profitable – he gained some riches overnight.

Where am I going with this? There appear to be many threads announcing Fakeblock-like products, or worse (I will call them “Fraudblocks” for now – scam companies), in the Mining Forum (and elsewhere in the Bitcointalk community). In other words, many companies introduce products with good intentions, but no realistic plan for sticking to their representations (which may have been unrealistic to begin with); and, many companies seem to be announcing fake products in hopes of scamming the community. Despite the number of Fakeblock and Fraudblock product announcement threads, there are not many threads promoting uniform strategies for deterring or reducing said announcements. My aim is to use this thread to discuss and debate various strategies for deterring and reducing the amount of Fakeblocks and Fraudblocks being promoted on Bitcointalk.

I’ll go first; feel free to lend your support, critique, offer new ideas, etc. 

THE CASE FOR PROACTIVE ACTION BY IDENTIFYING, PROMOTING, PRACTICING COMMUNITY NORMS

It is easy for individuals to join the community and promote their company or products without disclosing any verifiable background information about their project or credentials. Sometimes the lack of information is harmless, but other times it is not.  It seems that harmless instances have made lack of disclosure acceptable thereby increasing the prevalence of harmful instances.

At a micro-level, the harm is that some innocent community members lose fiat, coin, time, or some combination thereof. At a macro-level, an inefficiency in decentralized digital currency is exposed (that’s not to say this inefficiency is unique to Bitcoin), possibly hindering Bitcoin’s widespread acceptance (e.g., negative press about Bitcoin being a vehicle for bad actors). Finally, sometimes the harm is inflicted unintentionally and sometimes intentionally.

Scam threads are one way of shaming bad or negligent actors into good behavior. Tough questions on product announcement postings are another way of dealing with Fakeblocks and Fraudblocks. However, scam threads and tough questions may have limited effectiveness because they are REACTIVE NOT PROACTIVE. In other words, they come after damage has possibly been done. Some might argue that Newbie requirements are proactive, but I disagree. Newbie restrictions are not that effective because they don’t deter bad behavior after said restrictions are lifted. Further, I think we should welcome and encourage newbie participating throughout the forum, not erect artificial barriers to entering the community.

From what I have been able to find in searching the forum (very slowly by the way, the search feature is frustrating), there is nothing much to deter the Faceblocks and Fraudblocks from posting at Bitcointalk. In my humble Newbie opinion, this is a gap that can and should be filled. Obviously, filling this gap on Bitcointalk will not end Faceblocks and Fraudblocks per se, but it will help to limit their exposure on this particular forum and possibly save a few folks some fiat, coin, and time.

One way we can proactively deter Faceblocks and Fraudblocks is by identifying, promoting and practicing community norms. I searched the website for threads with “Norms” in the title and found nothing quite like what I have in mind (if my research was not thorough enough, I apologize), so please keep reading and offer your feeback. Here are few practices that could be adopted to produce new norms:

1.   Product announcement privileges being contingent on disclosing information necessary for a consumer to make an informed choice about the product (i.e., officers and their credentials; whether the company has signed a production contract/has partners; to what extent it is capitalized) – we could draft a standard form/template that has to be reviewed by a mod or other trusted person before posting.

2.   Appointing a panel of trusted and knowledgeable individuals to investigate new companies or products with the intent of evaluating their viability through a ranking system (mining pool directors might be good panel members) –like analyst reports for public stocks.

3.   Campaigning against the practice of pre-orders by encouraging community members to avoid placing pre-orders without certain protections (see #5 below, escrow, etc.).

4.   Campaigning for certain caps on the amounts of pre-orders (i.e, 50% of unit’s cost - many building contractors only get half up front, the other half a the end).

5.   Campaigning for alternatives to pre-order structure. It has occurred to me that pre-orders could be restructured as loans (bonds) or ownership positions (with payoff by refund or producing the product). I don’t see why it’s acceptable for companies to get wealthy overnight without having a firm plan for producing their products – I cannot think of another industry where this is acceptable. There does not seem to be a good incentive for a company to deliver as promised in the current pre-order scheme. Changing this practice via changing consumer expectations offers a vehicle for change.

6.   Commissioning a few folks to study product/service announcements made to highlighting some common practices of legit companies as well as bogus companies.  From there, best practices and consumer resources might emerge.

To summarize, to me it is clear that without defined community-wide standards, Fakeblocks and Fraudblocks will continue on this forum. Deterring product offerings by Fakeblocks and Fraudblocks by employing community norms, including standards for product announcement and pre-orders, might help the community – including those George Michaels out there that have good intentions but let their excitement get in the way of realistic representation.

Thanks for reading.

I don't think Bitron is it.  This might be the alleged parent company:

http://www.cms.uk.com/cms_company_profile.html

Someone local should give I.B. a call and see if CTS is his company:

http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/ian-bentall/23/727/40; https://www.facebook.com/ian.bentall.7?fref=browse_search

jwhitlaw's note about the internet announcement is interesting.  Run a whois search on the site and see when it was registered, I think you'll see Jan 12, 2014.  Kinda late, but what do I know.  

If you go to their Facebook page you'll notice a lot of "likes."  Run a search in FB for people who like CTS Miner.  Note any geographic themes?  Do you see any likes from the UK (I didn't find any)?  

Anyway, caution is warranted.

Acquired some domains a while back, thought I'd see if anyone is interested in buying them for BTC. Send me a PM if so.

(NOTE: All prices in BTC, Negotiations welcome).

Possibly BTC-Related
MyBitty.com_.3
SpaceTeky.com_.2


Cannabis Industry Related
PotShopLocations.com_1.0
NoCoMarijuana.com_.2
NoCoMannabis.com_.2
FoCoMarijuana.com_.2
NoCoMarijuana.com_.2
DenverCannabisStore.com_.5
DenverCannabisCompany.com_.5
SummitCannabis.com_.2
Northglennmarijuana.com_.2
ClearCreekmarijuana.com_.2
IdahoSpringsMarijuana.com_.2
GeorgetownMarijuana.com_.2
AspenMountainMarijuana.com_.2
VailMountainMarijuana.com_.2
SteamboatSpringsCannabis.com_.3
BlackhawkMarijuana.com_.4
HighCountryMarijuana.com_.2
KindCultivation.com_.2
KindJar.com_.1
KindJars.com_.2
MarijuanaAnchorage.com_.1
CannabisAnchorage.com_.1
WillamsburgMMJ.com_.2
CannabisWilliamsburg.com.2

All

I’ve mentioned elsewhere that I’m a practicing attorney in the Mountain West region of the U.S. and a Bitcoin hobbyist. I have been reading this forum for a few months and mining for under a month. Last week I registered for this forum and started posting. I would most certainly consider myself a “newbie.”

I am posting because I’m want to meaningfully contribute to the Bitcoin community and economy. The best way I know how to do that is by introducing myself and offering consulting and escrow-type services to community members.

About Me: My law practices centers around real estate matters, business transactions, and litigation. I assist lots of folks with buying and selling real estate, businesses assets, and business interests. I also act as an escrow agent along the way when the terms of a real estate or business deal necessitate it. Having read the Satoshi paper a few times, it has occurred to me that how bitcoins are transferred between parties resembles how real estate is transferred between parties (e.g., use of a public record, deed/hash, block/title chains, importance of time, etc.). Hence, my interest in offering consulting and escrow services. You’re welcome to learn more about me by sending me a PM or reviewing my public Linkedin profile (http://linkd.in/1dKf5Pc).

At the moment, I see myself helping folks based in the U.S. who have already agreed to a transaction. I can help folks document their transactions and perform them as a neutral third party (escrow). My role would not be as an attorney, but as a privately retained consultant and trustee. I have formed a corporation for this purpose, obtained a client trust account at bank, and am in the process of drafting standard forms for clients to use in documenting their pre-brokered deals with one another. I hope to have a website for the corporation in the next month or so (liberal arts background (graduate degree in rhetoric) + law degree = could be a while). I am not opposed to offering my services through my law firm and acting as an attorney, but it would be more cost effective the other way – especially for smallish transactions and transactions that do not need an advocate. Anyway, my ultimate goal is to help fund my hobby and maybe a date or two with my wife.

I have identified and read federal law/guidance (as well as my state’s) relevant to escrow services in the area of crypto-currency and feel comfortable in providing said services (that’s not a legal opinion; my opinion on this could change; and my opinion is based on a certain structure not discuss here). However, I have not read a ton about what is missing in current escrow practices. I would love to hear your thoughts on the current state of escrow services in the Bitcoin community and how it could be improved, changed, etc.

Looking forward to hearing from you. 

WZ,

I'm new to mining (but not new to lurking on this forum) and have been experimenting with different pools for the last few weeks, including this one.  I have been using Eligius for the bulk of the last few days and have been impressed with the regular updates and obvious time commitment you've made to the pool. Won't be pointing my miners any place but Eligius from here on out. Thanks again.

Hello there.

I'm a long-time lurker, hobbyist miner and practising attorney in the Mountain/West region of the United States.  I hope to contribute to productive discussions and friendly banter from time to time. 

Since I'm already posting: I'm in the process of convincing my law firm to accept Bitcoin from our clients and am open to suggestions/feedback from merchants and service professionals about how to integrate Bitcoin quickly and smoothly. We do not intend to hold BTC and we'd prefer not to use a mobile device as a POS system.

That's all I got for now. 

-JH