A. As far as this and any other web forum is concerned, I am present and acting as a private individual who happens to also be a citizen of the US.
I never suggested otherwise. And I don't recall your citizenship status being questioned or pertinent to the discussion at hand.
B. I have never accused anyone OTHER than GAW/Zen and its "CEO" of anything without having more than enough proof to back up my individual position. Seriously, I have a life and multiple businesses to run myself so why would I waist my time and that of others if I didn't have the proof and other resources to backup my claims? I do not need the attention or drama, but if I do not speak up, exercise my rights, and file (along side others) the appropriate complaints with the proper authorities against those who I believe wish to defraud and degrade the evolving technological business sector, then morally I am no better than those I believe should be held accountable.
You seem to be wanting very badly to make a statement about your rights and ability to make complaints to various agencies. Good for you. You won't find where I have ever suggested otherwise. Your above paragraph sounds like you think you might be being prevented from somehow exercising those rights, but you don't say how and by whom.
C. I have never claimed to be an attorney or act as a legal authority on any specific subject. I have my own legal representation I pay handsomely for such matters. With that said, I am college educated and do have over 18 years of global (US, HK, DE, AU, an UK) corporate business experience with a focus on technology, IP, and contract law compliance. If some of the language and references I use are too full of "legalities" for you, then I am sorry. Given the topic of this discussion, it is what it is. What I can do is apologize for any missed typos in advance since I am often doing multiple things at once and do not have the time to run everything through a spell/grammar checker first.
I didn't ask for your CV. I really don't care. Your posting that looks to me like arguing from authority.
I don't think you're posting too many legal terms. Not enough, in fact. Defined by actual chapter and verse codes and regulations, and your layman's opinion how how an actor meets the elements of whatever crime you think they may have committed.
What you are posting is a bunch "legal-sounding" terms. As below:
Now, you want case law and other references to how things are changing here in the US regarding Ponzi schemes and those who are complacent and/or unjustly benefiting from the continuation of these schemes (or the fallout)? OK, here are a few...
Let's start with Florida:
Sales of chains or pyramid schemes. People who sell shady deals should be prosecuted.
Lawyers and accountants of Ponzi schemes. They should be prosecuted
Banks of Ponzi schemes. They should be prosecuted
None of those three links above address your post here:
To those who say they have ROI'd once or many times over and/or are "smiling all the way to the bank", please by all means, continue with this expressed stance and make yourselves known in favor of this operation. This will give the regulators the info they need to add you as a willing collaborator - after the fact - if they choose to go that route. Remember, the first 2-3 tiers of any alleged Ponzi scheme requires some of the early players to make money in order to [help] draw in new investors. If lawfully unaware the scheme beforehand, no worries. However, continuing to support that scheme after being notified of the potential and likelihood of it being a Ponzi situation opens those collaborating with the source facilitating the scheme up to liability as well. Just saying...
Bold items are significant. In the first one, you clearly suggest that somebody who has reached ROI and posts about it may be added as a "willing collaborator" in your words.
None of the above three links you presented offer any such interpretation, and are limited to those involved with a Ponzi in a professional capacity, like a banker, accountant, or attorney.
In the second one, you offer up some idea of being "notified" and how support (assume that you mean by posting here) would create some legal liability.
I ask again, what defines "notified"? You surely don't expect that posting on some internet forum is any kind of legally valid notification or service, do you?
How could a simple customer, who happen to make posts on the internet, become legally liable, and for what exactly? Please elaborate.
