Tag Archive: THINKS

Victory! Or is it Victory? Jesse Willms Surrenders All to FTC Onslaught.

Jesse Willms Folds Following Consumer-Led Pressure on FTC and Other Law Agencies

Seal of the United States Federal Trade Commis...Willms et al to Pay $359,291,898

Jesse Willms, (the Canadian who set the legal dogs, financed by his scamduggery, onto me, for telling the truth about him on this website), has finally caved in to the FTC charges.  This is the full FTC judgement.

This is a  victory of sorts for the millions who have been scammed by him over the last few years.  However, what has actually happened has been a kind of plea bargaining, much favoured in the US. (Here’s his home-town take on it.)

Rotten Bad Smell

Hunstville 0, Willms 1

Instead of being stripped completely of his ill-gotten gains and being chucked in the slammer for a few years, he has reached a settlement whereby no admission of guilt has been made!

This is exactly what I suggested would happen, because the self-proclaimed philanthropist Jesse will do anything, absolutely anything, to stay in business.

To me this isn’t true victory.

The Return of Fu Manchu

He’s not been punished by the law which explains the lingering smell I have, possibly due to his key lawyers having previously worked at the FTC.  Maybe it is the old boy network?  Whatever.

The millions (yes, millions the FTC say) of people scammed may be temporarily amazed at the $359-million judgement, but seeing as how the original complaint was for over $450m they’ll soon realise that he’s got off with $100m!  However it’s worded, Willms has weaselled out of any admission of guilt, which means he’s still in business.

What cunning plans could now be afoot, with $100m to back them up, they’ll wonder?  It’s like The Return of Fu Manchu.

Almost 4 Million Questions

jessewillms.com-2012-02-24-12h-20m-30s

Willms’ Blog Release – notice how he promotes the $25k ‘gift’, but not his $359m settlement?

Like me, the millions scammed by him will be questioning how he isn’t, right now, being butt-plugged in Huntsville, instead of having 7 days to calmly surrender his bank accounts to prove that he can stump up the $359m negotiated, meanwhile making gratuitous comments about better business practices in future whilst still singing the praises of his $1000 philanthropic gestures.

  • True, Willms et al have to hand over all their money and have promised as much under sufferance of perjury.
  • True, they all have to notify the FTC of their whereabouts for the next 20 years and all their business proceeds.  They have to keep compliance records for 5 years.
  • True, Willms must tell the FTC his jobs, phone numbers, businesses in which he’s involved etc
  • True, Willms et al have 180 days to hand over all details of all their businesses and contacts within those businesses.
  • True, Willms for the next five years must give a copy of the FTC order (the pdf attached) to each person he does business with and that they have 30 days to sign and return it to the FTC.

True for all of that, but, Willms can still do business and who knows if any of his victims will get recompensed.  A lot of the order’s wording is to ensure that the US & Canadian Inland Revenue get their taxes from Willms et al for the last three years.  What about the little people?

This article guesses that victims won’t see any of the cash.  My guess is that only those people that actually complained to the FTC will get cash, which is why it’s so important to complain, as I’ve suggested for years.

The Return of Fu Manchu

This article thinks that he’s had to hand over everything (though I can’t see how they justify that, given what we know about business secrecy in Nicosia, Cyprus), yet it also points out that the bans that Willms has had to acquiesce to only apply to the USA!  That is, there’s nothing at all saying Willms can’t set up anywhere else, like Korea say, and hammer the world from there!

MSNBC opinionate that Jesse Willms will need to look for a new line of work…..

I, of course, beg to differ, because:

  • He settled with Microsoft, yet carried on trading as usual.
  • He settled with Symantech, yet carried on trading as usual.
  • He settled with Oprah Winfrey, yet carried on trading as usual.
  • He settled with Dr Oz, yet carried on trading as usual.
  • He settled with Google yet carried on trading as usual.
  • Now he has settled with the FTC. I’d be amazed (yet obviously pleased) if he changed the patterns of a lifetime. Only time will tell.

On top of this, Willms himself states on his blog entry (see screenshot above);

We are working to resolve issues relating to past marketing practices for products that our company no longer sells. Through this process, we have taken steps to assure(sic) that our business practices are in full compliance with the law. We are excited by the opportunity to continue giving customers access to a variety of products and services at significant savings. – n.b.  the emphasis is mine.

…..which looks to me that it’s more web business, not a change in business type.

It’s a victory, but not the one the whole world wants.  It all leaves a bad, lingering, smell…..

 Affected Businesses

Apart from Willms, Sechrist and others, the business entities that we’ve come across in our investigations here, are all in the judgement.  It writes that “Corporate Defendants” means:

  • 1021018 Alberta Ltd, also d..b.a. Just Think Media, Credit Report America, Wulongsource, and Wuyi Source;
  • 1016363 Alberta Ltd also d.b.a. eDirect Software;
  • 1524948 Alberta Ltd, also d.b.a. Terra Marketing Group, Swipe.Bids.com, and SwipeAuctions.com;
  • Circle Media Bids Limited, also d.b.a. SwipeBids.com SwipeAuctions.com, and SellofAuctions.com;
  • Coastwest Holdings Limited;
  • Farend Services Ltd;
  • JDW Media, LLC;
  • Net Soft Media, LLC, also d.b.a. SwipeBids.com;
  • Sphere Media, LLC, also d.b,a SwipeBids.com and SwipeAuctions.com;

I’ve listed these so that they appear in search engines and so that people realise the lengths of obfuscation that Willms has used in his activities.

Office Politics

I say Willms, because he is recognised in the judgement as the prime mover in the scams.  He has been pinched for hundreds of millions – the others have been collared for a few tens of thousands at most each, some, for nothing, because (how embarrassing is that for them?), they have nothing – yes really!

  • How annoying for the two Gravers that their payments are about the same as young Jesse Wilms’ fish tank!  ($30,000 in 2010 he paid for it)
  • I wonder how the Children’s Hospital Boston and the Gulf Coast Restoration Fund both realise that they’ve got less from philanthropic Jesse than he’s spent on his fish tank?  ($25k each)  I wonder how they feel now, knowing that this money was stolen from ordinary consumers, people like themselves?
  • Or how do Canadian veterans feel about Willms plugging his $1k donation to the poppy fund, while spending $5000 on a pool table?

How galling for Sechrist, Callister, and Milne.  They can pay nothing, Willms can pay $359m!  If they’re still working for him I bet that that’s fun in the office!

This is a local copy of the full FTC Judgement Against Wills et al  I suggest everyone read it – it’s riveting.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Related Posts:

Crawling Chaos Kick Scammers Ass with DMCA Infringement Bluff

Strangely post on December 7th, 2011
Posted in Art Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
[iframe height=”480″ width=”480″ src=”http://crawlingchaos.co.uk/859/dmca-infringement-by-black-box-access/” scrolling=”yes”]

I’ve been busy. I posted the details of a wacky con on the Crawling Chaos website (shown above). In a nutshell, it appears to operate thus:

  • User searches for music or other media
  • User is presented with search results, some of which point to Black Box Access
  • User clicks on link and is told that the required file was uploaded last week and has been downloaded ~19,000 times
  • User immediately thinks “this is popular, I’ll have it!”
  • User hands over email & financial details

After this I don’t know as obviously handing over that data to a bunch of crooks is just asking for trouble.
However, as if to highlight their very own scamminess, Black Box Access serve ads which go to websites from which it’s almost impossible to leave with continuous pop-ups and all the usual crap.

So beware. Tread softly young Luke. It’s a major privacy issue.

Related Posts:

Comments are closed

Internet Businesses, Court?

Introduction

roostersThe 9/11 period, (or 11th September in some places), has been interesting of late with regard to internet marketing and litigation as it applies to certain entities not unfamiliar to these pages.

Pacific WebWorks (PWW)

A Randy Guffey is named as the class action plaintiff against the “business” of PWW.  The nature of the suit?

Torts – Property – Truth in Lending

See this link, and more to follow when news filters out.

Jesse Willms

A few quick things around good ol’ lovable Jesse Willms have come out in the last few days.

  1. He’s been feverishly tanking up a blog on “internet ethics”.  See and the daily list of patronising postings from his holier-than-thou-ness.
  2. He’s plopping out yet more feeds about his “business”.  See http://www.prweb.com/releases/2010/09/prweb4486904.htm for instance which starts off with the classic line from Jesse,  “Bad customer service can destroy your business”. Well either that or getting caught for thieving by the copyright owners such as Microsoft and having to fork out millions in damages! That’ll also do it!
  3. He’s now taken to threatening legal action against anyone telling the truth about his activities….  Just small fry mind you.  Not the major TV companies who’ve exposed him, say.  Take Michael Larson of http://www.pyxisstudios.us/public/about-us.html, say.  In this document (link to pdf) from the lawyers Kronenburger, they conveniently provide a list to a host of complaints about SwipeBids (not SwipeActions mind you!).  Well it’s nice to have everything in one place for easy referral isn’t it?

In (3) above, most of Larson’s words are prior comment.  They’re just scare tactics.

Larson has taken this on board.  Cunningly, , has quite a few things to say about all this.  He’s now reminding everyone about the US RICO act.  This means the:

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act

In light of these facts, we see Jesse Willms actions with more clarity.

Conclusion

Willms is presenting a cleaner and cleaner image of himself to the world, like his charitable donations and continuing deluge of helpful moralising.

Unfortunately for him, the web has a memory, easily called up.  It’s not like having a playground argument where the winner walks away and all is forgotten, because all his weasely ways, frauds and deceptions are there in black and white for all to see with a quick Google search!

He knows what he’s done.  His current disguising actions are just fluff and bluster, because his past is there all the time.

Maybe the RICO act will get him?  Maybe a host of class actions?  He thinks his current penny auction site is an auction, the Government thinks it’s a lottery and should be governed by gaming laws (see RICO act for some of this).  He thinks  he’s being charitable with his money and helpful with his current blogging, we see it as self-serving deviousness.

Pacific WebWorks are being hit by another class action and legal case.  This is another reason why the share price hasn’t risen following the Google cop-out (sorry, agreement).  I wonder how many more are in the pipeline?

Long Lists from These Pages of Willms and PWW Comments

http://strangelyperfect.tv/7108/jobs-at-just-think-media/

http://strangelyperfect.tv/6568/dangerous-effectivecleanse-and-scams-too/

http://strangelyperfect.tv/5146/more-on-google-profits-and-pacific-webworks/

Related Posts:

Mona Vie Name in your URL

Hacker Attack?

digital attackThis article is a copy of one formally at this web address.  This is currently down and is repeated here in its entirety as a public service!  It’s suspected of being hacked, as described here on LazyManAndMoney.  This page will be removed if all is okay. (scheduled to release at midnight Friday 27/08/2010)

Mona Vie Name in your URL!

Mona Vie: Don’t use our name in your URL, unless you’re Wikipedia (and we’re doing the editing), By the author of Expert Fraud Investigation and Essentials of Corporate Fraud , Tracy Coenen

“No, MonaVie doesn’t endorse or approve me writing about them. In fact, they’ll probably get mad that I’m mentioning them. I don’t like MonaVie“.- Tracy Coenen

Earlier this week I wrote about the MonaVie lawyers going after bloggers who do unflattering critiques of the company. Their premise was silly: You can’t use our name in a URL. Here’s exactly what they said in their threatening letter to blogger “Lazy Man”:

“As a network marketing company MonaVie does not permit its name to be used in any URL or email address and the company must take necessary action to protect its intellectual property. It is not permitted for a third party vendor to use the MonaVie trade name in any form.”

So no use of their name in a URL, and no user of their name in any form? Gotcha.


Except it’s not so cut and dried. Lots of references to MonaVie in the titles of articles makes it so that their name is in the URL:

But the best example of a URL that includes “Mona Vie” and would therefore violate the bogus legal threats of the company comes from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MonaVie

It gets better, though. Not only does Wikipedia use the MonaVie name in a URL (horrors!)… people at MonaVie headquarters actually participate in editing the article about Mona Vie!!! A lot!!!


Here’s the link showing edits done by 65.44.117.2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/65.44.117.2. You can see lots of edits to the MonaVie article.


And here’s the proof that the IP address doing these edits is owned by MonaVie:

http://centralops.net/co/DomainDossier.aspx?addr=65.44.117.2&dom_whois=true&dom_dns=true&traceroute=true&net_whois=true&svc_scan=true


For now, let’s ignore the fact that Wikipedia rules prohibit a company or its employees from editing articles about the company. That’s a conflict of interest (they obviously have an interest in slanting article material in a positive direction).


But I don’t care so much about that, however. What I care about is the fact that use of the MonaVie name in a URL seems to only be frowned upon when the URL is for an article with negative information and opinions. Have the lawyers gone after Inc.com for using their name in the URL? Or MarketWatch? Or Facebook?


Here’s the best part about the edits of the Mona Vie page on Wikipedia, though… This edit removed the company’s Income Disclosure Statement from the article. Interesting, isn’t it? Especially since the link is to a page on the official MonaVie website. How could they object to that? Easy. The MonaVie Income Disclosure Statement, if looked at carefully enough, is a damning piece of information. It proves that almost no one is making any money from the “wonderful opportunity” that Mona Vie is offering. Here’s an explanation of the statement, which clearly shows that 99% of MonaVie distributors are making $3.75 a week. What an opportunity.


So what is it, Mona Vie lawyers? Can we use your name in a URL or not? Or do your made up restrictions only apply to negative opinions?

This article was taken from the ” the Fraud Files blog” at www.sequenceinc.com

Related Posts:

Pathetic Fried Tweets

KingdomTwitter

Today’s news that actor Stephen Fry, famous for his uptake of all new gadgets and one-man publicist for Twitter, is “thinking about giving up on Twitter” got me thinking.  (see Fry ponders leaving Twitter site )

Apparently he thinks there’s too much aggression and unkindness around….. well, dah?

Not that I’m disagreeing with the sentiment; but really; what’s he expect?

YawnIn days of yore, early last century, actors and performers in music hall famously were pelted with all sorts of rubbish if the audience were at all dissatisfied with the performance – or even if they just wanted to “have a go”.  Rotten fruit, tins, bottles, dead dogs & cats and even shit. (No-one noticed the shit as the stench was so over-powering from the great unwashed anyway, so what’s another turd gonna do?)

YawnMy point is that the great ivory tower in which performers now exist is ‘somewhat’ removed from reality (putting it mildly), and that Fry should ‘get a grip man’.  A life lived inside scripts, cosseted by studio security seems to have addled his brain.

Twitter is only a glorified chat room, now taken over by the meeja while all the plebs struggle to keep their heads above water.  I mean, why the fuck would I be interested in the latest tweet from the BBC’s “One Show” or anything else like that?  For fucks sake, I’ve just watched the show!!!

lady-yawningPersonally I’m glad this has happened and I hope he does ditch it.  Then Twitter can sink back into the morass from which it came – called “doing a MySpace” nowadays.  Because the reality of somehow nosing in on a celebrity’s thoughts wears a bit thin after a while.  Now that the thing has been taken over by the thumbnail-fixated masses, who wants to know the minutiae of folk’s lives and what anyone thinks?

I mean, how many people do I really want to know have just gone to the shops and think Kylie is really good for her age?

None.

Do I want to know your choice in blonde hair colouring?

yawn[1]No.

It’s like listening in on texting.  And that is the pits.  The world, far from being full of aggressive & unkind people, is mostly full of boring people having normal humdrum lives.

Fry’s Tipping Point?

Q. Do you want to know which tweet tipped Fry over the edge?

A. Someone said “I admire and adore” Mr Fry, but that he found his tweets “a bit… boring… (sorry Stephen)”.

So using one of Stephen Fry’s pet phrases; “Q.E.D. ” – ‘thus it was written’ – used as a proof statement.

Ages ago, Leo Laporte said MySpace is the new hell and I agreed.  It’s just that Twitter has added an extra dimension.

See  http://www.twit.tv/natn28 for the radio show and the actual show is:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Of course, the irony is not lost on myself that I too, am now yabbering on about nothing.

The above MP3 link has an discussion about Facebook before the system went openly public.  It’s an interesting historical document from this viewpoint.

Postscript 1/11/2009

Apparently all is well with Fry and the Twittering classes.  The funniest, most ignorant comment has to have been that of Alan Davies who called the innocuous, slightly critical, but still boring comment above, “moronic”.

Remember, all the bloke said was: “I admire and adore” Mr Fry, but added that he found his tweets “a bit… boring… (sorry Stephen).”

Moronic?  WTF?  It’s redefined the English and psychiatric dictionary.

Related Posts:

Comments are closed

© 2007-2017 Strangely Perfect All Rights Reserved -- Copyright notice by me