GUEST COLUMNIST: ‘Shocked’ And ‘Scared’ To See Her Name In Friedman Lawsuit Paperwork; Says She Was Told To ‘Examine Your Finances’; Sees Move By Dallas Lawyer As ‘Intimidation Tactic’ And Says She Won’t ‘Roll Over’
UPDATED 3:45 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.)
Editor’s Note: This is a guest column by Roxy Lewis, a self-described member of the “AARP generation.” Lewis was a member of ASD and the ASD Members Business Association. This column is in her own words. In the column, Lewis tells her story about various email interactions concerning her attempt to get a refund for her contribution to ASDMBA.
THE IRONY OF INFORMATION TRANSFORMED
INTO THREATS IN THE ARONS/FRIEDMAN CASE
By Roxy Lewis
When I saw my name in Exhibit A of the “Notice to Take Deposition†issued by Carter Boisvert to Jack Arons in the ongoing suit by Larry Friedman, I was frankly shocked at first and then scared. After all, I am a member of the AARP generation living in Minnesota, who never posted anything defamatory, slanderous or libelous about Larry Friedman or the legal firm. Yet here, buried in the middle of Larry Friedman’s suit against Jack, I found not only myself, but the names of 8 other users of the ASD-BIZ.NING.com forum. I was concerned, felt this was purely an intimidation tactic, and had no idea where to go next.
However, I am not one to just roll over and play dead based on legal documentation from some unknown person in a remote location. One of the ironies in this subpoena is the request for information on the 8 of us. The subpoena states they are asking for:
“Any and all documents regarding the following members of the “ASD Business Information Zone†social network site, located at the Internet web address http://asd-biz.ning.com, including but not limited to each member’s full name, address, telephone number, all e-mail addresses, all IP addresses and any other contact information within your possession, custody, or control.â€
Why is this ironic? Because in my case, Larry Friedman already had all of that information, and had it for months. In December 2008 I had an email exchange with Bob Guenther, who referred me to Larry Friedman, regarding a refund of my ASDMBA “contribution.†His final reply is noted below:
“Roxy. I am not avoiding any issue. There is no issue. You are not our client and never have been. Your dispute, if any, is with the organization that you purportedly joined not with me or my firm. You did not hire my firm. You are not a client of my firm. We don’t even know who you are. The only mistake I made was being nice to you in the first place, and I won’t make it again. If you take any frivolous action against me or my law firm we will defend it vigorously and pursue all of our lawful remedies against you. We know exactly how to deal with people like you in the Texas courts. Do not contact me again. -Larry Friedmanâ€
It’s interesting to me that Mr. Friedman moved immediately to threat mode, “we know exactly how to deal with people like you in the Texas courts.†Given that I am a private citizen, not an attorney, not financially wealthy as Mr. Friedman and his firm are, this was definitely perceived by me as a threat directed specifically at me. I decided to bide my time and do some research as things unfolded.
In March, I read that Larry Friedman’s firm had begun authorizing refunds. Laura Tripp was named as the contact person. I contacted her, restating my December request. I received a very nice reply, with the instructions and questions they required to be answered in order to obtain a refund. I found the last one particularly interesting: “Source of information for refund request†as it could be taken as asking “how did I learn about the fact that the firm was refunding monies.â€
I submitted my request and waited. The response from “Laura†was swift and as hostile and threatening as the December exchange with Larry Friedman, saying I would not be getting a refund. However, this time there was an added twist. This time “Laura†made disparaging remarks about the others on the ASD-Biz.ning.com board, the very thing Larry Friedman accuses Jack of doing! The tone moved from the pleasant information-giving exchange of earlier emails to what I perceived as a hostile threat as well:
Ms. Lewis,
This firm will not refund any money that was not paid directly to Friedman & Feiger. It has no obligation to do so. The money it has refunded has been strictly voluntary. The information you received from J. D. Sullivan a/k/a Wayne Tidderington a/k/a Bob Sterling is false and misleading. The statements that you have made are unsupportable. That is why Mr. Sullivan/Tidderington/Sterling does not make them himself, use his own name or file his own complaints. Mr. Friedman and the firm have recourse and will file suit against anyone who makes false, misleading or disparaging remarks against them or files a baseless complaint — as they have already. Rendering legal advice without a license is a crime in Texas; filing false complaints is actionable. The firm takes your threats very seriously and any complaint you file will be considered spurious and will be vigorously defended. Your should investigate Mr. Sullivan/Tidderington/Sterling’s background and history very carefully before you get involved with him or do his bidding. The last person he used for similar purposes got sued in Texas, after which he abandoned them and left them to fend for themselves with the problem he created. Ask Mr. Sullivan/Tidderington/Sterling what his real name and address is, what he does for a living, how many times he has been sued for interfering in other people’s businesses, what his wife’s real name is and where she works. If he will give you all of that information truthfully (which he won’t) you will know who you are really dealing with. Then you can determine for yourself who is leading you around. And, by the way, ask Mr. Sullivan/Tidderington/Sterling what his relationship is to Andy Bowdoin and what Mr. Sullivan/Tidderington/Sterling’s motives were to divert your attention from the real cause of your concern. If you want all of your money back start looking for it under Mr. Sullivan/Tidderington/Sterling’s rock.
Laura Tripp
AR Manager
Friedman & Feiger, LLP
Just to be sure I had been clear, I sent one last email to “Laura†:
Dear Ms. Tripp,
Thank you for your reply.
Please confirm for me that you (and Attorney Friedman) understand that his solicitation of funds to be sent to ASDMBA and mailed to Bob Guenther, still means he solicited them, received them and then did no service for them. As such, if he will not reconsider and refund my $100.00 I will have no recourse other than to immediately file a complaint with the Texas Bar Association and advise others who have asked my opinion on the matter to do the same.
Please reply by midnight on 4/7/09 CDT. Thank you.
Roxy Lewis
“Her†reply was swift and again perceived as threatening:
Ms Lewis
You have my response. I would strongly recommend that you consult with an attorney in Minnesota and stop getting your legal advice off the internet from non-attorney bloggers. As stated, any baseless complaint filed with the Texas Bar will be vigourously defended by this law firm. Also, I might recommend that you examine your finances to be sure you have the means to defend yourself against any actions that may be brought against you as a result of your actions.
That’s the second irony in this exchange. Clearly she had NO information about my December email exchange with Larry Friedman and assumed I was “getting my legal advice off the internet from non-attorney bloggers,” the same bloggers she disparaged in the prior email, rather than realizing this was a repeat request. Still, this threat against my finances compared to those of “this firm†felt very much like a second threat against me.
Those of you who have been following the case from Larry Friedman against Jack Arons know that many people believe, and have posted online in multiple forums, that this is really a first amendment, freedom of speech case. Considering that fact, I began to search for information on the internet regarding first amendment rights and came upon cyberslapp.org. I’d never heard of a “cyberslapp†before, but the definition on their home page was exactly what I was looking for:
“A new form of lawsuit called a “CyberSLAPP” suit is threatening to overturn the promise of anonymous online speech and chill the freedom of expression that is central to the online world. CyberSLAPP cases typically involve a person who has posted anonymous criticisms of a corporation or public figure on the Internet. The target of the criticism then files a frivolous lawsuit just so they can issue a subpoena to the Web site or Internet Service Provider (ISP) involved, discover the identity of their anonymous critic, and intimidate or silence them.â€
Because I was named in the subpoena, I contacted them via their “contact us†link on the home page. This put me in touch with a Mr. Paul Levy. I told him of the subpoena and my name being there, along with 8 others. He advised that Ning, being located in California, would likely not respond to a Texas subpoena at all, but he would verify this with them. Yesterday he confirmed this is indeed the position [Ning] has taken, and authorized me to share this information. You can view the posting on the ASD-Biz.ning.com forum.
So, to all of us named in that subpoena, it appears we don’t have much to worry about. Some of the online bloggers speculated early that this would be the case. Personally I needed a greater assurance than that, and the feedback from Ning to Mr. Levy gave me that assurance.
I am still not convinced Larry Friedman or the Texas courts and Judges have any jurisdiction over those of us in other states, including the subject of the suit, Jack Arons of Florida. I am now more convinced than ever that we all need to be diligent in guarding our first amendment rights against those who would try to intimidate, threaten and silence us, no matter where they are located.
Thank you, Roxy, for taking the initiative and contacting Cyberslapp and getting to the bottom of just what Larry can and can not do to the posters on the NING forum! I, for one, chose not to worry..I googled “Dallas attorney Larry Friedman” to see if anything from the Biz Forum was showing up that could possibly damage he or his business and found NOTHING.
I know Larry has stated time and time again he works for the ASDMBA Trust and not the members individually, which conveniently “prohibits” him from having to disclose to the trust members his billable hours for the $70,000 the trust has paid to him already PLUS the additional $50,000 owed. I, for one, do not know of so much as a letter being written on our behalf (trust members) from Larry, much less any filings. ( If there was a letter or filing, please Mr. Friedman produce it to me and I will gladly retract the above statement.)
Roxy, there is something deep down inside of me that tells me Larry, in spite of the trust (or not a trust as his buddy Bob has stated) STILL WORKS FOR YOU AND ME and has some sort of fiduciary responsibility to the both of us! We both should be considered active ASDMBA members due to the fact our money has NEVER been returned; he has taken OUR money and used it, and we are NOT supposed to question his ethics.SO, how can this man consciously name us (active paying clients) in a law suit? PLUS, he and his employee has threaten you in the worse sort of way (you contributed to her salary) I know he has singled us out from the group, but we are STILL collectively members of the group. something is just NOT RIGHT here!
I haven’t seen that web site before, very useful. Reading the FAQ page confirmed many things that I believed to be true.
http://www.cyberslapp.org/about/page.cfm?PageID=7
It’s well worth reading the FAQ page in full. It is plain to me that the case against against Jack is a text book SLAPP. It is frivolous and it was filed for the only purpose of intimidation.
The case has no merit and is more damaging to Friedfish’s reputation than anything anyone may have said on the internet. I’m sure there are others that share my view that the only reason this case was files was so that the con-artist Bob Guenther can intimidate those who have been asking questions. In fact, the aggressive tone of some of the replies from Friedfis’s office sound like they could have been written by Bobbie himself.
Well said, Roxy!
While the question of whether Ning will respond to a subpoena issued in Texas may have been addressed, Friedman may seek to have a subpoena issued in California. At this point there are many rumors swirling about the Internet regarding Friedman’s practices and he may well seek to up the ante in order to attempt to silence his critics.
On another note, Jack is reporting on Ning ASD Business Zone that he has an attorney seeking to depose Bob. That brings up the question of what questions people would like to see Bob answer. Since truth is a defense in libel and slander suits, the questions of Friedman’s full involvement in ASDMBA and an accounting of all monies paid to the “trust” would certainly be on the table.
Just my opinion.
dB
The more we learn about the way in which Larry Friedman and his law office conduct their correspondence with members of a client Trust Association (or even clients, the more astounded I become at the conduct of this “high profile attorney”. It may sound like something Bob G wrote, but it is sent, as so much other correspondence, under the signature of Friedman & Feiger, and the responsiblity for its content and tone are all theirs.
And yes, Kathy, I agree with you that we do have a legal relationship of some kind with Larry Friedman as members of ASDMBA.
Mr. Friedman seems to have come a long way since his days since he first started practicing at the Bar. It is a scandal that someone of his alleged stature should be making a parody of the words justice and “good standing”
It is also totally unnecessary. He could have resigned as the ASDMBA Trust attorney a long time ago. He did not have to join Bob Guenther in putting his name to raising funds for a standing that was never going to be possible. He could have let us all know that he HAD MADE MISTAKE and that ASD was not the legitimate non ponzi he told us it was at the beginning.
But he has done none of these things and is now earning himself and even higher profile – as a legal buffoon who tried to use the proverbial tank to squash a fly, who seems now to be trying to sue the world wide web and has, without anyone else lifting a finger, ended up turning himself into a subject of mistrust. Not a pretty situation for an attorney who was hired to help the victims of a ponzi scheme.
And how, pray tell, would Larry have such a document issued in a state (California) which he isn’t authorized to practice law in?
I checked the Texas Bar. Larry is only qualified to practice in two states, plus before Federal courts, if I read things correctly.
Additionally, California has a rather interesting law of their own regarding SLAPPs. The target can, with a simple and cheap motion filed, turn the lawsuit around back in the face of their attacker. Does Minnesota likewise have such a law? Yes, it indeed does have something related.
http://medialawminnesota.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/an-encouraging-slapp/
http://www.casp.net/statutes/mn-stat.html
During the Iraqi Invasion, the Iraqi Information Minister aka Baghdad Bob, made absurd statements on camera which have been preserved at this site:
http://welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/
A few years later, a company out of Linden, Utah, The Santa Cruz Operation, claimed to own Linux and demanded payment from Linux users to the tune of $700 per copy. IBM and other companies refused to sign up for their licensing program asserting that Linux was free. SCO sued IBM. Not surprisingly, Microsoft purchased a license and, it was alleged (not sure if it was proven), funneled $20 million to SCO via a venture firm named BayStar Capital which had a relationship with a senior Microsoft executive when their funds were running low.
A paralegal and blogger named Pamela Jones set up a website to document the litigation and quickly became the authoritative source of information, especially when many of the people who had programmed the code allegedly owned by SCO started posting. The site has won many Webbie awards.
http://www.groklaw.net/
In the course of his FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) campaign, Daryl McBride, the CEO of SCO, made many memorable quotes which are documented at this site:
http://www.anerispress.com/wltsim/
McBride and SCO sought to silence Pamela Jones and Groklaw in Federal Court and only succeeded in drawing more attention to themselves which brought out more people with evidence relevant to IBM’s defense and counter suit. SCO is now in bankruptcy and the stock has been delisted. McBride has succeeded only in making himself the poster child for patent trolls and the laughing stock of the worldwide Linux community. A secondary benefit is that when Microsoft sought to corrupt the ISO 29500 OOXML standardization process, the Internet community was watching and expressed it’s outrage.
dB
He could hire an attorney in California and seek to have a California court issue a subpoena. I don’t know what the chance of success would be.
It’s no different than me hiring a Texas attorney seeking to issue a subpoena to a Texas company.
Any thoughts?
I phoned my attorney who’s done this. In his words. “You have to get a subpoena issued in Texas and then take it to a California Court hoping to get it enforced. It can be a complex and time consuming task.”
As for judge shopping, cases are assigned on a rotational basis so if you wish to get or avoid certain judges, you would seek to file your suit in a jurisdiction with only one or two judges. This is true at Federal, State and County levels. Many larger counties have upwards of 30 judges so your chances are low. If he drew a judge who’s track record was less than favorable to his position, he would seek a jury trial.
He also stated that as you go from Local to State to Federal levels, the quality of judges increases.
Lets assume that somehow Larry gets NING to take notice of the subpoena. There’s about half a dozen people named, each person could file a protest against the subpoena. Larry might then have to issue a separate subpoena for each person. I don’t know how long that would take, but while he’s doing all this he is not charging his clients $250-$600 per hour. i.e. this is costing him money.
Lets say he gets his subpoenas filed & NING hands over what little info they have. 6 people possibly in different states. He would then have to issue subpoenas for each persons email or ISP provider. Each one of those could be contested, each one time consuming.
Lets say that eventually he gets the real info on those 6 people. He would then file for libel & slander for each person. Then the fun really starts. Each person could then file for dismissal, or file to relocate, file for anything else they can think of. Each person, in a different state, filing for oral deposition on different days. All these different motions would be very time consuming for Larry. Time he is not billing his clients. Time that is costing him money.
This is a no-win situation for Larry.
Ms. Lewis,
This firm will not refund any money that was not paid directly to Friedman & Feiger. It has no obligation to do so. The money it has refunded has been strictly voluntary. The information you received from J. D. Sullivan a/k/a Wayne Tidderington a/k/a Bob Sterling is false and misleading. The statements that you have made are unsupportable. That is why Mr. Sullivan/Tidderington/Sterling does not make them himself, use his own name or file his own complaints. Mr. Friedman and the firm have recourse and will file suit against anyone who makes false, misleading or disparaging remarks against them or files a baseless complaint — as they have already. Rendering legal advice without a license is a crime in Texas; filing false complaints is actionable. The firm takes your threats very seriously and any complaint you file will be considered spurious and will be vigorously defended. Your should investigate Mr. Sullivan/Tidderington/Sterling’s background and history very carefully before you get involved with him or do his bidding. The last person he used for similar purposes got sued in Texas, after which he abandoned them and left them to fend for themselves with the problem he created. Ask Mr. Sullivan/Tidderington/Sterling what his real name and address is, what he does for a living, how many times he has been sued for interfering in other people’s businesses, what his wife’s real name is and where she works. If he will give you all of that information truthfully (which he won’t) you will know who you are really dealing with. Then you can determine for yourself who is leading you around. And, by the way, ask Mr. Sullivan/Tidderington/Sterling what his relationship is to Andy Bowdoin and what Mr. Sullivan/Tidderington/Sterling’s motives were to divert your attention from the real cause of your concern. If you want all of your money back start looking for it under Mr. Sullivan/Tidderington/Sterling’s rock.
Laura Tripp
AR Manager
Friedman & Feiger, LLP
Is it just me, or does this entire letter sound exactly like Guenther wrote it, down to the incoherent mumbling? I don’t know of ANY manager in ANY office that would respond to someone like this, especially from a Law Office, and there are several defamatory statements made within “her” letter.
Thanks for the article….. and, I am not Don
You assume that Larry is doing all the work. In most law offices, the grunt work is done by paralegals. You are correct that Friedman could not devote all his time to other clients but it wouldn’t limit his ability to bill too much.
To a greater or lesser extent, U.S. Supreme Court rulings are not written by the justices themselves. Their law clerks write the opinions and the justices, approve, disapprove and tweak them. The justice is the editor, the law clerks do the grunt work.
HI Kathy,
I couldn’t agree with you more!
Roxy, or someone who thinks she is Roxy :)
Hey Dirty Bird!
Thanks! What’s so comical to me is that I haven’t said a thing critical of Larry or the firm, his own emails have, however, be they from Larry or “Laura.”
I think it’s going to get interesting, folks.
Roxy
Alasycia,
Agreed, not a pretty situation. Agreed, it did not have to go this way, at all. And yes, I’d have to agree, without anyone else lifting a finger, the man did it to himself.
Roxy
Dirty Bird and Professor Henry Higgins,
Thanks for the info about the Minnesota anti-SLAPP law. Larry is a dues-paying member of the bar here, but is prohibited from practicing.
It will be interesting to see what, if anything, comes from Ning, based on their remarks to Mr. Levy. And it is a comfort to know that it’s not easy to hip-pocket a judge elsewhere.
Roxy, wait, is this me? I better go check… :)
Hi I am not Don,
You’re welcome for the article. I do think the original replies about the nuts and bolts of obtaining a refund were from Laura, but then “she” morphed into a completely different respondent, so you could be right.
Roxy — maybe :)
Hi Kathy,
You’re welcomeSomething hasn’t been right with this whole ASDMBA from the get-go, in my opinion, which isn’t a mover/shaker or high-powered, but is still mine.
Roxy, really! :)
Hi Tony,
Yes, the CyberSLAPP.org site is very helpful and has an awful lot of information I’d never encountered elsewhere.
As for who wrote the responses, gee, “somebody hacked my email account and got my username and password, so it wasn’t me” from Laura might be what we hear next. Sounds awfully familiar!
Roxy, yep, it’s me :)
True, but being right or wrong generally does not stop attorney’s. They just keep filing more appeals until they exhaust them. Then they still disagree but “abide by the ruling”.
Friedman may have named you in the order precisely because he does know your address, etc. In other cases, he’d have to get the ISP to divulge the information which involves a whole other layer of subpoenas and court orders.
It’s nice that Ning would not respond to a Texas court order but if Friedman has any knowledge of the law, he already knows that. This may not be the end of the matter, only round 1.
Just a thought. As always, consult a (good) lawyer who knows the laws in your area if you have any questions.
If I’m not mistaken, did not the original ASDMBA information regarding the trust both give Friedman & Feiger as the people to send the money too, and state that money not used (for the stated purpose) would be refunded?
http://www.theadsurfersforum.com/documents/ASD_member_attorney.pdf , perhaps?
My assumption would be that ASDMBA funds would be in a client trust account c/o FF and not co-mingled with other funds. The funds would be disbursed to the firm upon billing. You’d have to see how the “trust” was registered to see what laws apply. Others are stating on the Internet that they have not located registration information so who knows. Just my opinion.
Hey Dirty Bird,
Could be, and yes, it’s always good to consult a competent attorney in case of questions. Only time will tell what happens. It could be he picked those of us who had signed up as members of the Ning board at a certain point, as he asked them for Jack Arons’ information and already had it as well. As I said, time will tell.
Roxy
Whilst I would never seek to defend the actions of Friedman, Guenther, Bowdoin or any of their cohorts, nobody should lose sight of the fact that anyone involved in this mess is in it because of their own actions in the first instance.I talk about people joining ASD and then to make matters worse, sending money to Guenther in the hope they were buying a place at the front of the payout queue.All for the love of money.
If you play with fire you shouldn’t be surprised if you get burnt. For every action their is a reaction. If you do the crime you should be prepared to do the time.
I think Roxy issued some good advice when she said: Just a thought. As always, consult a (good) lawyer who knows the laws in your area if you have any questions. It’s a pity she and others didn’t heed that advice before embarking down the easy money path.It doesn’t have to be a lawyer. There are plenty of free advice centres that after taking a quick look would’ve told you to steer clear.
http://asdgodsown.ning.com/
Roxy,
Years ago we registered a domain name and set up our website. A few years later, a very large multi-national sent us a demand for the domain name as it was the same as one of their businesses. They included a valid trademark certificate and a bunch of other registration forms. We said we’d be happy to sell them the name for the right price but their trademark was immaterial as we registered the name first and we were not in their line of business so no confusion could result by our use of a name identical to theirs. They countered with a demand to turn over the name without compensation by a certain date as they owned the trademark.
We filed suit against them in Federal Court in our jurisdiction. We again offered to sell them the name. They stated that they had not budgeted for such an expense. We just laughed as their CEO likely spent more on private jets in any given week. After negotiations, we agreed to drop the suit provided they drop their demand for the name AND not initiate any legal proceedings to gain possession of the domain name.
A year or so later, they came back and asked if they could buy the name. We agreed.
This corporation likely looked us up in a local business directory and figured we’d be too intimidated or ignorant to know our rights. They were wrong. By filing suit first we beat them to the punch. In order to defend themselves from our lawsuit, they’d likely have to spend more than our asking price.
Their filings and correspondence were polite but demanding. They did not threaten, unlike the alleged FF email.
The bottom line is that we won precisely because we knew our rights and beat them to the punch, filing suit against them in a jurisdiction thousands of miles from their corporate headquarters. If they had filed first in their jurisdiction, we would have incurred significant costs defending ourselves.
I’m not predicting what will happen in this instance but it’s good to know your rights and play the venue game, provided the law is in your favor.
Just my opinion.
dB
Thanks again DB.
Roxy
Hi Pistol,
They say hindsight is 20/20, and this ASD and ASDMBA mess is a great example of that. However, you wrongly assume I and possibly others like me, did not do any research before buying into ASD. At the time I bought in, there was little if any information online, and that which was there was well hidden, right down to “Andy Bowdoin” really being “Thomas A. Bowdoin.” If you are not an internet expert, finding this type of data, before it is literally all over the place, can be quite difficult. Likewise my reason for joining the ASDMBA trust wasn’t as you’ve stated either.
All that is water under the bridge however. I just want to make sure others benefit from my experience and don’t make the same mistakes.
Roxy
Perhaps your closet has no skeletons, or perhaps this ad nauseum repetition of the same old point is your attempt at exorcising past demons, either way the image that is conjured up resembles “The boy who cried wolf” and we all know what happened there.
Nuff said.
Hi again Pistol,
Your spelling of “centre” several times leads me to think you’re not in the US of A. We don’t have “citizens advice centres” here to consult. As to whether I consulted an attorney or accountant, I must say no, but for a very specific reason. The email from the congregational secretary was sent extremely close to the time of Miami rally. Her husband was taking his downline checks to the rally personally. In fact, those of us they recruited had very few hours to get our certified/cashier’s checks to them, and also to fill out the paperwork required, so it could be delivered to my sponsor who was boarding a plane for Miami. There was simply no time to consult with anyone. Now, had I heard this from Joe Blow on the street I would likely have given it not a second thought. Instead, because of the source of the information, as well as the time constraints, I opted to proceed. As I have said, hindsight is 20/20. One thing I and others have learned is to be more cautious. I take full responsibility for my decision to proceed without checking with an attorney first, but frankly, there was nothing to take TO an attorney to check out. And we were buying advertising for our businesses, which on the surface sounds quite legitimate. Would I make the same mistake again? No. I learned, as have so many others, that if it sounds too good to be true, it probably isn’t true. But at the time, the lack of negative information available to me and the press of time simply took precedence.
Still, I do understand what you are saying. Many of us here in Minnesota who went to the local rah-rah meetings held at the last minute before the Miami rall, were simply caught up in the press of time and the enthusiasm of the crowd, and facts shared by those speaking at the meetings. I don’t know what “citizen advice centres” do there, but here, we’re all pretty much on our own.
Hope this answers your question. Typically I am very cautious, but when I’m not the one in control of the timetable, the choices are sometimes forced upon me, and others as well.
Roxy
Hi Pistol,
Again, you are assuming 1) that I profited, which I didn’t. All of my ad pack purchases were seized; and 2) that I knew somehow that the “Brilliant ASD Business Model” was not that, long prior to any discussions being available on the internet to explain this whole thing.
I think Joe makes a good point, I won’t continue to reply to what I’ve already explained. You’ll assume what you choose to assume in any case, both about me and about others who were swindled and conned by ASD.
Roxy
Roxy
“that I profited, which I didn’t.”
Perhaps not but the intent was there, was it not?
“that I knew somehow that the “Brilliant ASD Business Model†was not that, long prior to any discussions being available on the internet to explain this whole thing.”
You sound like an intelligent lady and so I cannot believe that you didn’t look at the ASD “rebates” and wonder how it could be done.
I could take any four of my toddler great grandkids, cut four apples into quarters and tell them that they could have five quarters (125%)each. They would think I had finally gone over the edge.Even children would know there had to be a trick in there somewhere.
It’s called pro hac vice, where an attorney licensed to practice law in one jusridictions asks the court permission to appear in another jurisdiction in a specific case. It does require a co-counsel in the other state, but it’s almost automatically granted and happens every day.
My, my, everything old is new again:
http://72.14.235.132/search?q=cache:vEy6XTzFlMAJ:www.californialegalteam.com/katz/dismissalorder.pdf+cattyshaq+slapp&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au
Pistol,
So now you have exposed the true intent of your thoughts.
Key here is the word “sought”. As in “seek out”, “look for”, “discover” a way to “profit from the loss and misery of others”.
I am with you on this. I agree. I understand.
I also did not “seek out”, “look for”, or try to “discover” a way to “profit from the loss and misery of others”.
I also think many who post here did not “seek out”, “look for”, or try to “discover” a way to “profit from the loss and misery of others”.
Your abode? UK or Canada?
Peace to you.
Interestng document, LRM.
Pistol, Uncle Festa, Hugh, should just be ignored. He is a stuck record and because he can’t acknowledge when people get it and are being responsible his posts don’t provide much. He gets bored of his own Ning forum where he has to create the members because no one wants to be a part of it. He gets some sort of sick thrill out of insulting everyone which only alienates himself from others and he has to post under the umteenth anonymous name because he is constantly banned for his malicious posts.
Just ignore him, he’ll never let it go and the more people respond the more he uses those responses to antagonize others. (watch his response to this post for more evidence). His constant harpng on every member of ASD or the ASDMBA accusing them all of greed indicates that he has a hatred for America and its extraordinary success. He has lived under an oppressive central government maybe far too long which leaves him resentful and unable to understand that it is noble to work in one’s own self interest. He cannot distinguish between ANdy Bowdoin and other ASD members…in his eyes they are all the same.
Thanks Roxy for the info you posted. It was helpful.
Pistol/Revolver/UF, etc just looks for a misplaced comma or any opening to attack people and continues from there. It’s been the case on every forum and s/he is best ignored. Explaining anything to Pistol/Revolver/UF is a complete waste of time unless you have a different audience.
dB
April, ignoring your political aspertions (I also live in Europe and have no probs with the centralized govs here and dont hate the US) – you are quite right – Uncle F is from Scotland and loves being the centre of attention and is the forum expert at flogging defunct equestrine mammals and taking threads off topic for some private agenda he has. the solution is to put on a kind of mental “ignore” as the blog doesnt have the facility for a real one. lol
BUT – to return to topic. DB,(I think it was you, if not I apologise to the writer) you used an interesting word, that has become a feature of the whole ASD affair – CO-MINGLING.
Andy Bowdoin and Team did it and it caused them a lot of trouble. It is pretty clear that Bob G and Larry Friedman did it too. Money paid by members into a Tust Fund to be used exclusively to receive representation in court and general protection appears to have been used to enhance Mr. Guenther’s life style and for them both to spend time in acting as amateur prosecutors, irrespective of the fact that that was NOT their brief.
There is nothing they have done that was unavoidable – from the very first statements that the ASD programme was not a ponzi, to the possibility of establishing a precedent in achieving standing for the ASD Members of their Trust Association to the actions that are taking place today.
That’s standard practice of scams. If there is “simply no time”, I simply pass as there will be another opportunity.
Warren Buffett has stated that investing (yes, I know you were buying advertising) is like being a batter at the plate. You have an unlimited amount of pitches. Swing at the fat ones right down the middle and you are not guaranteed a home run but you increase your chances.
Yeah people might try explaining their point of view to a audience at the vile and racist WWSN forum of which you are a proud member and moderator.
EXACTLY! You have it in a nutshell, April dear. Each single element of a scam is dependent upon the others. Without Bowdoin there was no ASD. Without greedy members scrambling to feed at the trough there was no ASD. Each and every participant (except those poor people who are/were certifiably crazy)must take their share of the blame because they are just as culpable as those at the top.
Amen.
http://asdgodsown.ning.com/
P.S. I am a fan of yours April. Can I have a pic of you, please?
You would have to check the laws that apply.
When I was in finance, we ran a commission based business. We took in the full retail amount of the sale and forwarded the vendors’ portion on a weekly basis. Our ledgers reflected a liability on our part but all the funds were in our operating account.
In some cases, we took deposits up to a year in advance. Again, we did not segregate the funds, we just entered a liability. At any time, I could run a report and see exactly what we owed and what our cash position was in relation to our short term and long term liabilities.
The key was that we consulted with our corporate counsel continually and were audited on yearly basis. Our bond required our auditor to sign off on our books and express the opinion that our books were sound and we stood a good chance of continuing as a going concern.
At one point, laws were proposed to force our industry to create client trust accounts in many instances. This would have complicated our accounting. Fortunately, the proposed legislation was defeated.
We did quite a bit of business with law firms. Generally, the law firms would pay out of their operating accounts and bill their clients. In specific instances where the firm was acting on the behalf of a specific trust, we set up a separate client account and billed the firm separately. The checks we received came from the trust account. This does not mean that firms don’t pay out of their operating accounts and bill the trusts internally.
You would have to check the specific Texas requirements for trusts registered in Texas as they may be different. I can only speak to my experience in the state that our business was located in at that time. Things may have changed.
When you first raised the subject and pointed out the offending comments, I agreed the comments were over the top and racist. As promised, I raised the subject with the admin of the forum and pointed out those comments caused people to see WWSN as a forum which tolerates what a vast majority find objectionable. Again, as I explained to you, I have posted once at WWSN in the past 8 months and visit the threads I find valuable which usually exclude your attacks. I haven’t attempted to erase every objectionable topic, nor do I intend to.
People will find out that you are best ignored.
Pistol,
You have a unique point of view and we’re happy to let you share it, but please refrain from steering threads off-topic.
You aren’t sympathetic to autosurf participants, you clearly state your reasons why, and your point of view has value. It may, for example, help steer potential autosurf participants out of harm’s way while permitting the unknowing or uncaring to see themselves within the frames of the “Big Picture” that emerges when zeal or greed or lack of scrutiny overrides reason.
Actually, we don’t care if you make that point 100 times or even 1,000 times moving forward. It will have value to some of our readers, perhaps particularly new ones.
Post away — but please don’t use this Blog in a fashion that projects meanness. It is clear that you have the capacity to elevate the discussion, and that’s what serves readers best.
Patrick
Roxy,
Larry Friedman and his Firm’s attempt to intimidate you with the threats made in emails to you and then his subpoena to NING to try and ‘discover’ information about you and others just further demonstrates that the intent of their lawsuit was not to go after one person but to INTIMIDATE everyone asking for refunds or posting their complaints on any of the many, many Forums now blogging about the ASDMBA Scam, Friedman and Guenther. The ink was not dry on the lawsuit filed in Dallas County Court when Bob Guenther had it posted all over the Internet with the “LET THIS BE A WARNING TO OTHERS” comments.
Lots of ‘others’ were not intimidated and continued to post on NING and elsewhere so now this subpoena to NING to ‘discover’ who these anonymous bloggers are and where they live. They of course knew exactly who you were and all your contact information so adding your name to the list was again purely for intimidation purposes….glad you don’t roll over and back off!!!
We have to assume Friedman nor is staff are NOT stupid people, corrupt, dishonest and a few other things, but not stupid, so you would have to imagine they are probably singed up on NING and are reading all the posts too. Therefore they know exactly what information anyone signing up NING have to supply and it is not ‘real name, home address and phone number’ so even if their Subpoena were honored, they cannot obtain anything more than they could have off the NING site. Therefore, the subpoena naming various
‘names or handles, was purely for shock, awe and intimidation….but nobody blinked apparently. Apparently Friedman and Guenther believe that with enough intimidation everyone will just shut up and go away and they can keep their ill gotten gains from the ASDMBA fraud. All they have done is put more ‘burrs under the saddle’ of those of us might have let them get away with their con game and few hundred they scammed us for, but not now.
There are over 300 ASDMBA victims in Florida alone out of the 1800 plus and communication has been going on amongst several of the people. With this many people and the collective dollars given for legal fees, we believe filing a lawsuit in Federal District Court should happen. This gives absolute venue to us in Florida and Friedman is a member of the Florida Bar so he will have to answer the lawsuit here. This will be convenient for Mr.Arons to be able to attend as an interested spectator too.
Ready2Sue in Florida
I’m sorry if I steer things off-topic, it certainly isn’t intentional no matter what Alasycia and others may say and have you believe. I thought I simply commented on what others had posted or, perhaps, point out flaws in their argument. Unfortunately, I do not suffer fools or hypocrites gladly. I’m afraid I do not understand what you mean by projecting meanness. I like to think that I give as good as I get or, hopefully, a little better.
Patrick….
Thank you for your comments to ‘Pistol” or Uncle Festa. If he were God he would no doubt damn every ‘auto surf participant’ to hell and damnation. We know that, but we also know that out of the over 100,000 people that bought into ASD many had no idea what auto surfing was not any previous history of these scams being shut down. Many just bought into the concept that ‘Internet Advertising’ is a big and growing business which it is….for Google and others or simply trusted what a friend or relative told them.
This thread is focused on the actions of an attorney trying to use intimidation to scare and silence people who gave him money for legal fees which now appear to have be used for other than the stated purposes and wants to avoid explanation or refunds but taking on everyone on the Internet who is critical of his involvement. He doesn’t even know who all of these bloggers and critics are and thinks that picking out one or two that put their real name on posts, and sue them will shut up the hundreds of others. We all appreciate you keeping the focus Patrick.
Shiloh
Hello Shiloh and everyone else,
Thanks to all of your for educating me on who Pistol/Uncle Festa etc. is and what he is all about. As you can see, after I stated I wouldn’t respond to him, I haven’t.
Patrick, thank you for keeping us on task and focused here in your blog. The point of my column was indeed my reaction to seeing my name in Larry Friedman’s subpoena and how I personally view this as a scare tactic and form of intimidation. I appreciate all of the comments.
Roxy
Hi Ready2Sue (cute name),
Wow! There are 300 ASDMBA folks in Florida alone, amazing. We have very few here in Minnesota. I look forward to seeing what the group you describe can do in terms of possible Federal District Court action, and particularly enjoy the fact that Jack lives in Florida as well. I suspect you are correct, that Larry Friedman’s staff does read the comments both on Ning and here, as well as other forums. Sad that they felt intimidation would be a legitimate tool, isn’t it, and used a subpoena to do so. The emails speak for themselves, really. That must be a horrible way to have to live.
Roxy
Once more I will state that I have no intention of defending Friedman and/or his tactics but one would have to wonder what else would one expect a lawyer to do should he decide to defend his name and that of his firm rather than use any and all means at his disposal including the use of the law. That’s his job, for God’s sake.
BTW as far as I am aware Friedman has or is in the process of refunding money sent to him directly to anyone who asks. I doubt Friedman would look kindly on a request for a refund from someone who sent money to Guenther. Of course a court could easily take another view and order Friedman to refund everybody and tell him to sue Guenther for the money he (Guenther) received.
A question I have been afraid to ask but…(deep breath) here we go, in for a penny, in for a pound. WTF is the AARP generation?
http://asdgodsown.ning.com/
This is how it all started, before Bob declared UDI because everyone else left the ASDMBA due to his strongarm tactics and unilateral ASDMBA objective changing
http://www.theadsurfersforum.com/documents/ASD_member_attorney.pdf
It was only later, when the Trust had supposedly been properly set up, that people were asked to send money to the ASD Business Members Association Trust.
But this happened long after Bob and/or Larry had “discovered” that ASD was NOt a legal sustainable business.
Pistol –
This question I will answer. AARP is American Association of Retired Persons. Try Google and you’ll find it.
Roxy
Well Iam not your fan Pistol. I could respect your “tough love” approach to having people take responsibility for their actions except your approach unfairly and inaccurately blames and condemns people who did their due diligence and found nothing. Then on top of your inaccurate blaming of all ASD members as crooks you go further and you post pictures that you copy from the internet (like you’ve done to Jack, and others) with highly insulting cruel captions and graphics.
You are just like Andy and Bob in that you mailiciously try to harm others. Instead of helping to right the wrong you are verbally kicking people when they are trying to do the right thing.
You show a blatant lack of charity for your fellow man and you couch it in some self righteous indignation that anyone who is the victim of a scam is really a greedy crook themselves. Keep posting that link after your name Festa, so everyone can see what you really are.
Yeah well, they are only words and pics.On the grand scale of things, what I do is nothing like the cruelty inflicted on innocent children and others because their parents, in their greed sent money to some get rich quick scheme instead of buying food, medicine or paying their rent or mortgage. Nothing like as cruel as that, m’dear.On the other side of the coin, if you were an overall gainer would it bother you that someone else had to lose? Would you send your profits back?
What you do is still cruel and yet you are trying to justify it. Your justification for your own bad behavior is what makes you the same as the rest. Andy either knows his behavior is cruel to others but he justifies it, or he is a sociopath who cannot tell right from wrong. You know your behavior is cruel and yet you justify it, or you too cannot discern right from wrong.
There are plenty of ASD members who realize they made a bad choice and are trying to rectify it but you seem unable to acknowledge this. It is like you have a mental deficiency in being able to identify redemptive behavior.
fecal just needs attention. That’s why it’s the same garbage over and over for a year now. He is the prime definition of a ‘troll’.
I finally had a little time, and so I decided to do a little reading on the dastardly things those Larry Friedman wanted Ning.com to reveal their personal information in his subpeona.
What was interesting to me is that several of them, now called the Ning 9 on another forum, did not make any disparaging remarks about Larry Friedman or his law firm. Makes me wonder if they could turn the tables and file a lawsuit against Larry Friedman for defamation? I will leave it to the ‘legal eagles’ to make that determination, but it does strike me they may have a cause to do so. That would be a turning of the tables if they did. I think Larry has far more to lose monetarily than they would anyway. Sure would make for an interesting twist to this whole saga, don’t you think?
Interesting idea Lynn. The Ning 9 have every reason to be extremely angry for being included in a “hit list” by Larry Friedman. He threatens all and sundry, directly and through his multiple personalities but doesnt take his own advice – if you cant stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
Whoever wrote to the mails to Roxy, they went out under the Friedman & Feiger flag and is therefore their responsiblity. ” We know exactly how to deal with people like you in the Texas courts. Do not contact me again.” is hardly the correct phraseology for a “high profile attorney” who wishes to conserve his reputation. More like shooting yourself in the foot.
How would one organize something like this?
We respectfully ask all posters to stay on topic. We have asked Pistol specifically to refrain from steering this thread off-topic and meanness.
And we respectfully ask other posters not to engage in meanness.
Patrick
My sister sent us a link to this website over the weekend, both she and my wife were in ADD and gave some money to this jerk attorney. My sister had called them in Nov or Dec and the girl at the law firm was very rude to her too and told her they did not give any refunds and to talk to this Gunther character. She did and he was hostile. My wife sent one or two emails to the law firm and the second one was threatening just like the email this lady got.
It appears they just ripped everyone off cause they never did anything. My wife is looking for the emails and she will now be filing complaints, these people need to be stopped.
Rich
Admin,
I respectfully request that Pistol stop posting links at the end of his posts to his hate-forum. If he should be allowed to post that link, others whould be allowed to respond to it. It is not a legitimate forum, it is a mockery, specifically targeting the readers of your columns and members of ASD and the ASDMBA.
Would it not be a better use of our collective strength to sue the trust for disclosure of the expenditures so we can verify what happened to the money?
Hello April,
This Blog tries to educate, enlighten and inform readers on matters pertaining to online commerce, including ASD and autosurfs and Ponzi schemes in general.
My appeals to Pistol have been to the better angels of his nature, not the lesser ones. I’d like Pistol, for example, to view himself as a guest in this house, not to create maintenance issues and not to steer threads off-topic or engage in meanness.
The same request applies to all posters here.
These requests are reasonable. It’s my hope that Pistol will honor these simple requests and not behave in ways associated with trolls. I have taken an intermediate step to limit Pistol’s access to this Blog, because of troll-like behavior and the maintenance issues he creates.
Pistol can continue to educate the public about the perils of autosurfing if he chooses to. All I’m asking for is common civility if he chooses to keep posting here.
Patrick
Hello Alasycia,
Great question. How would we go about organizing this type of thing Lynndel?
Roxy Lewis
Hello Patrick,
From all of us, THANK YOU for taking that intermediate step!
Roxy Lewis
Hi Rich,
Interesting! So they are at least uniformly rude! If you’d care to post the email, feel free to do so. I think it would be very enlightening.
Roxy Lewis
Roxy:
Since I am not an attorney, nor do I play one on TV, I can’t answer your question. I think each person should consult with an attorney to see just what their options are in this regard. Someone with more of a legal background than I should be able to shed some light on this, and make recommendations on what should or could be done by these individuals. Let me see what I can find out, and get back to all later. Short on time right now.
Hi Lynndel,
I am also not an attorney, but I have spoken to one about the case. :) I look forward to hearing what you learn.
Roxy Lewis, maybe …
[…] writing the guest column on this blog [April 18], I was finally able to speak directly with a local Minnesota attorney who […]
Cyberslapp Suits or the “Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation” suits are EXACTLY what the internet needs, It will shut up people who, behind the cloak of a computer, can say ANYTHING they want, under any name they want, spread malicious and misleading information, just flat out lie, and think they can get away with it. Internet IDIOTS can ruin a person’s credibility, post doctored emails, post cut and redone pictures, edit audio, basically they can be whoever they want to be, and say whatever they want about anyone and hide behind multiple alias names.
AND YOU PEOPLE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SOMEONE TAKING ISSUE WITH THIS PRACTICE??
You must be kidding.. In a court of law, I have the right to face my accussor… You can’t admit “hear say”, and you have to state your real name, address etc.. This is the court of public opinion, and you want to just let people loose, without any accountability, to say whatever they want, behind some alias name..
Not me folks, anyone who posts, blogs or spreads lies about me, my family, my friends or my business needs to pull out your wallet, and get ready for a good old Texas style fight.. For those of your who don’t know what that means, do a little research on the Alamo.. Last man standing.. I will use whatever means available to me, spend as much money as I need to stop this new “Internet Group of Weak People”.
Right now, a group of professional businessmen along with me are raising a Legal Fund, and I mean a substantial fund, to hire attorneys to relentlessly pursue all of you internet clowns who think you can say whatever you want and get away with it..
Stay tuned, this is just the beginning. The next step is legislation and legal penalties for those people found guilty of promoting such internet garbage.
These people dont have the BALLS to confront people face to face or even in print with FACTS, under their REAL name address phone number..
You want to play games with the big boys, in Texas we have a saying,
“Don’t bring a knife to a gunfight”..
For you left wingers out their, I will add a footnote, ” The above statement is for illustrational purposes only and means no direct threat of harm to the reader…
Robert L. Guenther Sr.
Coppell, Texas 75019
bob@jaffapartners.com 214.587.3977
You want to know what is coming your way, take a look at what CYBERSLAPP has is store for you.. Go to
http://www.jcil.org/journal/articles/180.html
I fully agree with Bob here. As long as we post factual things, and not things posted in bad faith then it’s OK. So, therefore, we need to locate more facts and post them. My opinion is also a fact, as it is my opinion. Same as Bob’s opinion; I don’t have to agree with it, but we both have the exact, same rights under the law. Besides, we are all innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
I’m not sure about the validity of the Alamo comment, as the last guy standing was a Mexican, or a few hundred Mexicans. There are also Big Boys in states besides Texas, which is factual.
Oh, for goodness’ sake,
is there no end to this mans’ idiocy ???
This has now gone from the sublime to the ridiculous.
I suppose the one saving grace in having to endure his blowhard bullying is contained in the old maxim: “give ‘im enough rope and he’ll hang himself”
I wonder if the legislators who introduced antiSLAPP legislation knew just how valuable a service they were performing at the time.
Hmmm, I guess once a Democrat, always a Democrat which means Bob is a RINO. The last time I checked, it was the Dem’s who were in favor of “big brother” watching over us from cradle to grave thinking, and the Republican’s who were for limited government. Not that you could prove that from the last 8 years of big government spending by the Republican’s. Now Bob wants to play ‘big brother.’ Guess he is campaigning for being the Czar of the Internet. So much for individual freedom and free speech.
I also have found that it is the individual who “ruins” their own reputation, not someone saying false things about them. If you live your life in truth and honesty, nothing said negative about you will ever be believed. Only those that want ‘protection’ fear comments made about them. Besides, when it is the truth, there is nothing to be sued about.
Thanks Don for one of the best laughs I have had in quite some time. I am still laughing.
Don, that’s the best laugh I’ve had for ages but you have to give Bob credit for the setup. Absolutely classic.
I think the Alamo comment is quite apt. Bob hit the nail on the head only not as he had intended…
So does everyone get bandoliers and 10 gallon hats? Or bandoliers, hats & red clown noses? It should make for quite a show. Some people may need to brought up to speed as the Alamo may not be taught in Australian or Spanish history classes. (Don’t tell Bob).
The only thing comparable to Bob’s rant is the Crack Suicide Squad clip from Monty Pyton’s Life of Brian.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAGxGp1Bjgs
People wonder why I don’t watch television. I’d be missing out on Bob. You can tell when he’s under stress…or so it seems.
Good thing Bob wasn’t around during the American Revolution. The Federalist Papers would have been taken down immediately upon publication, Jay, Hamilton and Madison would have been SLAPPed and America would have taken another course. But then again, Dallas County would likely rule the world.
You are admitting that no existing laws have been broken so you need to seek new legislation? Then you are going to retroactively apply these laws? And “Bob’s Law” is going to trump the Bill of Rights? Or are you going to amend the constitution and have 2/3rds of the states ratify your amendment?
http://www.ebaysucks.com
Why not spend some time researching instead of “talking” on the internet, something all of you “wanna be somethings” are good at..
To assist you, just go to the following link and do that “click” thing, then read.. Simple enough…
http://www.jcil.org/journal/articles/180.html
This is simply about forcing people to tell the truth and identify themselves, what is wrong with that??
It is a great pity that Bob does not understand that telling the truth is something that everyone should do, including him.
He could lead the way by presenting a detailed and truthful breakdown of the way in which our “lawsuit money” sent to him and Larry Friedman was spent.
[…] No. 9: (April 18, 2009): GUEST COLUMNIST: ‘Shocked’ And ‘Scared’ To See Her Name In Friedman Lawsuit Paperwork; Says … […]