Category: The Economy

  • Payment Processors Used By Surf Firms Offline

    UPDATED 8:56 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) Two popular payment processors used by autosurfing firms are offline simultaneously.

    The main pages for SolidTrustPay of Canada and StrictPay of Panama both will load. But registration buttons for both of the processors are generating server errors and will not load. The problem appears to be affecting secure (https) connections.

    Some members said they could not access their accounts. Others described the problem, which is being discussed on autosurfing forums, as intermittent.

    Neither company has explained the problem on their main pages. The secure pages for both SolidTrustPay and StrictPay are generating a “Connection Interrupted” error message in Firefox, and a “cannot display the webpage” error in Internet Explorer.

    UPDATE 3:13 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) One of our readers reports that sign-up pages for the processors worked from his location. We again tried to get the pages to load in Firefox and IE, and they threw server errors. Why this is happening is unclear.

    UPDATE 8:56 P.M. EDT (U.S.A) SolidTrustPay and StrictPay are accessible now.

  • Arons Blames Friedman For Mediation Failure

    Florida resident Jack Arons blamed Dallas attorney Larry Friedman for a breakdown in lawsuit-settlement negotiations, saying Friedman did not take the negotiations seriously.

    In court filings in which Friedman is seeking a new temporary restraining order against Arons that would prohibit Arons from communicating with reporters and other third parties about the case, Friedman said talks collapsed because Arons didn’t negotiate in good faith.

    A previous restraining order against Arons expired.

    Friedman’s is not telling the truth, Arons said.

    “It is more like Larry was unwilling to mediate,” Arons said in a Blog Comment here. “I had set aside 4 hours on the day of mediation to mediate and Larry who was in his car on the way to another meeting spent all of 15 minutes on the mediation.

    “He also continued to load me down with paperwork during the so called mediation. So as is the case Larry is lying again and is making it sound like I am at fault and not him,” Arons said.

    Friedman sued Arons last month in Dallas for slander and libel, in a case that sprouted from Friedman’s representation of the ASD Members Business Association (ASDMBA) Trust.

    The Trust was formed by member contributions to protect their legal interests in the AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme case.  Some ASDMBA members have complained about the management of the Trust by Bob Guenther, its de facto head.

    Guenther, they say, has not provided transparent accounting that detailed how the Trust spent money from contributors. Friedman is the Trust’s attorney. Guenther, a convicted felon, introduced Friedman to potential contributors last year.

    Arons, who says Friedman has buried him in paperwork, including a 135-page filing yesterday, lives in a manufactured home in Florida, collects Social Security and does not have an attorney.

    Arons now is trying to amass $1,500 through a loan or donations to sue Friedman in federal court.

    Yesterday’s filing by Friedman includes an exhibit of Internet postings on this Blog and the ASD-Biz forum. It also includes content from the websites of the Dallas Morning News and WCTV-TV, a Florida television station.

    Separately, Friedman is using a subpoena to ning.com, the host of the ASD-Biz forum, in a bid to obtain information on posters at the forum. Some forum members appear to have changed their forum identities to create twists on their old names or twists on how they’ve been described by Guenther — in protest.

    Guenther is scheduled to make a court appearance in Arizona today on felony charges of repeatedly violating a court order that prohibited him from threatening an Arizona company.

  • BREAKING NEWS: Friedman Seeks To Gag Arons; Cites ASD-Biz Forum And PatrickPretty.com Blog In Court Filing

    UPDATED 11:26 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) Dallas attorney Larry Friedman is asking a Dallas judge to issue a temporary restraining order against Florida resident Jack Arons.

    An exhibit included in the filing includes content from the ASD-Biz Forum, PatrickPretty.com, the Dallas Morning News and WCTV-TV, a Florida television station. Separately, Friedman is attempting by subpoena to get ning.com to provide him information on the identities of posters at the forum.

    ning.com hosts the ASD-Biz forum.

    Friedman sued Arons last month, accusing him of slander and libel. All in all, today’s filing, including the exhibit, took up 135 pages.

    In the filing Friedman said a previous restraining order against Arons had lapsed and that settlement negotiations with Arons had broken down “due to [Arons’] unwillingness to mediate in good faith.

    “[Arons] continues to post on the Internet regarding Plaintiff despite representing to the mediator that he would not do so while the parties were trying to reach a settlement,” Friedman said in the filing.

    Among the content included in the exhibit was an April 9 column in this Blog, along with Comments from readers. Also included was an April 11 column, along with reader Comments, including a Comment from Guenther in which he threatened to send an email to the ASD Members Business Association (ASDMBA) Trust database that suggested we were a member of ASD and “possibly an ASD winner!!!”

    We were not members of ASD. Nor were we members of ASDMBA.

    Also included in the exhibit was a copy of a March 28 column in this Blog, along with reader Comments, including Comments from Guenther. The exhibit also incuded a copy of a March 19 column in this Blog that reproduced an October 2008 letter from Friedman to Guenther, warning Guenther that the ASD probe was an active criminal investigation and to stop threatening people.

    The exhibit also includes page after page of postings from the ASD-Biz forum, including posts made as recently as today by forum members. Some of the Comments made on this Blog cited in the exhibit also were made today.

    Friedman claims in the filing that his reputation will be irreparably harmed if Arons is not restrained. Among other things, the filing seeks to restrain Arons from “encouraging or duping ASDMBA investors to file false complaints or disseminate false facts to state agencies or other entities.”

    A hearing on the application for a new restraining order is set April 17.

  • April 13 Update: Our ASDMBA Coverage; A Mystery Email

    UPDATED 4:51 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.)

    Dear Readers,

    It is getting stranger and stranger. As we noted previously, we have arrived at the conclusion that meaningful communication with Bob Guenther, the de facto head of the ASD Members Business Association (ASDMBA) Trust, is not possible.

    We now have received an email from Guenther that appears that have been sent to us accidentally by pressing “Reply” instead of “Forward.” You’ll read more about this email below.

    Last week we advised you that we no longer would respond the Guenther’s emails — including 11 he sent on a single day, some or all of which asked for a receipt. Much of the information Guenther sent was not new to us. Regardless, we still were digesting it when we received more emails from Guenther, apparently unhappy that we did not publish his information immediately.

    At the same time, we noted that Guenther was free to post Comments on this Blog.

    Guenther did so over the past couple of days, challenging us to a “war” of some sort and threatening to send an email to the ASDMBA membership that suggested we were “Possibly a ASD winner!!!”

    We were not members of ASD, let alone an ASD “winner.” We also were not members of ASDMBA. We have no stake in the outcome, no matter what happens to ASD or ASDMBA. We are journalists.

    At the same time, many of our readers know that Guenther has used invitations to engage in “war” or issued declarations of “war” elsewhere. Use of such language is alarming. It simply is not a legitimate way to communicate. It demonstrates an utter lack of restraint.

    In recent weeks we have received a number of communications from Guenther we deem threatening — and this while Guenther is facing felony charges in Arizona amid allegations he violated a court order repeatedly and continued to threaten an Arizona company even after being warned not to do so.

    “You want a war, there Patrick, you got one..,” Guenther commented here Saturday. “Print the truth, get off the ASDMBA or start a war.. Your Choice…”

    A “war” if we don’t “get off” ASDMBA?

    How does one not deem such words a threat? How does one not deem such words as a bid to silence this Blog’s reporting on ASDMBA?

    Good grief. It is almost too much to believe.

    This stuff is over-the-top by orders of magnitude. It is unnatural, and is the very definition of menacing conduct. It is the exact type of behavior that resulted in the issuance of the Arizona restraining order. It also is the exact type of behavior that caused ASDMBA members to question Guenther’s handling of the Trust.

    And yet the behavior continues.

    Guenther appears to be a champion of the Larry Friedman lawsuit against Jack Arons for slander and libel. At the same time, however, Guenther is using this Blog’s Comments function to say he he’s thinking about using the ASDMBA database to tell members we might have been ASD winners — a threat that is almost indescribably bizarre because it suggests a willingness to extort us with a viral lie.

    It’s not even a clever extortion attempt. If Guenther were to tell members of ASDMBA that we were “winners” in ASD, it would serve only to prove that Guenther is willing to lie to extract an impossible result. The only person he’d be extorting is himself.

    Bob Guenther also appears to hold the twin notions that we are covering up for both the government and ASD. There is no way to reconcile these notions, which are impossibly at odds with themselves.

    We don’t charge for the information contained on this Blog. We don’t solicit or accept donations. We don’t ask for permission from either side in the ASD case to publish news and opinion on ASD. We don’t share our findings privately with the government. We publish information on a schedule we dictate. The government can read it. ASD members can read it. Non-ASD members can read it. Members of the public can read it.

    We gather information from sources on all sides of the ASD case, assess it — and publish news and opinion. Readers are free to make their own assessments about what we publish.

    We have no interest in Guenther’s “war.” Our interest is in delivering news and opinion. The ASD and ASDMBA stories pose unique challenges. One of them is how to deal with threats and menacing communications from Bob Guenther.

    The Mystery Email

    Some of you subscribe to our daily feed, which is provided by Google. Google sends the feed to the email inboxes of our subscribers.

    Early Sunday we received an email from Guenther to which we did not reply. The email was a response to the Google inbox feed for our Blog post, “Friedman Should Drop Arons’ Lawsuit.” The email asked for a receipt, which we declined to provide.

    A note at the top of Guenther’s email was not directed at us. Rather, it was directed to a third party.

    Here is what it said:

    “When you subscribe to this guy, this is sent out automatically t0 everyone of his subscribers, its now all over the place probably 30 blogs, forums etc..”

    It is clear that Guenther was attempting to communicate with a third party. Why we received the communication is unclear. We do not know the identity of the third party. It looks as though Guenther had attempted to “Forward” the email feed to a third party, but instead pressed the “Reply” button, thus sending an email to us.

    As you might have read in readers’ Comments here or at the ASD-Biz forum, Dallas attorney Larry Friedman is seeking information from ning.com on people who post about ASDMBA at the ASD-Biz forum. In that Internet-only way, some members of the forum appear to have created new forum names — twists on their old names or twists on how they’ve been described by Guenther — as a means of protesting Friedman’s audacious move.

    Friedman wants ning.com to share data — something the Trust, under Guenther’s de facto management, is not willing to do. Guenther, on this Blog, told ASDMBA members that they were going to have to sue to get information from the Trust — but not until after they contacted him and the Trust determined through some unspecified means if the complaint was valid.

    And to think all of this might never had happened had Bob Guenther simply provided a detailed accounting on how ASDMBA spent the money it collected from contributors and had the Trust engaged people in meaningful ways.

    We see no high principle that would demand Guenther not to provide detailed accounting for a Trust funded by the individual contributions of members. We have conceded that Friedman, who had an attorney-client relationship with the Trust, well could argue that he could not release details about the Trust’s finances owing to the privilege.

    At the same time, we pointed out that such an answer — even if principled — could not prevent people from asking questions about the Trust and even filing complaints with authorities. We called on Friedman to fire the Trust as a client.

    This story could have been over in a day. Instead it has dragged on for weeks. The questions ASDMBA members have are legitimate.

    ASDMBA, through Guenther, started off by saying it was sympathetic to ASD President Andy Bowdoin’s point of view in the ASD case. It then morphed into an organization that was sympathetic to the government’s point of view. After that, it morphed into an organization that openly challenged the prosecutors’ competence. Guenther made a big show on the ASDMBA website of demanding answers from the prosecution during an active investigation.

    Finally, Friedman — the Trust lawyer — sued Jack Arons for slander and libel, and now is seeking information from ning.com on people who are asking questions about the Trust.

    Perhaps one of the questions Friedman should ask himself is, “Why wouldn’t people ask questions under these bizarre circumstances?”

    Many of you are aware of Friedman’s lawsuit against Arons. We have written about this subject at some length, calling for Friedman to drop the lawsuit. We simply don’t see Arons as the party responsible for the flap surrounding ASDMBA or the questions being asked about Friedman.

    People were free to complain to Texas authorities about ASDMBA with or without input from Arons. If the government or the Texas bar opens an investigation, they’ll evaluate the issues on the merits of complaints filed by individual ASDMBA members. Jack Arons can’t force any agency to take action. Arons, for example, cannot create a condition that authenticates third-party complaints against Friedman, Guenther or the Trust. Either the complaints have merit or they do not, regardless of any input from Arons on the subject of ASDMBA or Guenther or Friedman.

    Even if Arons told 100 people that he thought it would be a good idea to contact authorities about the affairs of the Trust, he cannot make any complaints received by any agency any less or any more valid. That is up to the authorities to decide.

    The ASDMBA story has raised issues that speak to the heart of the 1st Amendment. Some members of ASD-Biz also are regular readers of this Blog. They view actions by Friedman as an attempt to chill speech. Given Guenther’s actions — indeed, his name is associated with threats on forums and even in court documents — it’s easy to see how some readers have concluded that speech itself is under attack.

    This Blog will not permit Bob Guenther to dictate its editorial policy. As previously noted, we no longer will respond to any of his emails. We do not publish information under threat.

  • Surf’s Up Report About Judge’s Order Adds Confusion

    Citing an email from her AdSurfDaily downline, a member of the Pro-ASD Surf’s Up forum has advised other members that a federal judge has ordered prosecutor William Cowden to “charge Andy Bowd[o]in or end it and return the money.”

    There are no documents in the public record to substantiate the claim. Judge Rosemary Collyer appears not to have issued such an order.

    On April 3, Collyer issued an order to show cause, ordering prosecutors to respond to certain Bowdoin pro se pleadings by April 24. The judge acknowledged in the order that “uncertainties surrounding the status of [Bowdoin and associated corporations’] counsel” had contributed to a delay in filing responses to Bowdoin pleadings.

    Bowdoin himself contributed to the confusion by filing motions on his own behalf even though the record of the case showed that he still had paid counsel. On March 26, Collyer ordered Bowdoin’s attorneys to state whether they intended to proceed as Bowdoin’s counsel or withdraw, and also to instruct Bowdoin on critical matters of law.

    The Akerman Senterfitt law firm, Bowdoin’s paid counsel, now has sought leave to withdraw, saying its representation of Bowdoin had become unreasonably difficult and advising the court that Bowdoin hadn’t consulted with the firm before he filed a series of motions on his own behalf.

    Last week, Florida attorney Charles A. Murray filed an appearance notice on Bowdoin’s behalf, although Collyer has not yet granted Akerman Senterfitt’s motion to withdraw as Bowdoin’s paid counsel.

    Murray’s entry in the case, however, suggests that Bowdoin’s days as a pro se litigant have come to an end.

    Meanwhile, the Surf’s Up post that quoted from the member’s downline and passed along confusing information urged ASD members to begin yet another letter-writing campaign on Bowdoin’s behalf.

    Here is the downline information being circulated at Surf’s Up (italics added):

    Once again, seems we might be on the cusp of getting our money return to the rightful owners – you and I. Recently the Judge has ordered Cowden to charge Andy Bowdin or end it and return the money.

    Now is a great time to put on the pressure. Write another letter today expressing your need for your money return and how you feel about them taking our money in the first place.

    Don’t give up. If we don’t act, apathy could cost us our money. Bad succeeds when good stands down.

    If you are writing from Panda point of view, keep in mind that is a separate company from out point of view. Write your letters accordingly.

    Don’t write a book. Succinctly write the wrongness of the gov taking our money, keeping it and creating the victims they claim they were protecting. Please use your own words and be brief. Just get your side counted.

    Include copies to:
    William Cowden/Jeffery Taylor
    United States Attorney’s Office
    555 4th Street, NW
    Washington, DC 20530

    Also write and send copies to the Ombudsman of the DOJ. This is the office that’s charge with protecting us from abuse from within the DOJ. File a complaint in regards to any perceived wrong-doing by the attorney generals in this case.
    http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/vr/

    Despite the claim in the email that the money seized by the government belonged to the members, Bowdoin has argued in court that the money belonged to him and his companies.

    Both Bowdoin and the prosecution agree that the members do not own the seized funds.

  • Guenther Has More Legal Troubles In Arizona

    The de facto head of the ASD Members Business Association has more legal troubles in Arizona.

    Bob Guenther faces an araignment hearing April 29 in East Mesa Justice Court. Guenther, according to records, was charged with an unspecified offense April 2.

    Judge Mark Chiles is scheduled to preside. A court employee said she was not authorized to provide details about the allegation against Guenther, referring inquiries to J.W. Brown, identified as a court spokeswoman. Brown could not be reached. Calls to the media office were not answered.

    A docket entry describes the allegation only as a “New Case.”

    Meanwhile, Guenther is scheduled to make an appearance in Justice Court April 27 for a traffic violation. This brings to three the number of court appearances Guenther is scheduled to make this month.

    He was charged March 27 in what was described as a photo radar ticket. In such cases, a camera takes a photo of a vehicle allegedly involved in a traffic violation, and the vehicle owner is mailed a ticket.

    Guenther also is scheduled to make an appearance April 14 in Maricopa County Criminal Court.

    He was charged March 13 with two felony counts of aggravated harassment. Mesa, Arizona, police said Guenther repeatedly violated a court injunction for workplace harassment that prohibited him from nuisancing Cheyenne Mountain and Affiliates, an Arizona business.

    Despite the injunction, Guenther continued to contact Cheyenne Mountain in a manner that “harassed or threatened” the company, police said.

    Guenther violated the court order both by email and telephone, police said. An infraction that occurred via telephone was recorded and placed into evidence. Guenther said the recording was obtained illegally.

    ASDMBA is a group funded by members who had the expectation that their legal interests would be protected in the AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme case. Federal prosecutors seized tens of millions of dollars from ASD in August, saying the company was selling unregistered securities and engaging in wire fraud and money-laundering.

    ASDMBA members said Guenther has refused to provide transparent accounting for ASDMBA, instead engaging in profanity, threats and menacing behavior.

  • EDITORIAL: Friedman Should Drop Arons’ Lawsuit

    UPDATED 12:53 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) By reading forum posts lately, we’ve been led to believe that Dallas is a city for movers and shakers and players — and that everybody else pretty much can go to hell. Irritate a Dallas mover and shaker and player and you might just find yourself in what movers and shakers and players describe as “Dallas Court.”

    Movers and shakers and players pull strings in “Dallas Court” and the miserable wretches interfering with all the moving and shaking and playing get crushed like so many offending cockroaches.

    At least that’s what we’ve read.

    We’ve also observed that it’s important to reference important people if you’re a mover and shaker and player in Dallas — and perhaps even add an important-sounding detail or two or a descriptive word or two to really drive the point home.

    If a nonmover and nonshaker and nonplayer suggests it might be a good idea for Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott to investigate the ASD Members Business Association (ASDMBA) Trust, a mover and shaker and player might be inclined to say he knows the attorney general’s private phone number, suggesting that a complaint will do no good because all good Texas Republicans march in lockstep.

    This brand of insider’s culture also apparently applies to the sports world.

    Why say “Dallas Cowboy executive,” for example, when apparently you can glean stature points by osmosis by saying “high profile Dallas Cowboy executive?”

    High profile” is good if you’re a mover and shaker and player in search of descriptive words that add to your own luster. Associating your name with “high-profile” people apparently elevates the stature of Dallas movers and shakers and players.

    At least that’s what we’ve observed.

    Local Rule Only?

    The “high profile” rule, however, may be a cultural phenomenon that applies only to Dallas movers and shakers and players. We tested it against a city — Pittsburgh — to see if we could get a presumptive boost in our stature by referring to Pittsburgh Steelers Chairman Dan Rooney as a “high profile Steelers executive.” Mr. Rooney, after all, has won six Super Bowls and is the ambassador-designate to Ireland.

    We abandoned the test as soon as we imagined Mr. Rooney looking at us as though we might benefit from a counseling session or two for attaching “high profile” to his name to make ourselves look good.

    Dan Rooney, who produced six Super Bowl champions, actually knows the President of the United States and soon will represent the United States in Ireland, still puts on his pants one leg at a time and walks to Mass. People love Dan Rooney, a commoner who made good. They call him “Mr. Rooney” out of respect — not for his six Super Bowls or because he has the President’s phone number — but because he doesn’t play the “high profile” game. If you’re a Pittsburgher, there’s no way to make yourself look good by hijacking Mr. Rooney’s stature. He doesn’t consider himself “high profile,” therefore stature points can’t rub off.

    Along those lines, we’re not aware of any “Pittsburgh Court” or “Pennsylvania Court” that is used as a playground for movers and shakers and players to crush the miserable wretches who irritate the movers and shakers and players from time to time.

    But “Dallas Court” — also known as “Texas Court” — certainly is no place you’d want to end up if you lack standing in the Movers and Shakers and Players Club. The cockroach fate awaits  nonmovers and nonshakers and nonplayers who don’t do what they’re told.

    At least that’s what we’ve been told.

    There is unwritten shorthand for the instructions given nonmovers and nonshakers and nonplayers by movers and shakers and players when confronted in “Dallas Court” for being a miserable wretch. It can be reduced to a single word: “jump!” The only acceptable response for the miserable wretches, the cockroaches — unwritten, of course — is  “How high?”

    At least that’s what we’ve observed.

    Player vs. Nonplayer

    Dallas attorney Larry Friedman represents the ASDMBA Trust. Dallas-area resident Bob Guenther, a convicted felon currently awaiting a court appearance in Arizona for violating a court order not to nuisance an Arizona company, is the de facto head of ASDMBA.

    Friedman and Guenther have a longtime attorney-client relationship. Some ASDMBA members aren’t happy about how Guenther has handled the accounting for ASDMBA. They say they don’t know how money they contributed to fund the Trust was spent and complain that Guenther has behaved in rude, obnoxious and threatening ways when his Trust stewardship is questioned.

    At the same time, they question why Friedman has filed no litigation to help them protect their interests in the AdSurfDaily (ASD) forfeiture case. Guenther introduced Friedman to ASDMBA contributors last summer. Lately Bob Guenther’s name has been associated with claims that Dallas Court can cure what ails the troubled mover and shaker and player.

    Enter Jack Arons, a Florida man on Social Security. Arons doesn’t belong to ASDMBA. But he is convinced ASD is crooked as a dog’s hind leg, and says there is no harm in ASDMBA members asking the state to investigate the Trust.

    Friedman sued Arons last month for slander, libel and saying bad things about Friedman’s law firm, saying Arons is a felon and menace. A poster at the ASD-Biz forum using Bob Guenther’s account announced the lawsuit, choosing the headline, “Jack Arons Sued, Served and Shut Up, Finally . . .” Arons derisively was referred to as “Rookie.”

    Arons instantly was hit with an avalanche of paperwork from Friedman. The poster purporting to be Guenther later said his forum account had been hacked. Posts announcing the lawsuit went missing, along with comments attributed to Guenther that forum members viewed as menacing. Some of the posts were about the brand of justice “Rookie” Arons could expect from “Dallas Court” or “Texas Court.”

    In a March 13 editorial, we noted that Friedman “should have no expectation that he is dealing with a professional litigant who will react by the book.”

    Arons lives in a manufactured home, draws Social Security, doesn’t have money to do battle with Friedman, doesn’t have an attorney and doesn’t ask “How high?” when Friedman says “Jump!”

    Jack Arons is not a “How high?” sort of guy. Arons posts in Internet forums and tells people when Friedman says “Jump!” If Arons gets hit with a blitz of paperwork from Friedman and a demand to appear in Texas from Florida on short notice for the high honor of being deposed by the man who is suing him, he tells people about it. To Arons’ way of thinking, he is getting shafted by a lawyer and a system weighted against him.

    And then Jack Arons sits at his computer and tries to figure out ways to subject Friedman to a paperwork blitz that maximizes Friedman’s inconvenience. He did so recently by sending a demand to Friedman that Friedman appear in Florida to be deposed. Friedman didn’t like that idea, so now he has gone to court in Texas to try to stop Arons from doing to him exactly what Friedman is doing to Arons.

    Arons now is trying to get a loan for $1,500 to sue Friedman in federal court. To Arons’ way of thinking, this is fighting fire with fire. Friedman has a law degree; Arons does not. Friedman has professional staff; Arons does not. Friedman can marshal nukes; Arons has a pea shooter and no budget.

    What Arons can do, in effect, is solicit input from nonprofesionals to go up against Friedman’s canon. The wounded party in this case is the Texas court system. Most people find the notion of “Dallas Court” repulsive.

    Today we again urge Friedman to drop the lawsuit against Arons.

    Jack Arons behaves in ways that are less than prudent — but so does Larry Friedman. Friedman should drop this lawsuit. He can show his love for the law by doing so. He can repudiate the notion that courts are playgrounds for well-connected people and that commoners get the shaft.

    Larry Friedman should be trying to dismantle “Dallas Court” if such a place exists, not reinforcing the notion that it actually might exist.

  • BREAKING NEWS: Andy Bowdoin Hires New Attorney

    UPDATED: 11:40 A.M. EDT (U.S.A.) AdSurfDaily President Andy Bowdoin has a new paid attorney: Charles A. Murray of Bonita Springs, Fla.

    Murray filed an appearance notice today in the civil-forfeiture cased filed in August against money and other assets tied to ASD.

    The appearance notice says that Murray will represent Bowdoin and two corporate entities: AdSurfDaily Inc. and Bowdoin/Harris Enterprises Inc.

    This may mean an end to Bowdoin’s pro se pleadings in the case. Bowdoin began to act as his own attorney in February. Judge Rosemary Collyer informed him, through his prior counsel, that the corporate entities could not proceed pro se.

    Michael Fayad, one of Bowdoin’s original attorneys, filed a motion today to correct an appearance notice from August that erroneously listed Bowdoin and his firms as “Defendants,” rather than “Claimants.”

    Murray says in his filing that he is taking over for Fayad’s firm, Akerman Senterfitt. Akerman Senterfitt filed a motion last week, asking the court to resign as Bowdoin’s counsel, saying its representation of him amid the circumstances was unreasonably difficult.

    Bowdoin did not consult with the firm before proceeding as a pro se litigant, Akerman Senterfitt said.

    In one of Bowdoin’s pro se pleadings, he acknowledged that ASD was operating illegally at the time of the August seizure of tens of millions of dollars. He advised the court, however, that he had been denied “fair notice” that his conduct was illegal.

    Prosecutors responded by saying ignorance of the law is no excuse and that the government had no duty to inform Bowdoin that fraud is illegal.

    Another Bowdoin pro se filing seeks to reverse his January decision — while working with paid counsel — to submit to the forfeiture and not raise the issue again. Collyer advised Bowdoin that he had not raised points of law to supplement his argument, in essence telling him that the motion alone might not be enough for her to grant his motion to reopen the forfeiture litigation.

    Using her discretion, Collyer had to construe a meaning for Bowdoin’s pro se motion — a somewhat common occurence when pro se litigants are filing papers. Pro se pleadings often are vague, sometimes making baffling leaps of logic and tortured arguments.

    In late February, AdViewGlobal (AVG), a surf firm with close ties to ASD, introduced Pro Advocate Group to members. Pro Advocate Group says it can help people practice law without a license.

    Karl Dahlstrom is associated with Pro Advocate Group. Dahlstrom was sentenced to 78 months in federal prison in the 1990s for securities fraud. Bowdoin’s pro se pleadings began at the same time AVG was introducing Pro Advocate Group to members.

  • UPDATE: Our ASDMBA Coverage

    Dear Readers,

    A few of you have wondered if Bob Guenther, the de facto head of the ASD Members Business Association (ASDMBA) Trust, has gone silent. The answer is no.

    As we explained in a March 22 post, this Blog engages in the marketplace of ideas, not the marketplace of threats. We encouraged Bob Guenther to communicate with this Blog only in meaningful ways, and provided him an email address through which he could submit attachments and documents he’d like us to consider for publication.

    Guenther, interacting with us civilly, took advantage of our offer. He used the email address we provided and submitted a document upon which we based this March 25 story.

    Our next contact with Guenther occurred April 6, when he emailed us that we “are finally catching on to Andy and ASD.” We did not reply to the email because of the implication that we are fools and that the ASD prosecutors are fools who don’t have adequate staff and don’t understand the issues. Guenther’s April 6 email made liberal use of CAPS to emphasize points. In other words, he was shouting.

    Guenther next contacted us later in the day on April 6, asking us to provide him an email address through which he could submit attachments. This email was not hostile or sarcastic in tone, except for a suggestion that the prosecutor didn’t know what he was doing. We responded to it, providing Guenther the same email address we had provided earlier.

    On April 7, Guenther sent us 11 separate emails, asking for a receipt on some or all of them. We supplied the receipts and completed a very busy work day, which included reading Guenther’s emails and attachments. Much of the information was not new to us, although we still were digesting the information from Guenther’s 11 separate emails and multiple attachments when we next heard from him.

    On April 8, Guenther emailed us again — twice. These emails were hostile and sarcastic. Our reading of them is that Guenther was unhappy because we didn’t instantly prepare a story based on the information he had submitted. Less than 24 hours had passed between his earlier submission of 11 emails and attachments, and much of the time was “overnight” time in which we were sleeping.

    As we’ve noted previously, we would be happy to consider Bob Guenther’s submissions, so long as threats and hostility were not part of the mix.

    But we now have reluctantly concluded there is no way to engage Guenther in a meaningful way. We had hoped this would not be the case, but Guenther apparently continues to believe that hostility and sarcasm serve him better than careful thought. Bob Guenther does not dictate the editorial policy of this Blog.

    Our belief that meaningful communication was possible with Guenther was mistaken. He is still free to use the Comments function of this Blog, but we no longer will respond to his emails.

  • Better Business Bureau Warns: Cash-Gifting Epidemic Online; Organization Says 22,974 Gifting Videos Posted On YouTube

    In the days after the government’s August seizure of tens of millions in the AdSurfDaily probe amid Ponzi allegations, opportunists stepped in to fill the void by offering cash-gifting schemes.

    Today, months later, opportunists trading on Ponzi pain are using the names of autosurfs and autosurf-related keywords to drive traffic to cash-gifting websites.

    The Better Business Bureau (BBB) says gifting programs and gifting clubs are flourishing on the Internet, taking advantage of families struggling to make ends meet in the poor economy.

    BBB has issued a warning “that cash gifting is not a legitimate way to make a few extra dollars, and in fact, is nothing more than a pyramid scheme.”

    How widespread is the problem? BBB reports there are 22,974 cash-gifting videos on YouTube. The videos have garnered an “astounding 59,192,963 views,” BBB adds, citing statistics from TubeMogul, an online video analytics company.

    Cash-gifting purveyors are “targeting people with some form of an affinity — such as women’s clubs, community groups, church congregations, social clubs and special interest groups, BBB says.

    “Bernie Madoff isn’t the only guy with a Ponzi scheme,” says Steve Cox, a BBB spokesman. “Money-making opportunities promising big returns for little work are all over the Internet and are extremely enticing to millions of people struggling with today’s economy.

    Run like there’s no tomorrow, warns Cox.

    “Anyone tempted by slick cash gifting marketing appeals should run in the opposite direction, or they run the risk of being the next person ripped off by a pyramid scheme,” he says.

    BBB said cash-gifting promotions typically are vague, adding that a video performer “might even open a FedEx envelope with cash inside to prove the effectiveness of the program.”

    Scammers often tout the programs as fundraisers for a worthy cause or as “empowerment” programs to help people help themselves. Prospects may be asked to pay anywhere from $150 to $5,000 to join.

    Money then is funneled to people farther up the pyramid, and participants then recruit more people to join in order to start making money themselves.

    Beware of assertions the programs are legal and sanctioned by the IRS, BBB cautions.

    “Almost every state has laws prohibiting pyramid schemes and/or assesses penalties on those who participate, and the Federal Trade Commission and many state attorneys general have issued warnings about cash-gifting clubs, BBB says.

    Here are some questions consumers should ask, according to BBB:

    • Do I have to make an “investment” or give money to obtain the right to recruit others into the program?
    • When I recruit another person into the program, will I receive what the law calls “consideration” (that usually means money) as a result?
    • Will the person I recruit have to make an “investment” or give money to obtain the right to recruit and receive “consideration” for getting other people to join?

    If the answers are “yes,” BBB warns people to steer clear of the scheme.

    “Don’t give in to tempting claims online and never buckle under to high-pressure sales pitches, even when they come from the mouth of a trusted friend, co-worker, neighbor or church member,” BBB advises.

  • BREAKING NEWS: Plaintiffs In ASD RICO Case Ask Court To Extend Deadline For Class-Action Certification, Saying They Haven’t Been Able To Serve Bowdoin, Busby, Garner

    Andy Bowdoin
    Andy Bowdoin

    UPDATED 7:12 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) Facing an April 15 deadline to seek class-action certification in a racketeering lawsuit against AdSurfDaily President Andy Bowdoin, ASD attorney Robert Garner and Golden Panda Ad Builder President Clarence Busby, three members of ASD have asked a federal judge for more time.

    Meanwhile, the plaintiffs have informed U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer that they intend to use the discovery process to seek facts concerning ASD’s management and operations, including how ASD interacted with employees, officers and “other representatives” of ASD.

    Mike Collins, Frank Greene and Natures Discount Inc. — all former ASD customers — said they have not been able to serve Bowdoin, Garner or Busby.

    The lawsuit was filed Jan. 15.

    “Because Defendants AdSurfDaily, Inc., Thomas [Andy] Bowdoin, Clarence Busby and Robert Garner failed to respond to the Notices of Waiver of Service sent by Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs issued summons for these Defendants and are still in the process of attempting to perfect service on these Defendants,” Collins, Greene and Natures Discount said.

    Other filing deadlines have been pushed back because of the plaintiffs’ inability to serve the RICO defendants. Bank of America, a non-RICO defendant in the case, joined the plaintiffs’ in a motion last month to extend time on other issues created by the inability to serve Bowdoin, Garner and Busby.

    Bowdoin, Busby and  Garner were accused in the lawsuit of conspiring with unnamed parties in organized efforts to defraud.

    The RICO complaint alleged the men were involved in “other” schemes beyond ASD, Golden Panda and LaFuenteDinero, and have “committed or aided and abetted in the commission of countless acts of racketeering activity,” including indictable offenses.

    “The ASD Enterprise provides the RICO Defendants and other unnamed co-conspirators with a system by which to operate fraudulent schemes such as ASD, to hide the fraudulent nature of the schemes, and to profit from such schemes,” the plaintiffs alleged. “Each RICO Defendant agreed to perform services of a kind which facilitated the operation of the ASD Enterprise and facilitated the RICO Defendants and others in the operation of various fraudulent schemes, including ASD.”

    Why the complaint hasn’t been served is unclear. What is clear is that the plaintiffs’ have notified the court that they intend to ask for discovery, “which will focus on a few key factual areas necessary to establish the elements of certification.”

    Here is a preliminary list of what the plaintiffs intend to seek through discovery:

    • Representations made regarding the individuals associated with ASD.
    • Nature of ASD’s business and the opportunity to earn money.
    • Types of services offered.
    • Management and operation of ASD.
    • The relationship and interaction among employees, officers and other representatives of ASD and BOA, Bowdoin, Busby and Garner.
    • Facts and circumstances surrounding the opening, maintenance and account activity of BOA accounts in the names of ASD, Bowdoin, Busby and/or Garner.