International Law

Ad Surf Daily Money's Seized

Image via Wikipedia

The US Government has responded to the Ad Surf Daily's Emergency motion.

The Government has a number of interesting arguments.

First, they note that:

"Bowdoin/Harris Enterprises, Inc.; Adsurf Daily, Inc.; and Mr. Thomas A. Bowdoin, Jr., as claimants, fired off an "Emergency Motion For Return OfSeized Funds . . . And Motion To Dismiss" by which Bowdoin asks the Court to release the funds agents seized from his bank accounts because, he says, without "emergency relief[,] the company will soon collapse completely.

Its member base, its most important asset, will disappear, and its employees will be out of work."

Well, why will its member base disappear just because the money has been seized, but none of the business assets have been seized?  If the assets have not been seized, surely the business can continue?

The US Government makes this point and more:

"Bowdoin says that he has hired a lawyer named Gerald Nehra, who fashions himself as the country's foremost expert in refuting Ponzi schemes, to prove that ASD was not one.

Remarkably, Bowdoin attaches an affidavit from this lawyer to the very same pleading in which Bowdoin says that his customers will evaporate unless he is permitted to pay them with the funds they supposedly paid to him for advertising!"

This is probably the funniest line I have ever read in a Court document.  

Nehra, the Ponzi expert, explains that unless ASD gets access to the funds to pay "advertisers", ASD cannot pay it customers!  

I see, I paid ASD for advertising, and unless ASD gets a hold of my money, to return to me, I will leave. 

Yup, you just might be a Ponzi scheme.

Full post as published by Misleading Advertising Law on August 26, 2008 (boomark / email).