Topic: Are we legally associated with advertised services? (Read 570 times)

First, if you are advertising a service, you are being paid for it and you are not a co-worker. There is a difference between working for a company and being the owner and running a company.

Think of an example that you are a worker in a company. Later if the company do any fraud, the people working in the company won't be faced legal action, only the owner will be held responsible or the board of directors in case the company operate on that model.

I mean, the government thinks that bitcoin mixers are used for illegal activities and it's something they don't like, right? And when you promote a mixer that was noticed to mix coins for darknets and you are directly receiving the money from their platform, doesn't it sound alarming and different from the situation that you gave me as a comparison right now?
This situation isn't exactly white and black area, it's between, the gray one.

But recently I was thinking about one interesting accident that happened some years ago.
There is a company called Driver Sports that was selling pre workout called Craze. This pre workout contained illegal meth-like substance. Finally, this pre workout was pulled from shelves but the company still operates and hasn't even stopped doing business ever. How and why? Especially if we keep in mind that this was one of the best selling and most hyped pre workout of all time.
So, right now I'm really confused who gets punished for what and what kind of logic the government follows.

We all know that but that's never how it works. Criminals can and do easily use their dodgy black-market money on the high street and supermarkets etc but those places would never be prosecuted for money laundering or handling illicit money etc but you as an individual could be if they deem you are handling or interacting with illicit cash. It's sadly just how things work. I always find it funny how people cry that bitcoin is a tool for scammers and drug dealers but 99% of scammers just us bitcoin as a medium to sell for cash and most drug dealers don't accept bitcoin. They only accept cash because it's pretty much untraceable, is very easy to launder and there's no record of it kept, but nobody seems to be making that case right now. I'm sure they will do once they decide to go to a 'digital dollar' so they can keep an eye on everybody's transactions and tax is appropriately.

I have euros, dollars and pound sterling that have most likely at some point been used criminals. Simple evidence: most bank notes contain traces of cocaine, and there are countless other crimes that don't leave physical evidence on the money.
None of this is a problem for me, because money is fungible. And no government would dare take that away, because if they do, it will be the end of money as we know it. Just imagine you can't accept money without checking known and unknown crimes committed by all previous owners.

You don't have to make it complicated. Advertising a product with deadly side effect would introduce other legal concerns. Let's just say that a TV commercial appeared whose company was later on caught to launder funds, and let's assume that company is anonymous for a while, so the feds can't just address the people in charge of the company. You think the TV commercial would continue?

Mixing Bitcoin isn't illegal. Laundering money is. Receiving coins that were used in illegal activity says nothing; you do that every day when you go to the supermarket.

Now I truly want to keep everyone's attention on one thing!
As it seems, there was a signature campaign in 2016 from a bitcoin mixer that seems to be closed as for now. Check Bitmixer.io signature campaign.
This company was paying users automatically from the website. So, I assume users were receiving bitcoins that were mixed and more likely some users would end up with bitcoins that were used for black market and other illegal activities. There are a lot of old forum members, so, has anyone ever had any problem from the payments received from the bitmixer campaign directly from the bitmixer website?
I think that case like this can be a dangerous. If you are promoting a company that the government thinks is a money launder machine and at the same time you actually receive a laundered money from that company, then you probably are in a huge trouble.
I think that this worries don't apply to those who receive money from the campaign managers.

Yes that's true but we can give a hint from the advertising giants like Google and Facebook they have a group of lawyers and are backed by legal firms, they allow the showing of platforms that looks legit but ended scamming people unless reported to them and they got notification they will allow these projects to be broadcast on their platforms, same to us here we will only discontinue until there are rulings or there are a lot of complaints and we don't have liability because we are not directly recruiting

R Kelly is not a celebrity and a famous person.
Kodak black - Do exactly what Kodak black did and let's see if you manage to escape the jail as soon as he did. I don't think anyone will commute your sentence ever.
6ix9ine - Again, commit what he committed and let's see if they'll release you from prison because of coronavirus fears.

So, if TV company advertise company that is a registered trademark but the product of that company says in TV commercial that one of it's side effect is death, if this company advertises product that causes severe addiction development and brutal withdrawals, as far as I understood, this business deal is normal event for both side if the company has trademark. Well, strange.

Okay, I think the best way would be to ask this question someone who is anti-bitcoin and anti-crypto but is lawyer at the same time. If anyone has someone like her as a close friend, will be glad if we get updated, otherwise I think that our logic and the way of explanation may not be interesting in the court.
Sorry 

I want the hammer blow to hit YouTube sooner rather than later. Frankly, I'm disgusted at how it went from being a respectable video broadcasting service to a ruthlessly milked money machine where lawyers are taken 100x more seriously than their own customers.

I know that very well, but I wouldn't be 100% certain that's true from a legislation point of view. There's room for doubt, especially when this kind of advertisement is a necessity for the service.

The TV company, though, doesn't advertise anonymous services. Ever. Companies that desire to be advertised in the telly are registered trademarks.

And they will law enforcement time will not spend some time do an investigation on people they cannot trace the identities since we are all anonymous here. We don't owe anything to anyone if the platform turns bad and scam since in the first place we tend to believe that they are just doing some good business and get reputation for providing good platform to their costumers. Somehow hard to spot scams in first glance so signature campaign participants should not worry anything since the company or well known individual are the one who get sued for this if they been a hardcore promoter of a scampany.

Shouldn't doesn't always mean it won't.
It depends on the jurisdiction. Fortunately, not many countries have the power to request anything from this forum. One of the countries that might have it is the US, but we aren't breaking any US laws... yet.

Let's say some third world country, like some Islamic enclave, decides you are breaking their rules and by reading your posts conclude that you might be a Muslim breaking the rules of their government and their faith. They won't be able to get your IP or anything like that. It's not like someone from Iran can force admins of this forum to share your IP or email address.


That's true because, by law, only those who can decide on the path the company takes can be held responsible. Take FTX as an example. If you were the owner, or a managing director of the company, you're held liable. If you were an employee who had to maintain the servers, make sure the domain is accessible, do backups of the exchange, you're not liable, even if you knew the company could go bankrupt. You did not make it go bankrupt and you had no way to stop it, just as someone who displayed their banner somewhere, or run a show wearing their t-shirt.

We are currently renting our signature space on the forum for advertising purposes. We're not coworkers here; it's business, just like they say. As a result, low enforcement should not harass us for providing a service. When a brand advertises on television and the company ends up with Punishment, the TV company should not be punished. But, yes, low can compel us to remove our signatures and stop doing business with them.

Same could apply in Google, the search engine. Yet, they're accepting almost every advertising offer, including scams. Maybe users just don't care as much as to have their revenue lost.

Constantly advertising scams will also hurt their revenue if it's becomes popular opinion that YouTube is just a wild west of scams and scammers. The whole adpocalypse thing a few years back was spurred on by advertisers being worried about their adverts showing up on problematic content and even terrorist videos etc and withdrawing their ads and Youtube just went full overkill and into panic mode. I'm sure that will happen again someday and they will surely start facing legal consequences when people are continuing to lose money. It's not a good look for them at all and if they don't implement some safety standards they will soon be forced to by regulatory bodies. This stuff wouldn't fly on TV or other advertising platforms so not sure why YouTube will be able to get away with doing little to nothing.

Well, I expected that I would have some affiliation in the eyes of the feds if I'm getting paid with laundered funds.

No, but here's the thing. Binance isn't reliant on a forum. ChipMixer's signatures mean a lot for the service, because outside bitcointalk you'll mostly find scams. Bitcointalk is the "portal" of ChipMixer, and I believe it's already highlighted with a bunch of ads in every single page of this board. Also, just because Binance did launder part of their stash, it doesn't mean every service that launders funds is safe to advertise.

How many years is R Kelly in Jail, Kodak black served, 6ix9ine served, Surge tupac's boss still serving his jail time. What do you think of celebrities; little gods. Indeed it depends on your environment and the emotions you've got for these people. Law is above everyone depending on the level of evidence used on them. Nothing would happen in the world if the Police arrests Messi, his reputation would collapse like Terra. These are not even Government officials.

Are you paid to wear the company's Tshirt in street? so it's quite different from the forum signature since you're being paid to insert it on your signature space. Moreover, putting any code or url on your signature space doesn't guarantee payment.



You don't have any reason to be a part of the money laundry case, the law enforcement focuses only on two parties the company owner and the people that used the company to launder money. For instance, the recent news that Binance is used by drug cartels to launder money. Does it mean everybody that promotes Binance would be arrested? even the direct employees has nothing to bother about other than losing their jobs. CZ is the person to answer for it as the CEO, and if he can provide the names of the drug dealers he can go scot-free; proving to the court that he doesn't work for the cartel. That is if he's arraigned.

No, it's not the kind of affiliation you're thinking about. This is company affiliation not affiliate program.

Affiliation with a company or a service means you are taking a commission from a part of their earnings. It does not mean the money that they pay for marketing. Just think about it. These websites that have ads on them, aren't affiliated with the companies in the ads. They just paid some ad broker to put them on other peoples' websites.


The only reason they are doing that (porn filter) is to avoid a public outcry which would, you guessed it, damage their revenue.

People would still use YouTube even when it's full of scams, as evident today. So clearly (and sadly) there is no outcry to hit their bottom line. These guys only do stuff for their own pockets and not for their users.

Like I said before, there are sadly different rules for massive corporations where there are often little to no consequences other than fines. I don't think tech companies are immune from being prosecuted about advertising certain scams though. I'm sure the laws will change soon enough to become more in line with things like TV advertising where there needs to be standards. On Youtube and Google now it's pretty much the wild West with most people coming across scams: https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-google-scam-ads-fraud-technology-2021-4?r=US&IR=T

Youtube probably has the technology to autoblock porn etc so I'm sure they will or can develop something similar. A human vetting the adds should be the least they do right now until they have the tech.


I believe people have been prosecuted from sharing darknet affiliate codes/links. Perhaps a little different as they're illegal marketplaces that sell drugs and guns etc but don't think it's above the powers that be trying to make the case that Chipmixer is also an illegal service which it may in fact be in certain countries so I would still advise caution.

I think it will depends on where you live and the independency of the court, there's no way you can bribe an independent and professional judge, but if you live in a corrupted country and the judges isn't professional, you can escape from the punishment.

Messi, Elon Musk and any other celebrities can get jailed, I don't think if Messi get jailed, you and other Messi's fans will attack the judges or will try to defend him.

Are you sure? will you try to wear anything with black color and carrying a big bag outside? I'm completely sure anyone will stay away from you and they might call cops since you're seems like a terrorist.

Don't compare yourself to celebrities because laws are different for you and for them. Okay, let the police forces arrest you for possession of hard drugs and then compare yourself to the celebrities who were arrested for the possession of hard drugs. You'll easily end up in jail but celebrities will still be free because it's the fame, status, money that protects them from everything. Imagine Lionel Messi decided to use drugs, do you really believe that any government ever arrest him? Can you imagine what would happen in the world if any police force arrest him?

Wearing the signature on this forum to me looks like wearing a company's t-shirt in public. How can anyone arrest me if I wear some company's logo and url? Even if I print amphetamine logo on my t-shirt and paint a tattoo on my face, I think I'm safe.

What I mean is being specific if you have an affiliate code and working as an affiliate you are directly recruiting and you are directly working on the site and actively recruiting because you are getting paid based on the action of your referrals you have your own affiliate account your own affiliate manager and you are putting up a budget to promote a project.

Whereas in a signature campaign, you are doing specific you are just posting in a forum so your signature space will show up the project you are promoting, other than that you are not doing anything more, Google is showing ads but they aren't affiliate on those ads, Facebook is showing ads and accepting payment but they are not affiliated to those products and services.
It's a bit different for a promoter working on a desk and getting direct instructions from the managers or owners and a guy just getting paid or hired to distribute flyers.

Affiliate code isn't necessary to be considered affiliated. The fact that I'm getting paid from them to advertise them does add an affiliation.

I didn't say the project scams. I said it launders money. The former can be instantly detected, while the latter may not be detected ever.

I'm more than sure that law enforcement will focus on the prosperity of a service that is proved to launder money.

---

---

Also, just because it happened once with 1xbit, it doesn't mean the court will penalize in the same manner, regardless the service.

That won't be feasible in the forum since the forum cancels any project once it's dictated to be a scam project. I think the law enforcement agencies only focus on the advertisers if they promote a company which has been classified scam. According to OP's complaint, I'd say if the project is working fine and you promote them it's not a problem. The problem begins when you promote a known scam that's wrong. It's not your fault if a genuine company turned a scam in future. You are not guilty by any means. Look at 1xbit the promoters are getting negative reviews in the forum for promoting a known scam it's actually their fault and members can be considered guilty for promoting them, because they help in deceiving people.

Let's take it to the outside world, celebrities like DJ Khaled, May weather etc in 2018 was charged for promoting a scam project using their social media platform. These people are influential in the society and can easily be detected if they do anything fishy with their influence on people. In such situation they'll be considered guilty and fined for misleading their followers.  Here in the forum, you are not having followers, but people can trust you, therefore trusting any company you promote here too, if need arises for investigation on you for promoting a company, you'll be charged according to what you got paid. Though, it's rare because how would all the participants get charged to pay regarding the difference in locations and identity.

The laws differ country by country, but there should be a general understanding of the whole scenario.
In my country I have seen ponzi schemes and/or scammers who advertised on national TV and Radio stations and in the end when the scam must have manifested, no agency went to the radio stations or TV to sue them or implicate for whatever reason.
I think that should be our fate in this forum, unless other countries policies differ.

I guess all the lawyers will say that too, the main developer or operator is the one who has the burden on all the cases because he is commissioning a campaign to pay people to promote.

Majority of the campaign here do not have affiliate code so they are not really earning from commissions only from posting and showing the banner from their signature campaign, maybe if they are actually leading people or recruiting people directly and they made money from recruiting like they do on Ponzi schemes like Bitconnect, then there's legal liability.

I addressed a lawyer. Positive answer. No direct association.

You don't know what a service does behind your back, though. An entire exchange which were accounted for billions of dollars was caught to launder money. And there are obviously countless of similar, other examples. Sure, I might trust ChipMixer, but in this crazy world we live in, despite the odds it launders their money, we even might have "mixing bitcoin" an illegal activity.

I think that this case of signature campaign advertisements is very different from the other ones. Here, you just wear the signature and that's all, you don't have to suggest and don't recommend anyone to use the product/website that's in your signature, you don't have to review the website you promote and you just can say zero word about it. You just wear it under signature and that's all, how can I be legally charged for anything if the service turns into scam?
I mean, imagine I wear Balenciaga's t-shirt and the next day I hear news in TV that this company runs bad campaign, etc (you probably know what happened around it recently). Am I legally associated with Balenciaga this way? Should I be charged because I wear their T-shirt with their logo and somehow promote them? Even if I am a celebrity and the company pays me money to wear their t-shirts, I think that I can't be touched.

Let's say you are and the CEO of the projects were caught for illegal service providing. How whoever the authority it is, will find you. You are in an anonymous forum, most likely browsing using TOR. It's not easy to find you.

May be a lawyer will tell you better. But personally I do not care. I live free, die free. It's hard but bitcoin gave me an opportunity.

It all comes down to this.

and also this:
From where I am from, some influencers were investigated for their participation in promoting a gambling platform on social media.

Like others have pointed out, authorities will have a harder time if you're anonymous but you might still be subjected to a probe.

I think it is clear at this stage that the answer to the OP's question is no, with some nuance.

Many of you are thinking of campaigns that you've been in for quite a long time, as I think the OP seems to be, but a lot of people are in one campaign for a couple of weeks or months, then another, then another, and so on. The courts are not going to waste time investigating who is behind a nick that got paid $70 a week for 9 weeks to advertise a service that has been outlawed in that jurisdiction, but maybe in the jurisdiction where the person behind the nick lives it is not illegal or there are no laws about it.

Search Engines like Google literary advertise Ponzi schemes, exit scams, phishing sites every day for so many years, but I have never heard of a lawsuit against them for advertising even when known frauds such as Ponzi schemes or 1xbit

I think this is also similar to advertised service here, except that most service advertised here aren't even scams at the time of being advertised, with a few exceptions.

You didn't sign any contracts so you will not get associated on what might happen to the company do in future. For sure you will not in the list of their employee so if you are worried about anything like the scamming that might happen to the platform you advertise or to any other then you are not included to number of people who will do or seek a solution on their problem.

I think it will depends on how popular you are and what's your power/position on that's project.

If you're the owner, co-owner, or someone that built the project from the start, high likely you will need to face legal problem if there's a police sanction or take down the project.

If you're very popular person and everyone recognize your name, face, etc you could be follow the same path like I previously said.

But if you're just advertise the project using your account in this forum and there's no personal information you've give to anyone, IMO you will be safe since there's no way to verify you and they have no idea which person own the account.

Like I said, unless they subpoena the forum but the BFL labs case is a little different as they were probably trying to find out information about the people behind it. Also, like I said, err on the side of caution if you're worried. Law Enforcement could always decide to go after people who were advertising a service they deem illegal but unless it's a ponzi or some other scam then I think the chances of them wasting time trying to find out who was advertising a service on a message board would be slim though obviously not impossible.


They can and will go after Ponzi promoters etc. A fair few youtubers ended up getting into trouble for promoting these things to their audience even though they weren't directly involved they were making money from their referrals etc and spreading the scam to a larger audience. I think some even went to jail for it. Didn't some high profile celebs like Floyd Mayweather and Kim Kardashian also get into trouble for promoting pump and dumps and unregistered securities related to crypto coins as well? Those things are a little different to promoting other services but the legality of such will vary from region to region. Gambling sites are illegal in many counties for instance. I'm sure even bitcoin by itself is illegal to use in many countries too.

I assume I and the company I am promoting here don't have an employer-employee relationship. I don't have to know them and they of me. Besides, there is no signed and notarized contract or agreement both of us entered to. In which case, I have no legal claim whatsoever of whatever benefits the company deserves to provide its employees. And the company itself doesn't list me as one of its employees.

At most, I am like a worker that is hired by a third-party agency. The company doesn't have responsibilities over me and I of them. I am only answerable to my campaign manager. The CM pays me according to the agreed price. Whatever agreement the CM and the company undertake, I'm not involved.

I'm not even under the company's payroll. I'm probably only under a specific marketing expense.

In the case that I'm promoting an illegal service, however, I will be held legally responsible over my actions. But it's not because I'm part of the company but because I knowingly and willingly promote something illegal.

I believe those were actual employees, and not someone just advertising the services. They would've had reason to believe that x belonged to y, and that would've been included in the subpeona. Like LoyceV said; the advertisement industry would be absolutely dead if advertisers were held responsible for advertising scams. However, if you advertise an illegal service, that could potentially land you in some trouble. Since a lot of the campaigns users advertise here are legitimate businesses that have been operating for years, this isn't likely to be a concern for many.

However, if the authorities expect you're related to the service any other way other than advertising, and have some convincing evidence to back that up; they will likely take it further, and include it in the request to theymos for more information. It's up to theymos then if he complies, and to what extent. Generally, he'd have to comply given the evidence was strong enough.

 Tor! Tor! Tor!


Really?

https://ia801909.us.archive.org/6/items/gov.uscourts.ksd.97083/gov.uscourts.ksd.97083.68.1.pdf
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bfl-subpoena-1027518
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/dpr-subpoena-881488

I've see The US doing it with 2 or 3 huge MLM or HYIPs scams such as Genius Funds 10-15 years ago. Giving trouble to people they considered promoters affiliated. I'm talking about scams but it doesn't matter, I mean the point is they can decide you're part of the scheme

Adding, but I may be wrong, that Theymos mentionned he doesn't care subponeas coming from outside The USA (his country I guess).
(that's years ago)

And see his reply to @Quickseller .
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50817904


NSA on my curriculum vitae... Not so bad...

It would really depend on where you are located.
Here in the US there is a big emphasis on Mens rea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea
So there is the element of what is going on. Using your HSBC example they knew, but it was going to be just about impossible to prove who knew what and when.

If some shifty looking person shows up at my shop and I take in a few thousand in cash and take a cut and give it back with a 1099 tax form it's fairly obvious what I was doing.

So that is going to be a big part of it.

If you are wearing a signature for Bob's Meth and Heroin shop it's going to be a much more difficult thing to talk your way out of then say [looks down at signature] ChipMixer which is a legit service for people who just don't want to be tracked.

-Dave

But he's not a large bank. Banks and other large scale businesses operate under different rules to the rest of us. HSBC was caught knowingly laundering a billion dollars for the Mexican cartel and nobody went to prison. They just paid a 2 billion fine which is probably a couple of weeks profit for them and then move on. If you laundered even a few thousand you'd go to jail and pay fines. For banks it's just a calculated risk and they'll take the chance knowing that even if they get caught they'll just pay the fees and carry on.

https://www.investopedia.com/stock-analysis/2013/investing-news-for-jan-29-hsbcs-money-laundering-scandal-hbc-scbff-ing-cs-rbs0129.aspx
https://www.independent.co.uk/independentpremium/long-reads/hsbc-laundering-mexican-cartel-blackhurst-b2097490.html

I think it's not the best way to look at it as it would be fair to say that (at least in most places) the treatment of banks in comparison to the treatment of people in regards to most crimes are in two very different realms. Banks commit monstrosities and get fines. While sometimes even innocent people get time. Point being, a person who does happen to have legal troubles shouldn't expect to get a fine in a situation where bank would.

Most of the large banks in my country have been found guilty of money laundering. The banks paid a fine, management collected their bonuses, and that's it. The end.

You're at best a third part contractor doing promotional and advertising services for another company. Of course, the laws will be different around the world so what would happen would be different depending on jurisdiction but there's little chance you would personally be in trouble, but maybe your country has different laws on what people are allowed to advertise. I'm sure you could potentially get into trouble for advertising illegal services but I would be very surprised if someone came after you or other people who were advertising a company on some random website. How would they even know who you are? It's not like you've signed a contract with them and they have all your details that law enforcement can get if they shut down a service. All they have is a username on a forum unless they subpoena the board to get more information but I doubt that would happen just to try find out who was advertising them here. With that being said, if you're worried about something then I would err on the side of caution.

One of the signature campaigns that were working here was seized^[1], however, there was no court ruling related to the individuals participating in the signature campaign[2], and some of the most popular scam ICOs^[3] were published in this forum.

Therefore, for users, they are safe, but I do not think that this will be the case for campaign managers, as they are part of this system unless they write explicitly that they do not know information and that their role is limited to tracking posts and receiving payments.


[1] Dutch Police, Europol seize crypto transaction mixing service
[2] [CFNP] BestMixer Signature Campaign | Sr. Members - Legendary | Up to 0.01225BTC
[3] [ANN][ICO] 🚀 Confido - Trustless escrow payments with shipment tracking

You could be considered "affiliated" by accepting payment for advertising the service. I think that it is highly unlikely that an authority would reach their arm all the way from the founder of the service, to those who work on it technically/directly in some way, to those who manage campaigns, then to you, just for being paid a few dollars per post to have some flashy text in your signature. I doubt the arm would even reach as far as the campaign manager. As LoyceV said, the entire advertising industry would collapse if things worked that way and if it worked like this at maximum efficiency, the population of incarcerated versus not would probably be way out of balance.

If you are worried about being prosecuted for being very slightly and temporarily affiliated with a service that is very likely to have some users that are using it for illicit purposes (which is almost certain with mixing services if I'm not wrong), then don't. If you were ever prosecuted, it's probably likely that it's not the primary reason that whatever authority responsible was coming to you. I would assume (take with a grain of salt) that you'd have nothing to worry about if  you aren't already under watch for a much more serious reason and/or you are doing basic things to sufficiently upkeep your privacy.

Sure, but I think the answer isn't as absolute as it might sound. If I advertise a service, aren't I considered an employee of that service? Or aren't I an employee at all? Am I considered working for somebody else? Am I subjected to the integrity of that else?

Purely hypothetical, but let's say either Betnomi or ChipMixer does money laundering (without the acknowledgement of their campaign participants). Are participants considered guilty, from a legislation point of view, for accepting laundered funds? We don't sign any legal documents when submitting the registration form, and I'm curious how far can the authorities reach this.

No. The entire advertising industry would collapse if that would happen.

I'm not into the law, and there might be differences in each country's legislation, but I'm concerned about this. Am I considered a co-worker of the services I advertise? If the authorities strive for shutting down one of these services in my signature and avatar, am I subjected to this activity as well? If the CEO of either ChipMixer or Betnomi (as examples) is proved to be guilty, am I guilty as well?

Asking a lawyer is probably a better idea, but I'm just curious if someone else had had the same concern before.