However, continuing to support that scheme after being notified of the potential and likelihood of it being a Ponzi situation opens those collaborating with the source facilitating the scheme up to liability as well. Just saying...
Please cite any law or case where such a thing has happened. While you're at it, provide a legal definition of "collaborating" and "notified". Are you somehow suggesting that your posting on a random Internet forum is some kind of legally valid notification? Are you somehow suggesting that GAW customers who might read such a random Internet forum and
don't close their account now open themselves up to some kind of, in you words, "liability"?
You're tossing out a bunch of legal-sounding verbiage here, so it's not unreasonable for a reader to ask what your exact legal qualifications and training are and what statutes or cases support your position.
Let's get a few points clear here:
A. As far as this and any other web forum is concerned, I am present and acting as a private individual who happens to also be a citizen of the US.
B. I have never accused anyone OTHER than GAW/Zen and its "CEO" of anything without having more than enough proof to back up my individual position. Seriously, I have a life and multiple businesses to run myself so why would I waist my time and that of others if I didn't have the proof and other resources to backup my claims? I do not need the attention or drama, but if I do not speak up, exercise my rights, and file (along side others) the appropriate complaints with the proper authorities against those who I believe wish to defraud and degrade the evolving technological business sector, then morally I am no better than those I believe should be held accountable.
C. I have never claimed to be an attorney or act as a legal authority on any specific subject. I have my own legal representation I pay handsomely for such matters. With that said, I am college educated and do have over 18 years of global (US, HK, DE, AU, an UK) corporate business experience with a focus on technology, IP, and contract law compliance. If some of the language and references I use are too full of "legalities" for you, then I am sorry. Given the topic of this discussion, it is what it is. What I can do is apologize for any missed typos in advance since I am often doing multiple things at once and do not have the time to run everything through a spell/grammar checker first.
Now, you want case law and other references to how things are changing here in the US regarding Ponzi schemes and those who are complacent and/or unjustly benefiting from the continuation of these schemes (or the fallout)? OK, here are a few...
Let's start with Florida:
Now, jump across the country to here in California where this "both sides of the coin" paper offers plenty of reference content:
http://www.theponzibook.com/CBLP_2012_Liabilitiy_of_Professionals_Phelps.pdfAnd another story or two worth reading:
http://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/bankruptcy/b/bankruptcy-law-blog/archive/2012/10/17/banks-beware-aiding-and-abetting-claims-in-ponzi-cases-are-still-alive-and-well.aspxThat should be enough for now.
Scott-