Thread: Bogdan Fiedur of Adlandpro Threatening Suit Against Realscam.com

QUOTE Fiedur.

"Both (Judy Hortin and Sara Gardner Blow) have been terminated from social networking site for multiple cases of breaking of community rules (including fraudulent activity and hate letters) after which they have started their attacks on the owner and any active members they could identify. "

Spit it out Bogdan! WHAT FRAUDULENT ACTIVITIES have I been engaged in?

Bogdan is quite the case. He give Sara the job as a moderator, but he admonishes her to keep it a secret. Bogdan chose to give her the job. If he didn't like the way she was performing all he had to do was remove her privileges. I don't see what starting this war between the sites has accomplished. He has banned those members he wanted to be rid of. I don't see what makes him think he has the right to dictate how this forum is run. I will only respond to legitimate complaints. He has yet to substantiate anything.

Discovery in a civil case is mountainous and if he should be proven to have filed a groundless case or one in bad faith Texas has very good laws concerning that.

§ 10.001. SIGNING OF PLEADINGS AND MOTIONS. The signing of a pleading or motion as required by the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure constitutes a certificate by the signatory that to the signatory's best knowledge, information, and belief, formed after reasonable inquiry: (1) the pleading or motion is not being presented for any improper purpose, including to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation; (2) each claim, defense, or other legal contention in the pleading or motion is warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law; (3) each allegation or other factual contention in the pleading or motion has evidentiary support or, for a specifically identified allegation or factual contention, is likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and (4) each denial in the pleading or motion of a factual contention is warranted on the evidence or, for a specifically identified denial, is reasonably based on a lack of information or belief.

So Bogdan and his attorney could be slapped with all the costs of court for a suit that is filed. A very simple case could run 100 grand in attorneys fees for one side only easily and anything the least bit contested or complex can run several hundred thousand in attorneys fees. Bogdan better take a hard look at Kathleen's and his other members businesses before he jumps into the fire on this one.

Soapboxmom

I find it rather curious that Boggy & Company think that they can hold Realscam accountable for the posted opinions of members when their TOS states'

All postings, messages, text, files, images, photos, video, sounds, or other materials ("Content") posted on, transmitted through, or linked from the our services, are the sole responsibility of the person from whom such content originated.

The user understands that Adlandpro does not control, and is not responsible for content made available through our service, and that by using our service, he/she may be exposed to content that is offensive, indecent, inaccurate, misleading, or otherwise objectionable. Furthermore, ADLANDPRO site and content available through our service may contain links to other websites, which are completely independent of Adlandpro.

Hellooo, anybody home...? Wakey, wakey...!

Check out what was in Bogdan's first link posted this morning:
http://cyberlawyerblog.com/2008/11/2...go-rivera.aspx

.....Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The purpose of this law was to allow Internet service providers to be able to alter or remove objectionable content without assuming the liability associated with a traditional publisher of content. Congress sought to allow providers of interactive computer services to perform some editing on user-generated content without becoming liable for all defamatory or otherwise unlawful messages that they didn’t edit or delete. In other words, Congress sought to immunize the removal of user generated content, not the creation of content.


Sections 230(c)(1) and 230(e)(3) provide that "no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider," and that "[n]o cause of action may be brought and no liability may be imposed under any State or local law that is inconsistent with this section." Noble intentions behind this Congressional law, but not-so good intention behind "Internet street law" which could be read as saying "service provider, you can stand by while your services are used to ruin the reputation of good businesses and people, don't worry, we will not hold you liable."

This has given rise to many consumer complaints websites. While some of these are well-intentioned and responsible, the majority are not. The lawlessness has now sparked many websites charging fees for "investigating" consumer complaints. Some of these websites have their employees call their targets and offer to help with the defamatory postings... for a membership fee, of course. Some of these websites have been known to have their employees actually create the postings in an "anonymous" manner.

There are certain of these websites who charge a sliding scale fee for these memberships. Therefore, if you are a successful business and you wish to have the false postings edited or removed, it may cost tens of thousands of dollars. But the administrators of this scheme apparently have a kind and gentle heart. Therefore, if you believe that their fee is not financially feasible to you, they offer you the opportunity to prove it to them and request a lower fee. But you must provide them your private financial information first. Are these practices any different from the mafia employee going to a store and demanding the boss' "share" of the business earnings. Well, the threat of physical violence is now absent, but the demand is essentially the same "give us our share of your income or we will put you out of business." The name for this practice is racketeering.....

Bogdan is apparently seeing dollar signs here when there are none. This site generates no income and does not back door to anything that generates income. The admins do remove or edit unlawful content. Other edits or removals are at our discretion. We are strictly volunteer. Nothing like this lawyer describes has ever happened here. So, how is this relevant to your sour grapes and whining, Bogdan???

Bogdan, you are doing a superb job of making points in my favor. Got some more gems for us???

Soapboxmom

This has given rise to many consumer complaints websites. While some of these are well-intentioned and responsible, the majority are not.

Really? How do we know that? Where is the study that demonstrates that? How about documentation? Without any of the previous items,this is nothing more than the considered opinion of Attorney Rivera. Maybe Boggy should pose some questions to this fellow and see what kind of answers he gets...!

If you are practicing law in following jurisdictions, Dallas, Texas, Burlington, Kansas, London, UK, and have expertise in slender, defamation, libel, hate letters and would like to represent us, please contact us here support@realscamclassactionsuit.com

Bogdan is too inept to find a competent attorney, so he is advertising for them on his attack site. What a complete idiot. That is certainly not the way to get experienced, reputable help. I am well acquainted with many attorneys and firms in the Dallas area thanks to my work as a consumer advocate.

No decent attorney will respond to a solicitation like yours, Bogdan. Those folks with legitimate cases don't monkey around as you are and make a$$es out of themselves in public. They have competent legal help already in place before turning things into a circus side show. Bogdan, have you considered enrolling in clown college? You do seem to have the aptitude for it.

Soapboxmom

If you are practicing law in following jurisdictions, Dallas, Texas, Burlington, Kansas, London, UK, and have expertise in slender, defamation, libel, hate letters, cyber-bullying, cyber-stalking, copyright and trademark laws and would like to represent us, please contact us here support@realscamclassactionsuit.com

Poor little Boggy is just madly editing.
Boggy wrote to Sara:

...I'm talking to my legal adviser and he believes this can
be qualified as cyber-stalking and cyber-bullying.

Boggy wrote to me:

In addition my lawyer has been provided with the case and I'm
awaiting their analysis and possibility of demanding
repayment of damages from your company....

I will be waiting 48 hours for actions to be taken on your part
in stopping this attacks and removing any references to my
name and business adlandpro.com from your site.

Should this be not honored this time, I will engage in full
legal action against your company and these two individuals
and demand repayment of damages.

If Boggy had counsel in Canada they would be lining up counsel elsewhere as needed and working closely with them, wouldn't they??? I think Boggy has quite the penchant for fiction!

Soapboxmom

Odds are in BLUE....Place your bets

Originally Posted by laidback

1. Whether any of these "victims" can present any evidence to law enforcement to support the accusations they're making, 1000-1

2. Whether any of them have the fortitude to file a complaint in civil court, and if so, 10-1

3. The odds that their efforts would survive the discovery phase...! 50,000-1

Originally Posted by Soapboxmom

Bogdan is too inept to find a competent attorney, so he is advertising for them on his attack site. What a complete idiot. That is certainly not the way to get experienced, reputable help. I am well acquainted with many attorneys and firms in the Dallas area thanks to my work as a consumer advocate.

No decent attorney will respond to a solicitation like yours, Bogdan. Those folks with legitimate cases don't monkey around as you are and make a$$es out of themselves in public. They have competent legal help already in place before turning things into a circus side show. Bogdan, have you considered enrolling in clown college? You do seem to have the aptitude for it.

Soapboxmom

What he is trying to do is find somebody that will take the case pro bono or on contingency. Contingency is out because the first thing the attorney looks for is potential payday before he (she) commits resources. BTW, what's the charge for "slender"...?

Just found this thread. I am now picking myself up of the floor, having fallen off the chair laughing. Thank you Bodgan Fiedur for providing us with a real belly laugh during an otherwise depressing, wet and windy week.


It is touching that someone wants to protect the repution of this Canadian registered site that has, over the past years, consistently permitted the promotion of nearly every online ponzi scheme and disreputable MLM known to man, woman and (in the case of AdlandPro) some rather strange little green men who come down from the sky.

Many are the major ponzi pimps and founders of illegal or corrupt schemes who have passed through it's membership list -some of whom are now enjoying free publicity for their businesses, courtesy of the US Federal Justice Department (Does the name Pedro Dispenza AKA Peter Roor AKA ..... ring any bells? lol). Many more have chosen their cheerleaders from the AdlandPro "most popular" who are everyone's "best friend".

Complaints about libel and defamation which come from the owner of a site which forbids/deletes/bans critical objective discussion of "businesses" promoted there is laughably ironic at best. The very idea that objective comments with supporting data made by people working free, gratis and for nothing in the field of consumer protection on a non-profit site are a bad thing, never mind libellous are, let's face it, hilarious.

Have these people never heard of DISCOVERY?

SBM said it right when she commented that

The facts speak for themselves. If the Adlanders had legitimate businesses they wouldn't be running around making all sorts of ridiculous threats and accusations. They would be busy working and be generating lots of positive publicity. I take it this site is definitely doing something right judging by this hullabaloo!

(By the way, as far as the sister advertising site is concerned, could the good owner of AdlandPro be confusing Real Scam with another erstwhile consumer advocate site owned by a fellow Canadian citizen who loves advertising, especially if there are ladies promoting large attributes involved?)

Originally Posted by littleroundman

Ah, so THAT'S why people post here - revenge.

I always wondered why I do it.

Good luck with proving that little piece of insight to the satisfaction of a court.

I can't wait to get into a court room and see Boggie explain how the "actions" are "unproven"

"Your Honour, there I was, innocently promoting a completely legitimate business known as EZWealth Solution and this nasty anonymous poster said my business is illegal and a fraud.

I beg your pardon, Your Honour.......it's 100% legal because

Err, well.......moving on..........Lottery Clubs ARE legal in the USA.........umm.........err.........well.......... .....

OK, forget that, let's go through every "opportunity" presented on AdLand Pro and show EXACTLY how legal they are and how it's critics are wrong

I'm sure the advertisers and promoters won't mind having their businesses discussed in open court, especially with the free publicity they'll get from all those media people over there in the corner"

I look forward to the day.

I have to say.....I am a legitimate business owner and have never been attacked on this site. There's the obligatory 'positive' post. lol.

Originally Posted by laidback

What he is trying to do is find somebody that will take the case pro bono or on contingency. Contingency is out because the first thing the attorney looks for is potential payday before he (she) commits resources. BTW, what's the charge for "slender"...?

A bowl full of sexy. Poor frodo bodgan.....still looking for his precious.

Fiedur is now caught in a classic double bind of his own making.

He has spent a lot of time and energy convincing his "true believer" members that AdLand is a legitimate money makers forum and those members fully expect him to defend his and their integrity.

On the other hand, the very last thing his advertisers and insiders want is the full light of public exposure being shone on their activities.

If he does progress his bluffing and blustering to a full on court case, he knows full well every single aspect of his forum and its' history will be closely scrutinized. the very last thing the money men want.

What does he do ??

Does he keep the "true believer" Kathleen Vanbeekoms happy by following through with his threats or does he keep his advertisers and insiders happy by shutting his mouth and deciding discretion is the better part of valour ?

Originally Posted by littleroundman

Does he keep the "true believer" Kathleen Vanbeekoms happy by following through with his threats or does he keep his advertisers and insiders happy by shutting his mouth and deciding discretion is the better part of valour ?

I am finding it hard to believe that Kathleen is a true believer at this point.

Originally Posted by baylee

I am finding it hard to believe that Kathleen is a true believer at this point.

"There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know. The proverb has been traced back in English to 1546 (John Heywood), and resembles the Biblical verse Jer. 5:21 (King James version): "Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not.". In 1738, it was used by Jonathan Swift in his 'Polite Conversation,' and is first attested in the United States in the 1713 'Works of Thomas Chalkley'..."

Not sure, looks like Jack Sunshine is taking over the forum.

List All Your Biz Sites Here | View Forum | AdlandPro Community

Originally Posted by Lil Ol' Radical Me

Just found this thread. I am now picking myself up of the floor, having fallen off the chair laughing. Thank you Bodgan Fiedur for providing us with a real belly laugh during an otherwise depressing, wet and windy week.


It is touching that someone wants to protect the repution of this Canadian registered site that has, over the past years, consistently permitted the promotion of nearly every online ponzi scheme and disreputable MLM known to man, woman and (in the case of AdlandPro) some rather strange little green men who come down from the sky.

Many are the major ponzi pimps and founders of illegal or corrupt schemes who have passed through it's membership list -some of whom are now enjoying free publicity for their businesses, courtesy of the US Federal Justice Department (Does the name Pedro Dispenza AKA Peter Roor AKA ..... ring any bells? lol). Many more have chosen their cheerleaders from the AdlandPro "most popular" who are everyone's "best friend".

Complaints about libel and defamation which come from the owner of a site which forbids/deletes/bans critical objective discussion of "businesses" promoted there is laughably ironic at best. The very idea that objective comments with supporting data made by people working free, gratis and for nothing in the field of consumer protection on a non-profit site are a bad thing, never mind libellous are, let's face it, hilarious.

Have these people never heard of DISCOVERY?

SBM said it right when she commented that





(By the way, as far as the sister advertising site is concerned, could the good owner of AdlandPro be confusing Real Scam with another erstwhile consumer advocate site owned by a fellow Canadian citizen who loves advertising, especially if there are ladies promoting large attributes involved?)

Hello, LORM!!! Glad to see you back here and this has made your week better.

It seems the "accused" here are actually the "victims". Yes, we have been having a good talk about the past experiences of Adland community. We had hoped it would just go away but no...

I was once led to believe in the leadership of Adlandpro but have learned my lesson the hard way, as most of us do.

Do I need to get legal representation? I thought of calling my friend, the Sheriff of my county but he would probably not be able to contain the laughter. It would be a celebration of sorts to have some visitors from Canada visiting our little community here and we would have a lot of media attention. A little citizen of this remote community having big folks from Canada coming here to file a suit against them would really get lots of attention.

Thanks!

Originally Posted by Boggie

Both (Judy Hortin and Sara Gardner Blow) have been terminated from social networking site for multiple cases of breaking of community rules (including fraudulent activity)

A classic case of attempted diversion.

So what if they had been terminated for those reasons ??

How would that change the fact AdLand both promotes and encourages the promotion of HYIP ponzis and get-rich-quick schemes ??

One has nothing to do with the other, PARTICULARLY since Fiedurs' own words contradict what he's claiming occurred WRT "fraudulent activity" AND he's provided absolutely no proof of either person involved being guilty of the accusations he's made.

Fiedurs' protestations are akin to an organized crime bosses' lawyers requesting the dismissal of all charges based on the fact the witnesses don't like the accused and have a personal score to settle.

AdLand Pro and Bogdam Fiedur are what they are and do what they do.

If Fiedur doesn't like what people say about what he does, then he should simply stop doing it.

Originally Posted by scratchycat

Not sure, looks like Jack Sunshine is taking over the forum.

List All Your Biz Sites Here | View Forum | AdlandPro Community

Is there a thread for the class action at Adland??....I can't find a search button there...only a search members button...

Originally Posted by okosh

Is there a thread for the class action at Adland??....I can't find a search button there...only a search members button...

You can search "supposed business opportunities" threads in Adland by clicking the tab at the top of their main forums thread then completing the search box when it comes up there. I could not find the RS action information in an Adland thread but he has obviously published the information somewhere as you can find it in Google.

Any lawyer who is interested in finding out what I have said to Bogdan's members about him in private, will not have to look far. My associates here will confirm that my usual comments on the "Bogdan persona" are short and sweet. They are quite simply "Oh Bugger Bogdan."

One wonders if Boggies' mythical lawyer friend recommended this as the best way to deal with negative publicity for AdLand.

I hesitate to believe anyone remotely connected to the law would advise his/her client to issue such an easily disputed statement such as the opening line of Fiedurs' tirade on RealScamActionSuit.com

Originally Posted by Boggie

The site RealScam.com engages in harboring disgruntled users who then create anonymous accounts on the RealScam site and out of revenge attack members, business owners and individuals accusing them of unproven actions, exposing their full names taken from their place of business or activity.

I wonder how the Bogster intends to prove the said "full names" came from "their place of business or activity" and not from publicly accessible information put out there on the 'net by the individuals themselves.

As for proving the "disgruntled users" bit, FAGEDDABOWDIT.

Originally Posted by littleroundman

As for proving the "disgruntled users" bit, FAGEDDABOWDIT.

Is that synonomous with my Cynical Ancient Brit comment when the subject of Fiedur's defence gets an airing LRM? My brains go into deep freeze at the thought of trying to absorb the legal issues. "Bugger Bogdan" is the only response that ever comes to my mind when the issue is raised.

Originally Posted by scratchycat

Not sure, looks like Jack Sunshine is taking over the forum.

List All Your Biz Sites Here | View Forum | AdlandPro Community

Jack Sunshine has been around Adland and other forums for ages. I remember him pushing Sunshine Jewellery very hard on The Safelist. He pushed the same free groceries scam that Jimbo is still pedalling on Adland ad nauseum.

Many people have tried to tell you that you do not know your own enemies, I totally second that one! They are right under your nose.

SC, without wishing to credit Bogdan Freebie with more smarts than he actually has, I think it is safe to say that he knows exactly who his own enemies are. They are, and always have been, the people who try to rock his warm and fuzzy Adland boat - however innocent their intentions might have been.

Originally Posted by path2prosperity

Is that synonomous with my Cynical Ancient Brit comment when the subject of Fiedur's defence gets an airing LRM? My brains go into deep freeze at the thought of trying to absorb the legal issues. "Bugger Bogdan" is the only response that ever comes to my mind when the issue is raised.

Nah,

I'm referring to the Bogsters' opening comment on his RealScamActionSuit.com website:

The site RealScam.com engages in harboring disgruntled users who then create anonymous accounts on the RealScam site

My point is, how the h**l does he know that "disgruntled users" are behind his nefarious activities being exposed ??

Is someone who becomes aware of the criminal activities being promoted on Adland merely "disgruntled" or is the Bogster suggesting such people should keep their mouths shut and allow the criminal activities to continue ??

You see, Fiedur or his company moved from being innocent forum owners to fair game targets when they began accepting tainted money from illegal activities and continued to do so after they had been informed of said illegality.

I'm finding it difficult to understand what tactics Fiedur and/or his "legal representatives" intend to use should they ever decide to file suit.

IANAL, nor do I play one in a TV series, but AFAIK, "it's not fair" or "they're just disgruntled ex members" don't quite cut it in terms of having a class action suit actioned.

Are there illegal activities being promoted on AdLand ??

Is Fiedur aware of such activities ??

Has he acted against activities after being advised of their status ??

Does he or his company receive compensation for said promotion ?

Has he sought legal advice WRT his responsibilities and is he able/prepared to provide evidence of having done so to the satisfaction of a court ??

Is any of the so called "private" information discussed NOT already in the public domain and/or privileged ??

WHAT, exactly is it Fiedur and Kathleen think has been said or done illegally ??

They may be completely pi***d off their little corner of the 'net is now exposed for others to see and they can no longer play their silly little HYIP games and get-rich-quick schemes out of the public eye, but, surely they didn't think they could get away with it forever