Dont.farm being sued by Google LLC

You should definitely introduce something like an escrow service then, possibly with a delayed release of funds. This would make life more difficult for rogue businesses.
 
I think escrow should be an option which is what marketplace 2.0 is all about. I don’t think it should be enforced on all sellers though.

It will be an option for the buyer - if your selected seller doesn't offer it then we'd expect to be able to offer a seller that does offer man in the middle / escrow through our platform.
 
It will be an option for the buyer - if your selected seller doesn't offer it then we'd expect to be able to offer a seller that does offer man in the middle / escrow through our platform.
That’s definitely a fair middle ground. I expect that those who’re able to do escrow will be able to corner the market .Perhaps even offer badges for threads that have escrow as an option?
 
It's great this is discussed now on an open thread, the mods were deleting my comments so far, the original thread on the shitlist is mine.
You can see the clear proof in the thread, but it was high court decided to lock my thread for over 2 months while giving dont.fam to be an active seller on this forum.
I don't think the thread will be any relevant now that they have no home to return to.
Very hope the moderators will decide to not delete my comment today as it's in an open thread.
 
It will be an option for the buyer - if your selected seller doesn't offer it then we'd expect to be able to offer a seller that does offer man in the middle / escrow through our platform.
What if the buyer takes advantage of escrow? As I have had a few ones who did a chargeback for my software product instantly after purchasing it, Which led to me leaving the crypto option only and that paypal unfortunately got banned as well. What if buyers do some false claims while Escrow is introduced? Is the escrow system seller-friendly as well?

I am sure there are a lot of buyers who come with ill-intentions after purchasing the product, Would the sellers also have a choice if they want to have escrow or no?

Unfortunately due to these people, Sellers are forced to keep only crypto as a payment as I have been observing the marketplace..
 
What if the buyer takes advantage of escrow? As I have had a few ones who did a chargeback for my software product instantly after purchasing it, Which led to me leaving the crypto option only and that paypal unfortunately got banned as well. What if buyers do some false claims while Escrow is introduced? Is the escrow system seller-friendly as well?

I am sure there are a lot of buyers who come with ill-intentions after purchasing the product, Would the sellers also have a choice if they want to have escrow or no?

Unfortunately due to these people, Sellers are forced to keep only crypto as a payment as I have been observing the marketplace..
I guess the safest option would be to not use escrow on services like that.

I doubt the BHW arbitration wouldn’t be able to see through a scammy buyer but you’d be better off not enabling escrow for something like that.

Or just set up a licensing server to prevent buyers from continuing to use the software after requesting a refund.
 
I doubt the BHW arbitration wouldn’t be able to see through a scammy buyer but you’d be better off not enabling escrow for something like that.
If it's optional, It's a good-to-go option. As per my observations, One product is more riskier than other so it comes down to what you are selling as well. And buyers are happy when you offer them paypal for legit services, Escrow would be a nice add-on though!
 
If it's optional, It's a good-to-go option. As per my observations, One product is more riskier than other so it comes down to what you are selling as well. And buyers are happy when you offer them paypal for legit services, Escrow would be a nice add-on though!
Yes indeedy.
I’m pro choices. Since it’s not always the buyer who’s innocent.
 
Yes indeedy.
I’m pro choices. Since it’s not always the buyer who’s innocent.
The whole Escrow is problematic, it makes the escrow provider take full responsibility for the product quality, the fact you will receive a product will not ensure the product is what you have asked for.
Heck, take Amazon and other places as an example, and this example is with physical products. when it comes to content and other digital products, the escrow should come from the same industry with prior knowledge of what is the product and what it should do, otherwise the whole, otherwise what is the point in the escrow...
 
Also other services of their are suspended: awmproxy, vd.ne, abm.net
 
The whole Escrow is problematic, it makes the escrow provider take full responsibility for the product quality, the fact you will receive a product will not ensure the product is what you have asked for.
Heck, take Amazon and other places as an example, and this example is with physical products. when it comes to content and other digital products, the escrow should come from the same industry with prior knowledge of what is the product and what it should do, otherwise the whole, otherwise what is the point in the escrow...
Indeed, That's the case as well. I have had so many buyers who don't know how the service works and when it's delivered, They are like this wasn't properly delivered and some nonsense shit. I mean why do you buy something when you don't know how the service works?
 
The whole Escrow is problematic, it makes the escrow provider take full responsibility for the product quality, the fact you will receive a product will not ensure the product is what you have asked for.
Heck, take Amazon and other places as an example, and this example is with physical products. when it comes to content and other digital products, the escrow should come from the same industry with prior knowledge of what is the product and what it should do, otherwise the whole, otherwise what is the point in the escrow...
We actually don’t know the specifics of the whole system. Will have to wait for the reveal. You’re right it’s problematic but no reason to think BHW hasn’t already considered what you’re saying.
 
The dont.farm company has started partnership with Sarkar. We will keep you updated.

Ordered biggest package: Transaction ID: 3TR23437271263130

Lady Gaga + BOX SHOT + Flying Dragon Combo orders Placed

Transaction ID:1G453002J0901110P
-----------------------
The dont.farm company has started partnership with Aka Sam. We will keep you updated.

These "partners" were most likely just selling their services to him. I hope is no risk of them getting caught up in this?
Asking because one of them is sarkar - the most favorite seller for many members here :D

Seriously, I think they were just link providers, so no risk to them, most likely.
 
Months ago I reported his thread to BHW mods, it was very clear he uses hacked accounts, mods was aware, but let this service open. And it is still open regardless of the many shit list complains and the clear evidence this is a pure SCAM on BHW.

Be ware where you do business. BHW stands for black hat stuff.

Oh, yes, who doesn't know the best seller seo crap service online? He is famous and a milionare, thanks to BHW, again.
 
This is an allegation, not a judgement, that has been brought against one of our members. We have informed the member in question, frozen their ad account and await their response. Once a judgement has been made by the courts we will review our position based on the facts of the case.
Read the lawsuit, these are not just empty allegations. There is a lot of evidence being presented in this document that only corroborates everything that the members of this forum have been saying for over a year.

I don't feel sorry for Google, but rather for the members who buy these accounts (which are expensive) to get amateur support and share a hacked account with the malware victim.

Be careful when putting your credit card details in the FB Ads account you buy with Dont.Farm, it's already more than proven that they are an international hacker scam using malware, cryptojackings, keyloggers, phishing and other techniques for data theft.
 
Are they being sued for threshold accounts? Or for infecting computers and selling stolen credit cards?
 
Back
Top