COSPLAY FAN brings a proposed CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT for FRAUD against CBS, DISNEY, NBC Universal, and ANOVOS!

At first glance, it seems almost ridiculous. Most fans know that ANOVOS, a licensee that produces ultra-high quality cosplay props and costumes for Star Trek, Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, and other genre franchises, has a well-earned reputation for taking a looooooong time to fulfill their pre-orders. And when I say “long time,” I’m often talking years!

But the wait is usually worth it. The Anovos replicas look amazing, many uniforms are custom-tailored for each individual who orders one, and all are officially licensed to look nearly identical to what has appeared on screen. While some fans complain about the long wait times—to both Anovos and to the licensors—others just seem to grin and bear it. In a number of cases, fans have learned from frustrated experiences not to pre-order new items and instead wait until they are listed as “in stock.”

But one fan, RICHARD DALTON from Louisiana, apparently didn’t get the memo about avoiding pre-order items and—over a nearly three-year period—pre-ordered 49 different items ranging in price from $10 pennants to a $9,000 starship model…for a total in excess of $40,000! Now Mr. Dalton is suing in California federal court (you can read the entire complaint here). The reason for the lawsuit is that none of the pre-order items was ever shipped, and Anovos has refused to refund any of his $40,000.

Some of you are probably thinking, “Serves him right for not getting the hint sooner! Caveat emptor…let the buyer beware!” True, there’s a certain amount of “fool me twice, shame on me…” lack of sympathy that some fans might cynically be feeling. And of course, Anovos does state on the pre-order pages: “All items are subject to change in availability, features, and delivery dates at any time and for any reason.”

But should that one blanket disclaimer get Anovos completely off the hook? Just because poor Richard was naive enough to believe that a licensed vendor would actually deliver merchandise in under three years(!!!) after being paid in full, should he be penalized for that innocent faith? If Anovos took advantage of Richard’s (and others’) trusting natures, why should it be only the customers who come out on the losing end? Shouldn’t Anovos face some consequences, too?

This case is germane to fan films because one of the the guidelines states:

4. If the fan production uses commercially-available Star Trek uniforms, accessories, toys and props, these items must be official merchandise and not bootleg items or imitations of such commercially available products.

Anovos uniforms are, in fact, official merchandise…and so the outcome of this lawsuit could conceivably affect Star Trek fan films. This is especially true because Mr. Dalton isn’t suing only Anovos; he is also suing CBS and Disney and NBC Universal for continuing to renew Anovos’ licenses for their intellectual propertiues despite being well aware of consumer complaints and possible fraud, breach of contract, misrepresentation, and unfair enrichment.

Let’s take a closer look at all of this…


Okay, first of all, let’s be clear what is happening here: Mr. Dalton and his small San Diego-based law firm HYDE & SWIGART, APC, are swinging for the bleachers. While few attorneys at their level would advise their client to bother with a $40,000 cause of action (it’d likely cost at least that much to litigate) against a small-time manufacturer, the allure of a class action that could bring in three major studios—CBS for Star Trek, Disney for Star Wars, and NBC Universal for Battlestar Galactica—is probably irresistible. Those studios have deep pockets, and a win could bring in not only a return of the Mr. Dalton’s $40,000 but potentially additional statutory and punitive damages in the hundreds of thousands…for each plaintiff in the class action.

What is a “class action,” you ask?

In law, a “class” is a group of separate plaintiffs who can come together to bring a single complaint because they all have suffered the same injury or damages. In the case of Anovos, it’s anyone like Mr. Dalton who paid for a pre-order product(s) from Anovos—licensed by Disney, NBCU, and/or CBS—who have not received the product nor a refund from January 1, 2016 through the present. These plaintiffs, whether there be 5, 10, 100, or 1,000 or more, can all be represented together by a single lawyer or law firm.

It’s not necessary to know, before the trial, who all of these people are. Anovos’ records can be subpoenaed during discovery, and those individuals can then be contacted to see if they’re interested in joining the class action. In the event of a settlement or jury award, the members of the class will split the proceeds after attorneys fees (usually around 40%). Although the members of the class might not get much more than their money back, Hyde & Swigart get a 40% of everything combined and could wind up seeing millions. If they win. But they don’t necessarily even have to win…

That’s because few class actions ever make it to litigation. The vast majority are settled long before they ever go to trial. Large corporations are likely to pony up a few hundred thousand dollars to a plaintiff with a reasonable complaint (and this is a reasonable complaint) just to save on the nuisance of dealing with a protracted lawsuit. If each defendant offers $250,000…that’s a million bucks. 40% goes to the lawyers, and the rest can be spread among the “class.” Not the multi-million dollar windfall described above, but a few hundred thousand dollars for settling a case quickly ain’t a bad haul!


Of course, the judge first has to certify the class. That’s why the complaint lists the following three items first under “Prayer for Relief” (a legal term for “Here’s what we want…”):

  • This Action be certified as a class action
  • Plaintiff be appointed as the Class Representative
  • Plaintiff’s attorneys be appointed as Class counsel

This will allow Hide & Swigart to represent hundreds, thousands, and possibly tens of thousands of people with unfulfilled purchases from Anovos that hopefully (for the Plaintiff) exceed $5 million. I say “hopefully” because $5 million is the minimum threshold to make a federal case out of all of this. Below that number and the federal courts don’t have jurisdiction.

If the judge nixes the class—which is a distinct possibility—then this entire case will likely go away quickly. One of the reasons for that decision could be Anovos stepping forward to share their records to show the unfulfilled preorders total since the beginning of 2016 far less that $5 million.

If the class is certified, though, things could get VERY interesting. The action I would imagine the big studio lawyers taking first—in addition to making an immediate motion to dismiss—would be to have each of teir studios dropped as co-defendants. After all, what did they do??? There’s charges of fraud, breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, and the such…all of which apply to things that Anovos did (or failed to do). All CBS and the others did was renew a contract with a licensee. Where’s the fraud in that?

For this reason, the Plaintiff’s lawyers spend nearly a full page explaining why the licensors are, in fact, also culpable. Here’s an excerpt:

Should Anovos fail to meet agreed upon quality standards, Licensors can order Anovos to stop the production of said product. Accordingly, Licensors have a duty to supervise Anovos’ use of the Licensors’ own marks. Licensors knew or should have known of Anovos’ scheme. Nevertheless, Licensors profited from the scheme by permitting Anovos to use their well-known names and trademarked logos to induce target consumers to become Anovos customers.

Furthermore, it’s pointed out in the complaint that not only was Anovos reported to the Better Business Bureau by multiple customers (and received and ignored two certified letters from the BBB), but a number of those customers also contacted the studios directly to complain about this official licensee. So the “Licensors knew or should have known of Anovos’ scheme...” isn’t out of left field.

However—and here is where the rubber meets the road for this entire case—was there, in fact, a “scheme”? Did Anovos set out to defraud and mislead its customers, taking their money while always intending not to deliver the product(s) purchased that were pre-paid for in full?

Photo ©2015 DAVID NGO. Used with permission of DAVID CHENG (pictured).

This will be rather difficult to prove based on the fact that Anovos has, in many cases, successfully delivered pre-ordered, pre-paid merchandise. Fan cosplayer DAVID CHENG, pictured to the right, pre-ordered his “monster maroon” and, according to David, didn’t receive it for two and a half years. But he did receive it.

The problem for Anovos is that their business model—what there is of it—suffers from a small number of orders for expensive-to-produce items coupled with a serious cash-flow problem. All too often, funds don’t exists to build up inventory until enough orders come in first. And producing items one at a time as they are ordered makes them way too costly to manufacture and still make any kind of profit…unless the prices are raised so high as to make almost no want want to buy them. Economies of scale require Anovos to have items—even very high-end items—produced in some kind of quantity. And that often means long delays for the first folks who pre-order while they wait for enough subsequent orders to come in to justify starting the production fulfillment.

And of course, allowing customers to cancel and get a full refund if production takes too long collapses the whole house of cards. If Anovos needs, for example, 25 pre-orders for a production run and is up to 20, then they’re just five pre-orders away. But if 7 people cancel out of impatience and frustration and demand their money back, then now Anovos has jumped to 12 orders away…and everyone has to wait even longer. That is why Anovos recently issued a new “All Sales Are Final” policy for pre-orders…which did NOT go over well with fans.

Anyway, people like David Cheng are proof that Anovos does have a defense that the system can and does work…just not all the time. Richard Dalton just happened to get particularly unlucky in ordering 49 items that all took more than two and half years to fulfill. But that does NOT necessarily mean that Anovos never had any intention of fulfilling them and simply wanted to abscond with his money.

Now, just because Anovos has a defense does not necessarily mean they are completely off the hook. Fraud and misrepresentation don’t require that Anovos set out with the intention never to fulfill orders. It is also conceivable that a judge or jury might find that a failure to clearly state that certain items can often take years to be produced is a form of misrepresentation. Obviously, there’s a difference in pre-paying for an item priced at several hundred dollars and expecting it might be shipped to you in a few months versus pre-paying in full with the knowledge the item might not arrive for a few years. A customer might not make the latter purchase with the knowledge of how long it could take, and so making the customer believe otherwise could be considered an unfair and potentially illegal business practice.


A lot is riding on whether or not the judge 1) certifies the class and 2) dismisses the studios. If this case does make it past those two hurdles, then expect a quick settlement (my prediction) rather than a protracted legal battle. It’s just not worth it for the studios to let this go to court…especially since California juries tend to be very liberal and sympathetic to the “little guy” taking on the big corporations.

Also, if the case makes it through the gauntlet, there might be some possible repercussions to hit Anovos from the studios. Up until now, the licensors seem to have been mostly ignoring the problem, likely seeing the production and fulfillment delays as more of a feature than a bug. The studios aren’t stupid. As awesome as these costume and prop replicas are, most of them are never going to be bulk sellers (except the more “in demand” items like TNG and TOS tunics and the cheaper stuff like the patches). So there’s probably never going to be enough cash-flow to keep many of the more expense items in stock.

So the only viable business model continues to be waiting for enough pre-orders (paid in full) to come in to justify a limited production run. Otherwise, the cost of making these uniforms one-at-a-time as they’re ordered would price them out of most fans’ reach.

For this reason, it’s unclear how the studios will react. If the case goes nowhere, then likely no harm/no foul…and Anovos keeps on keeping on. But if the studios get dragged into a class-action lawsuit and have to spend money cleaning up Anovos’ mess, then there might well be some new rules established about how long money can be held before products are either manufactured and shipped or money is refunded…maybe six months or a year max? It’s hard to say.

The studios need to be careful, though. If they make it too difficult for Anovos to operate and/or make a decent profit offering cool new items, then they’re just limiting their licensee and possibly condemning Anovos to a slow bleed out into oblivion…and that doesn’t help Anovos, the studios, nor the fans.

A lot depends on what happens next, which will be a response from the defendants followed a few steps later by a ruling from the judge on whether to certify this as a class action. If that occurs, things will get very interesting very quickly…

44 thoughts on “COSPLAY FAN brings a proposed CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT for FRAUD against CBS, DISNEY, NBC Universal, and ANOVOS!”

  1. This is something I’m keeping a close eye on.

    Yes. Anovos produce a lot of damn cool stuff. But it’s also bloody expensive, and – financially speaking – pretty much out of reach for all but the wealthy few.

    I’ve bought a couple of items from them in the past, but only because they were on sale and I had money to burn at the time.

    Now, I don’t recall where I read this, but I saw a news story that some of the Anovos Star Wars items were being diverted to the new Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge attraction, rather than being shipped to customers.
    Whether this is true or not, I don’t know.

  2. Anovos sounds a bit like a permanent Kickstarter campaign, or like the preorder lines some of the board wargame companies have for proposed new products, where at least X customers (typically, min. 500 customers) have to preorder a new game title before it goes into production. The terms of the preorder programs often vary slightly from company to company. My spouse has ordered several board wargames this way. With Kickstarter-funded games, however, backers’ credit cards aren’t actually charged unless the Kickstarter campaign is successful, while with individual companies’ preorder programs, one’s credit card may or may not be charged at the time the preorder is placed, depending on the terms of the preorder program.
    The examples I’m personally familiar with of unfulfilled preorders are both from Kickstarter campaigns, though. Megara Entertainment was supposed to publish both Destiny Quest: Raiders of the Dune Sea (a solo RPG/interactive fiction book) and the 7th book in the Fabled Lands series (also a solo RPG/interactive fiction book). Megara has since gone out of business, though. I eventually received a copy of the Destiny Quest book, after the content producers took over production themselves and eventually offered the book via a UK online vendor; backers had to pay an additional (but heavily discounted) sum to finally get a physical copy of the book. No such luck yet on Fabled Lands #7, however.

  3. My Bet is if it is certified as a class action and if the studio’s remain in the suit there will not be a quick settlement regardless of how much sense it makes financially. The studios have become arrogant believing whatever they produce with its social messages the fans must accept and when they do not do so then blame the fans instead of their product.

    That the fans seek to compel them to monitor their licensees and actually do something for the money they receive is too much of an affront to their ego’s and I believe it will go to court though maybe at that stage it will go away when it becomes obvious that the negative press they are getting is not worth the trouble.

    As to the Anovos Business model yes totally flawed they have the figures to prove how many items are sold once in stock and any bank would authorize a short term loan on the basis of enough pre orders. So it would make sense for them to accept pre orders at 25% of the total cost non refundable for say 6 months, fund production with a bank loan the cost of which would be born with the few people who change their minds about paying the remainder of the money.

    PS Sad to inform you that Galaxy’s Edge has not had great reviews it is apparently small with long wait’s though that may well be because of its newness and has a dearth of Original Star Wars characters.

    1. “PS Sad to inform you that Galaxy’s Edge has not had great reviews it is apparently small with long wait’s though that may well be because of its newness and has a dearth of Original Star Wars characters.”

      I’m going to GE for the food (and the Smuggler’s Run ride). The restaurants there actually got pretty good reviews. There’s few decent places to eat inside of the park (at least Disneyland; DCA is a different matter). Usually, we sneak over to Downtown Disney and do lunch at Tortilla Jo’s, which is excellent. It’ll be nice to have some good options without having to hop on the monorail.

    2. Glenn – your first paragraph reminds me of when CBS revamped the official Star Trek website at startrek .com, dropping the original version created by Paramount and replacing it with the clunky, cheap thing created by the Funny Garbage web design firm that went live before it was out of Beta and never worked well from Day One. It looked like something created on FreeWebs and didn’t operate as well as something that was.
      As complaints started coming in, the reactions from CBS were on the line of “it’s probably your browser” and “we’ll look into it” (which they never did) and so on, implying it was YOUR problem, and not considering the fact the new site just plain sucked.
      To this day I still blame myself in part for what that site became, because I had been invited to a meeting in New York City with CBS and Funny Garbage representatives as part of a group of selected startrek .com members to discuss the plans and direction for the revamped site…I wasn’t able to go. Still have the email…

  4. Jonathan, if they accept a customer’s order, and take years to produce it, then what is done with the customer’s payment? Is it kept in an account for use when the minimum number of pre-orders is reached, or do they spend it on other things? Aside from class action, which may be just to get the attention of the studios, is this not fraud perpetrated by the company?

    1. It’s very possibly fraud. This case is by no means a slam dunk for either side…and a lot of dirty laundry could come out in discovery. That’s one of the reasons we might see a quick settlement.

      1. I’d be curious to know what kind of interest they are gaining keeping customer money in their bank accounts for such extended periods of time…

        1. With interest rates as low as they are at the moment, I’m guessing the answer is somewhere between “almost nothing” and “not very much.” 🙂

  5. I should not wonder but can’t help myself from wondering how the Axanar haters are reacting to this lawsuit. Sigh.

  6. This article fails to address the actual facts. Caveat emptor aside, the assertion that people are cancelling early or simply not understanding that things they’ve paid for before release is a false one. If you would go to Anovos’ website, you’ll see that they provide shipping windows for each product. In many, many cases, they have not only slipped past that window, but often don’t even update with new targets. Even the form emails that they’ve lately taken to sending out on that topic have only started recently, most likely as a response to comments out on the web regarding a law suit…something that has now come to fruition.
    A couple of other items for you. One is an error – Anovos costumes are not tailor made. These are ‘off the rack’ sizing with the expectation that tailoring be done once the costume is received by the customer. So…having to create a unique version of each costume isn’t a fact or an excuse for their behavior. Also, there are increasing examples of their having taken shortcuts resulting in significant errors in replicating the original costume. The most egregious one was their Star Trek The Wrath of Khan replicas. Pieces on the jacket that were supposed to have soutache/braid instead had embroidering. The pants – supposedly based on the ‘hero’ versions worn by the principals – were actually replicated from those used by extras (vastly different and of lesser quality). Even the stripes were all wrong. When I asked on of the Anovos people about that, his defensive response was that they make no quality control inspections before their contractors drop ship.

  7. Nice article marred by two errors that I saw.

    1) The $9000 item Dalton ordered was a starship model, not a uniform.

    2)Error on the spelling of Anovis (sic). Of course, this is totally understandable because the word is so obscure in the first place!

  8. This sounds like a perfect scenario for Anovos to use a Kickstarter model going forward. Make each product available for a specified time, where no money is collected unless a specified number of orders are received. At the end of the period, if the specified number of orders are received, all orders are charged and the product will be shipped in X months (where X is based on how long it takes to do a run with shipping). They could switch to this model for the product that they are closest to reaching the minimum order size, and show existing orders as already pledged. 1 or 2 products a month like this and they could be out of trouble before this goes beyond discovery.

    1. Yeah, you’d think that. But something tells me if it were that easy, they’d be doing it.

      The problem is, I would guess, the lag time between ordering and the date they charge the credit cards…which could be a year or longer (On Kickstarter, it’s a month or less). There might be restrictions on when a vendor can charge a card after purchase. But even if there’s not, imagine it’s a year later, someone has just paid off their balance because they lost their job and money is super-tight. Suddenly there’s a $500 charge they weren’t expecting because Anovos just hit their threshold. The customer might be livid. What if they challenge the charge? Or as another example, what if the card a customer gave in 2018 expired in early 2019 and the charge doesn’t go through? Suddenly, Anovos was counting on $10,000 to pay for an initial production run, and because of credit card charge challenges and expired cards, they’re $3,500 short. And when they track down those costumers to get their new card expiration dates, some of them no longer want the item because it’s been too long. So suddenly Anovos is thousands of dollars short of the funds needed to start production…even though they’ve charged the other cards.

      It’d likely be a mess.

      1. Any Kickstarter pro worth their salt would set the minimum funding levels to account for fees from Kickstarter, the credit card compaines, postage, production of the product, and missed/failed pledges. Anyone who doesn’t shouldn’t be running a Kickstarter. Period.

        The trouble is that Kickstarter will only allow one campaign at a time. That one has to be fulfilled and shipped before the next one is started. (according to their rules, at least). What Anovos can do, though, is use a similar model that doesn’t bill the buyer’s funds until the minimum order number is met. No one is charged until 1) the minimum number of buyers have agreed to buy and 2) their credit cards are authenticated. This does require more work on Anovos’ part, but they could make it work if they wanted to.

        But that’s just it, they’d actually have to WANT to make it work . . . . .

        1. As I answered previously, there are logistical issues involved in taking an order and waiting potentially six months or a year (or more!) before charging credit cards. Among the most obvious land-mines are credit cards whose expiration dates have expired in the interim or customers who forgot they ordered something 18 months earlier and flag the unexpected charge as fraudulent. Also, with all the identity thefts these days, card numbers get stolen and cards have to be replaced. Anovos would have no way to track and record those new numbers.

          Now, of course, Anovos could contact all of those people with a “We’re now ready to place our manufacturing order–please confirm your payment information, and we will charge your card.” But what if a portion of those people have changed their minds in the interim and say, “I no longer want to buy this item…”? Suddenly, there’s not enough in the pipeline anymore to order a production run, and Anovos is back to waiting for more orders.

          With Kickstarter, the risk is minimized because the duration of the campaigns is typically 30 day (or at most 60). Anovos’ time frame stretches out much longer.

  9. I, personally, think that a 2 1/2+ year wait for something I paid fully for is an unreasonable wait. More so, I would be looking for more than my money back if refused a refund due to an unreasonable wait.

    It is not on the client to wait for a purchased item beyond a reasonable term. It is the business’ responsibility to deliver the promised, and paid for, product. Too bad if they cannot get enough orders; that is their problem not mine. I made the purchase in good faith, the onus is now on them to deliver.

    As for class action, if there are indeed a large enough number of individuals that have waited an unreasonable time (note that, unfortunately, will be determined by the judge) for delivery, then the class action shouldn’t be denied.

    The culpability of CBS, NBCU and Disney is in either being negligent in not knowing the state of the Anovos’ deliveries to fully paid customers and therefore blindly renewing the licensee, or in knowing the situation and not including some requirement to improve the fulfillment of orders that have already been paid for in full and deemed to have waited an unreasonable time. Ignorance is no excuse, nor is deliberate avoidance of a known issue with a licensee.

    But, of course, I’m at best being an “armchair lawyer” here. I am not a lawyer, law clerk, or actually in any capacity associated with the dispensing of the law–even more so US federal or state laws. I’m Canadian and an IT specialist (unemployed). So, take my comments for what they are, my opinion on what is right, not necessarily what is legal according to law and precedent.

  10. I thought exactly the same thing. Simple bank interest on items purchased 2+ years earlier on a significant total dollar amount could be “a pretty penny”.
    And, if done with the cash from a significant number of prepaid purchases…
    Or/and if the monies received go into something more profitable than just a simple business/chequing account, the return on that money could easily outpace a standard banking account.
    All the more reason for discovery to want access to Anovos’ bookkeeping and banking information to trace where purchaser’s money went upon receipt.

    1. These days, a decent savings account is lucky to get 2% a year, Rick. Let’s say Anovos had as much as $300,000 in pre-orders (which is a lot!). 2% a year on that is only $6,000. That’s hardly significant for a company with serious cashflow issues. Relying on interest from money in the bank is not a viable strategy.

      More likely, they’re borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. They’ve likely had to short-order some items due to lack of enough pre-orders, hoping that having additional items in stock afterwards would lead to those items selling eventually. So they take some of the money from new producer pre-orders to fund the production of older pre-orders. This leaves the newer items more “in the hole,” but hopefully the money from selling the overstock from the old item will fill in the gap. Otherwise, that new product eventually becomes the old product from the previous scenario, and a newer product’s pre-orders pay for that.

      In that way, it’s kinda like a ponzi scheme…but not exactly the same.

  11. Also as an aside, there is a complete lack of communication on the part of Anovos with their customers. People who have reached out to get updates are given the run around and then eventually ignored or flat out ignored to begin with. Those that have requested refunds have waited up to 4 or more months to receive them.

    1. No argument here…Anovos is in need of an ass whumpin’. Will they get it in a legal way? Not sure yet. But at least in these five minutes, they’re not in a very comfortable place.

    2. They seem to be blatantly violating the Fair Credit Billing Act with the actions that you describe.

        1. The Fair Credit Billing Act protects consumers from unfair billing practices, such as unauthorized charges, charges for unaccepted or undelivered goods and services.
          The consumer has 60 days to dispute a transaction
          https://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/glossary/term-fair-credit-billing-act.php
          Anovos could potentially be subjected to countless charge-backs and bank disputes. If they are not careful Visa and Mastercard and Discover may determine that they are violating the merchant contract that enables acceptance of Visa Mastercard and Discover

          1. But here’s the thing:

            “To dispute a charge, send the creditor your name, address, account number and a description of the billing error to the address given for “billing inquiries.” The creditor must receive the letter within 60 days of sending the flawed bill and must acknowledge your complaint in writing within 30 days after receiving it. The dispute must be solved within two billing cycles, but no more than 90 days.”

            So after waiting three months, the sale is final. Now, what if the item is never delivered? Then report them to the Better Business Bureau and/or file a complaint in small claims court. But the The Fair Credit Billing Act has a 60-day limit to file a claim and a 90-limit to resolve it.

  12. Anovos may be violating the Fair Credit Billing Act and possibly other laws by charging for items years in advance especially if they are not specifying the exact time frame for delivery. Perhaps CBS and the other licensors should jointly buy Anovos that way they can profit more directly from sales while providing working capitol to enable Anovos to fullfil orders within reasonable timeframes.

  13. I remember reading somewhere that many credit card issuers do not allow merchants to charge your credit card before they ship. If Anovos is not careful they could lose the ability to accept credit cards.

    1. Not true. All online vendors charge immediately and then ship at a later point. Order from Amazon and you’ll see: you get the order confirmation e-mail almost immediately (to confirm that your card was charged and the item paid for), and then you get the shipping confirmation e-mail a few minutes, hours, or day later. Doing it in the opposite order risks a credit card charge being rejected AFTER the package is no longer under the control of the merchant.

  14. It just occurred to me that if a plaintiff convinced a judge that all the defendants are engaged in a racket that licensing fees paid to CBS, DISNEY, and NBC Universal could be perceived as racketeering proceeds.

    1. Racketeering is a criminal act. This is a civil trial. Any charge of racketeering would need to be reported to the Justice Department or the FBI for investigation and possible criminal charges, and I doubt that’s likely.

  15. Well, it’s seems to be business as usual for Anovos. I got a “please buy one of our products” email from them yesterday.

      1. Indeed. There’s bound to be *some* poor gullible fools out there for them to fleece. 😉

  16. The BBB is not a government agency. The FTC is the proper government agency to report undelivered goods. The FTC can and does fine companies. They also are known to start class actions such as FTC vs Ameridebt. Anovos is lucky that their victims do not know to report them to the FTC

Comments are closed.