Legal implications of a Bigfoot website

Tumblehome · 3rd December 2007, 01:10 PM

You might remember Todd Standing, who earlier this year came up with the ingenious idea to get Bigfoot protected as an endangered species in Canada. He made a faux documentary to exhibit in theatres around Western Canada, and makes a big deal of donating all the proceeds from the film to animal shelters. So if he's in it for the money, where does he get it?

Well, on his website, he appeals for donations...

Quote:

--All of your donations will allow our research to continue well into the future.

--All money donated through this site will allow us to expand our expeditions and assist in bringing forth the very important legislation.

--With your help and kind donations we will continue with our work for many years to come.

But here's the kicker:

Quote:

(Make All Cheques/Money Orders Payable to: Todd Standing)

I know what the ethical ramifications are of asking for money to be sent to him personally, but I was hoping bigger business minds than mine could advise on the legal implications. It doesn't look like he's set up as a business, so is it still legit to solicit money for himself personally? (This is in Canada, of course.)

Starthinker · 3rd December 2007, 02:06 PM

Looks like he just wants to get his camping trips funded. I guess if you donate to his site you get what you pay for.

Michael Redman · 3rd December 2007, 02:21 PM

I'll tell you what I think, but first I'm going to need a check . . .

Tumblehome · 3rd December 2007, 02:23 PM

@starthinker,

So it's legal, then? If I sent money, I can't ask to see that it was spent on his "research", and not his mortgage payments?

ETA: Just to be clear, no, I didn't send him money.

Tumblehome · 3rd December 2007, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by Michael Redman

I'll tell you what I think, but first I'm going to need a check . . .

Um...the check's in the mail...yeah...really. Now can you tell me what you think?

Michael Redman · 3rd December 2007, 02:57 PM

I don't know anything about Canadian law, but I would think you could say "I'm going camping and looking for Bigfoot, and if you give me money, I'll go more often," without running afoul of the law. The site doesn't claim they're a charity, or that donations are deductible.

BPSCG · 3rd December 2007, 04:45 PM

I'm going to Montana for a week in January. Send me some money and I'll look for Bigfoot for you while I'm out there.

"Hey, Beeps, you see Bigfoot down there?"
"Nope. Okay, we're almost at the top. Why don't we ski down that trail off to the right? Takes us back to the lodge; maybe we can look for Bigfoot in there while we're having lunch."

Tumblehome · 3rd December 2007, 05:39 PM

I was thinking more along the lines of, "Great idea, Todd, looking for Bigfoot in Las Vegas."

"Yeah, I don't see any in the pool here. Let's see if there's one in the casino."

So because he's just an individual, not a company or organization of any kind, donors can't force him to show where the money goes. He can buy a Ferrari if he wants, even though the site states it's for "research" and "expeditions" and "the very important legislation".

Michael Redman · 4th December 2007, 05:17 AM

Can you "force" street beggars to tell you how they're going to spend the money? What if they say they just need a couple of dollars to buy a battery cable? Could you sue them if they use the money for booze?

If he were claiming the donations were being used for charitable purposes, I might expect the government would be interested in helping find out where the money was going. But he isn't make any such claim, that I can see.

A potential donor could ask him where the money is going, and not give him money if they don't like the answer. I'm not sure why the law should get involved.

Drewbot · 4th December 2007, 06:01 AM

As long as it is a business, or a personal endeavor, you can take money, as long as you claim it on your taxes. Another way to go about it, (which is what he is trying to avoid) is to issue shares, and offer a return on the investment. He would have to incorporate to do that. People making movies will often say "I will offer you 1/10 of a point on the profits of the movie, for every $1000.00 you give me." or something like that.

Starthinker · 4th December 2007, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by Tumblehome

@starthinker,

So it's legal, then? If I sent money, I can't ask to see that it was spent on his "research", and not his mortgage payments?

ETA: Just to be clear, no, I didn't send him money.

Oh, I'm not a lawyer or anything, that's just my opinion of what that looks like. Personally, he'll probably get away with it until someone reports him to some agency that might, just might investigate. Otherwise, what's to stop him?

Michael Redman · 4th December 2007, 08:12 AM

Get away with what? Is there any reason to think he's not doing what he says?

blutoski · 4th December 2007, 09:17 AM

Originally Posted by Tumblehome

You might remember Todd Standing, who earlier this year came up with the ingenious idea to get Bigfoot protected as an endangered species in Canada. He made a faux documentary to exhibit in theatres around Western Canada, and makes a big deal of donating all the proceeds from the film to animal shelters. So if he's in it for the money, where does he get it?

Well, on his website, he appeals for donations...

But here's the kicker:

I know what the ethical ramifications are of asking for money to be sent to him personally, but I was hoping bigger business minds than mine could advise on the legal implications. It doesn't look like he's set up as a business, so is it still legit to solicit money for himself personally? (This is in Canada, of course.)

I'll have a look and see if he's in BC.

In BC, there is a legal business structure called a "sole proprietorship." The owner is the legal entity. The proprietor can register a trade name. So, for example, the local McDonald's franchise is "Bob Smith o/a McDonald's on Marine Drive."

The only reason somebody outside would have a right to look at the books is during an audit, or discovery for some trial. They're the private property of the proprietor.

As far as I can see, Standing's not doing anything illegal.

It's possible would be engaged in deception if he were to falsely represent himself as a business or registered society (This would look like calling his organization something with the word "society" or "corporation, inc, ltd, llp, limited, or incorporated"), but I don't see him implying this anywhere.

blutoski · 4th December 2007, 09:21 AM

Update: Todd appears to be in Alberta. Possibly a student (?) at UofA. Alberta laws are almost identical to BC in regards to proprietorships.

Tumblehome · 28th December 2007, 11:51 AM

Thanks for the replies, and apologies for my late reply. Stuff happens.

Thanks for looking that up, blutoski. Yes, Todd Standing is in Edmonton, Alberta. His "qualifications" (I forget where I saw them) included "former science student at the U of Alberta".

And his petition was submitted to an Edmonton member of parliament.

The fact that donations go to him personally, and not to an accountable organization, raises a giant red flag. If people will donate under those circumstances, it's no wonder they'll believe the crap he spouts.

I had been wondering if someone could take him to court if they made a donation, then was refused any records to show the money didn't actually go towards his mortgage payments. It seems not.

blutoski · 28th December 2007, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by Tumblehome

I had been wondering if someone could take him to court if they made a donation, then was refused any records to show the money didn't actually go towards his mortgage payments. It seems not.

Oh, I didn't see that part on his website where he promises to apply the donations exclusively to his mortgage. This can be interpreted as a meeting of the minds (aka: a deal or verbal agreement or contract), and if there's reason to believe that he's not doing this (eg: title search reveals his mortgage was paid off years ago) it could be interpreted as fraud.

The donor would have to have forwarded a great deal of cash for the legal fees to be worthwhile.

To be frank, this is just the web version of "Spare a dime for a cup of coffee?" - who really follows up on panhandlers to see if they're spending the day's loot on whatever their cardboard sign said they would? It's disposable income for the donor, and they probably much prefer maintaining the fantasy that they're contributing to a good cause.

Tokenconservative · 29th December 2007, 08:49 AM

Originally Posted by Tumblehome

You might remember Todd Standing, who earlier this year came up with the ingenious idea to get Bigfoot protected as an endangered species in Canada. He made a faux documentary to exhibit in theatres around Western Canada, and makes a big deal of donating all the proceeds from the film to animal shelters. So if he's in it for the money, where does he get it?

Well, on his website, he appeals for donations...

But here's the kicker:

I know what the ethical ramifications are of asking for money to be sent to him personally, but I was hoping bigger business minds than mine could advise on the legal implications. It doesn't look like he's set up as a business, so is it still legit to solicit money for himself personally? (This is in Canada, of course.)

This is all based on the economic theory that a fool and his money are soon parted.

And the quickerer the betterer in my opinon.

This guy is the MAN!

Tokie

Tumblehome · 30th December 2007, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by blutoski

...It's disposable income for the donor, and they probably much prefer maintaining the fantasy that they're contributing to a good cause.

Would you say the same of people who give to Sylvia Browne? I know Todd Standing isn't in the same league as SB, but he's still soliciting money under suspicious circumstances, to be polite about it. It still bugs me.

Tumblehome · 30th December 2007, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by Tokenconservative

This is all based on the economic theory that a fool and his money are soon parted.

And the quickerer the betterer in my opinon.

This guy is the MAN!

Tokie

Oh, stop it with the false humility.

Everyone knows YOU are the MAN!

bruto · 30th December 2007, 12:19 PM

I'm guessing that if he words it right, and pays his taxes, it would be legal. "All money will allow our research to continue" does not actually say "money will be spent accountably on research." After all, paying his rent and buying his beer is one way we can allow him to continue on his frivolous crackpot research instead of getting an honest job.

Yeah! I think it's time to set up a website to fund my ongoing search for Champ. I promise that if you send me money I will continue with my current level of Champ exploration, which includes leisurely sails on Lake Champlain (with my eyes open most of the time), boat maintenance, taxes on my lake house, and other expenditures vital to the cause.

Tumblehome · 30th December 2007, 11:00 PM

That had occurred to me, too. "I can't do research if I don't have a place to live, a good vehicle, etc." I guess there's no way to stop him, not that that's the end of the world. He's pretty small potatoes, but I'm just particularly pee'd off at this guy for using the Canadian Parliament to legitimize searching for a non-existent animal.

Champ is another story altogether, though. Who do I make the cheque out to?

3rd December 2007, 01:10 PM	#1
Tumblehome Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Beside the point Posts: 1,445	Legal implications of a Bigfoot website You might remember Todd Standing, who earlier this year came up with the ingenious idea to get Bigfoot protected as an endangered species in Canada. He made a faux documentary to exhibit in theatres around Western Canada, and makes a big deal of donating all the proceeds from the film to animal shelters. So if he's in it for the money, where does he get it? Well, on his website, he appeals for donations... Quote: --All of your donations will allow our research to continue well into the future. --All money donated through this site will allow us to expand our expeditions and assist in bringing forth the very important legislation. --With your help and kind donations we will continue with our work for many years to come. But here's the kicker: Quote: (Make All Cheques/Money Orders Payable to: Todd Standing) I know what the ethical ramifications are of asking for money to be sent to him personally, but I was hoping bigger business minds than mine could advise on the legal implications. It doesn't look like he's set up as a business, so is it still legit to solicit money for himself personally? (This is in Canada, of course.)

3rd December 2007, 02:06 PM	#2
Starthinker Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 5,014	Looks like he just wants to get his camping trips funded. I guess if you donate to his site you get what you pay for.
	__________________ \|¦¦\|¦ \|¦\|\|\|\|¦\|\|\|¦\|\|¦¦\|¦\|\|\|\|\|\|\|¦\|¦¦¦¦\|¦¦¦¦\|\|¦\|¦\|¦¦\|¦ \|¦¦\|¦ He who doubts victory has already lost the battle. Below the navel there is neither religion nor truth.

3rd December 2007, 02:21 PM	#3
Michael Redman Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: St. Paul, MN Posts: 3,063	I'll tell you what I think, but first I'm going to need a check . . .
	__________________ The rule is perfect; in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane. - Mark Twain

3rd December 2007, 02:23 PM	#4
Tumblehome Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Beside the point Posts: 1,445	@starthinker, So it's legal, then? If I sent money, I can't ask to see that it was spent on his "research", and not his mortgage payments? ETA: Just to be clear, no, I didn't send him money.
	Last edited by Tumblehome; 3rd December 2007 at 02:26 PM.

3rd December 2007, 02:57 PM	#6
Michael Redman Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: St. Paul, MN Posts: 3,063	I don't know anything about Canadian law, but I would think you could say "I'm going camping and looking for Bigfoot, and if you give me money, I'll go more often," without running afoul of the law. The site doesn't claim they're a charity, or that donations are deductible.
	__________________ The rule is perfect; in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane. - Mark Twain

3rd December 2007, 02:29 PM	#5
Tumblehome Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Beside the point Posts: 1,445	Originally Posted by Michael Redman I'll tell you what I think, but first I'm going to need a check . . . Um...the check's in the mail...yeah...really. Now can you tell me what you think?

3rd December 2007, 04:45 PM	#7
BPSCG Cannibal Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Looting Fafner's Cave Posts: 17,556	I'm going to Montana for a week in January. Send me some money and I'll look for Bigfoot for you while I'm out there. "Hey, Beeps, you see Bigfoot down there?" "Nope. Okay, we're almost at the top. Why don't we ski down that trail off to the right? Takes us back to the lodge; maybe we can look for Bigfoot in there while we're having lunch."
	__________________ Philanthropist (n.) - Someone who spends his own money to advance his version of Utopia. Socialist (n.) - Someone who spends your money to advance his version of Utopia. Last edited by BPSCG; 3rd December 2007 at 04:46 PM.

3rd December 2007, 05:39 PM	#8
Tumblehome Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Beside the point Posts: 1,445	I was thinking more along the lines of, "Great idea, Todd, looking for Bigfoot in Las Vegas." "Yeah, I don't see any in the pool here. Let's see if there's one in the casino." So because he's just an individual, not a company or organization of any kind, donors can't force him to show where the money goes. He can buy a Ferrari if he wants, even though the site states it's for "research" and "expeditions" and "the very important legislation".

4th December 2007, 05:17 AM	#9
Michael Redman Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: St. Paul, MN Posts: 3,063	Can you "force" street beggars to tell you how they're going to spend the money? What if they say they just need a couple of dollars to buy a battery cable? Could you sue them if they use the money for booze? If he were claiming the donations were being used for charitable purposes, I might expect the government would be interested in helping find out where the money was going. But he isn't make any such claim, that I can see. A potential donor could ask him where the money is going, and not give him money if they don't like the answer. I'm not sure why the law should get involved.
	__________________ The rule is perfect; in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane. - Mark Twain

4th December 2007, 06:01 AM	#10
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	As long as it is a business, or a personal endeavor, you can take money, as long as you claim it on your taxes. Another way to go about it, (which is what he is trying to avoid) is to issue shares, and offer a return on the investment. He would have to incorporate to do that. People making movies will often say "I will offer you 1/10 of a point on the profits of the movie, for every $1000.00 you give me." or something like that.
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	__________________ "I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker "I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325 Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

4th December 2007, 08:08 AM	#11
Starthinker Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 5,014	Originally Posted by Tumblehome @starthinker, So it's legal, then? If I sent money, I can't ask to see that it was spent on his "research", and not his mortgage payments? ETA: Just to be clear, no, I didn't send him money. Oh, I'm not a lawyer or anything, that's just my opinion of what that looks like. Personally, he'll probably get away with it until someone reports him to some agency that might, just might investigate. Otherwise, what's to stop him?
	__________________ \|¦¦\|¦ \|¦\|\|\|\|¦\|\|\|¦\|\|¦¦\|¦\|\|\|\|\|\|\|¦\|¦¦¦¦\|¦¦¦¦\|\|¦\|¦\|¦¦\|¦ \|¦¦\|¦ He who doubts victory has already lost the battle. Below the navel there is neither religion nor truth.

4th December 2007, 08:12 AM	#12
Michael Redman Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: St. Paul, MN Posts: 3,063	Get away with what? Is there any reason to think he's not doing what he says?
	__________________ The rule is perfect; in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane. - Mark Twain

4th December 2007, 09:17 AM	#13
blutoski Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 5,982	Originally Posted by Tumblehome You might remember Todd Standing, who earlier this year came up with the ingenious idea to get Bigfoot protected as an endangered species in Canada. He made a faux documentary to exhibit in theatres around Western Canada, and makes a big deal of donating all the proceeds from the film to animal shelters. So if he's in it for the money, where does he get it? Well, on his website, he appeals for donations... But here's the kicker: I know what the ethical ramifications are of asking for money to be sent to him personally, but I was hoping bigger business minds than mine could advise on the legal implications. It doesn't look like he's set up as a business, so is it still legit to solicit money for himself personally? (This is in Canada, of course.) I'll have a look and see if he's in BC. In BC, there is a legal business structure called a "sole proprietorship." The owner is the legal entity. The proprietor can register a trade name. So, for example, the local McDonald's franchise is "Bob Smith o/a McDonald's on Marine Drive." The only reason somebody outside would have a right to look at the books is during an audit, or discovery for some trial. They're the private property of the proprietor. As far as I can see, Standing's not doing anything illegal. It's possible would be engaged in deception if he were to falsely represent himself as a business or registered society (This would look like calling his organization something with the word "society" or "corporation, inc, ltd, llp, limited, or incorporated"), but I don't see him implying this anywhere.
	__________________ "Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett

4th December 2007, 09:21 AM	#14
blutoski Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 5,982	Update: Todd appears to be in Alberta. Possibly a student (?) at UofA. Alberta laws are almost identical to BC in regards to proprietorships.
	__________________ "Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett

28th December 2007, 11:51 AM	#15
Tumblehome Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Beside the point Posts: 1,445	Thanks for the replies, and apologies for my late reply. Stuff happens. Thanks for looking that up, blutoski. Yes, Todd Standing is in Edmonton, Alberta. His "qualifications" (I forget where I saw them) included "former science student at the U of Alberta". And his petition was submitted to an Edmonton member of parliament. The fact that donations go to him personally, and not to an accountable organization, raises a giant red flag. If people will donate under those circumstances, it's no wonder they'll believe the crap he spouts. I had been wondering if someone could take him to court if they made a donation, then was refused any records to show the money didn't actually go towards his mortgage payments. It seems not.
	Last edited by Tumblehome; 28th December 2007 at 11:54 AM.

28th December 2007, 02:11 PM	#16
blutoski Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 5,982	Originally Posted by Tumblehome I had been wondering if someone could take him to court if they made a donation, then was refused any records to show the money didn't actually go towards his mortgage payments. It seems not. Oh, I didn't see that part on his website where he promises to apply the donations exclusively to his mortgage. This can be interpreted as a meeting of the minds (aka: a deal or verbal agreement or contract), and if there's reason to believe that he's not doing this (eg: title search reveals his mortgage was paid off years ago) it could be interpreted as fraud. The donor would have to have forwarded a great deal of cash for the legal fees to be worthwhile. To be frank, this is just the web version of "Spare a dime for a cup of coffee?" - who really follows up on panhandlers to see if they're spending the day's loot on whatever their cardboard sign said they would? It's disposable income for the donor, and they probably much prefer maintaining the fantasy that they're contributing to a good cause.
	__________________ "Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett

29th December 2007, 08:49 AM	#17
Tokenconservative Banned Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 2,204	Originally Posted by Tumblehome You might remember Todd Standing, who earlier this year came up with the ingenious idea to get Bigfoot protected as an endangered species in Canada. He made a faux documentary to exhibit in theatres around Western Canada, and makes a big deal of donating all the proceeds from the film to animal shelters. So if he's in it for the money, where does he get it? Well, on his website, he appeals for donations... But here's the kicker: I know what the ethical ramifications are of asking for money to be sent to him personally, but I was hoping bigger business minds than mine could advise on the legal implications. It doesn't look like he's set up as a business, so is it still legit to solicit money for himself personally? (This is in Canada, of course.) This is all based on the economic theory that a fool and his money are soon parted. And the quickerer the betterer in my opinon. This guy is the MAN! Tokie

30th December 2007, 10:03 AM	#18
Tumblehome Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Beside the point Posts: 1,445	Originally Posted by blutoski ...It's disposable income for the donor, and they probably much prefer maintaining the fantasy that they're contributing to a good cause. Would you say the same of people who give to Sylvia Browne? I know Todd Standing isn't in the same league as SB, but he's still soliciting money under suspicious circumstances, to be polite about it. It still bugs me.

30th December 2007, 10:05 AM	#19
Tumblehome Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Beside the point Posts: 1,445	Originally Posted by Tokenconservative This is all based on the economic theory that a fool and his money are soon parted. And the quickerer the betterer in my opinon. This guy is the MAN! Tokie Oh, stop it with the false humility. Everyone knows YOU are the MAN!

30th December 2007, 12:19 PM	#20
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 11,188	I'm guessing that if he words it right, and pays his taxes, it would be legal. "All money will allow our research to continue" does not actually say "money will be spent accountably on research." After all, paying his rent and buying his beer is one way we can allow him to continue on his frivolous crackpot research instead of getting an honest job. Yeah! I think it's time to set up a website to fund my ongoing search for Champ. I promise that if you send me money I will continue with my current level of Champ exploration, which includes leisurely sails on Lake Champlain (with my eyes open most of the time), boat maintenance, taxes on my lake house, and other expenditures vital to the cause.
	__________________ "Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding.(Samuel Johnson) The gods are less for their love of praise....(Wendell Berry) Last edited by bruto; 30th December 2007 at 12:20 PM. Reason: typos

30th December 2007, 11:00 PM	#21
Tumblehome Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Beside the point Posts: 1,445	That had occurred to me, too. "I can't do research if I don't have a place to live, a good vehicle, etc." I guess there's no way to stop him, not that that's the end of the world. He's pretty small potatoes, but I'm just particularly pee'd off at this guy for using the Canadian Parliament to legitimize searching for a non-existent animal. Champ is another story altogether, though. Who do I make the cheque out to?