Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
Lawsuit: AMP Futures Trading aka AMP Global Clearing
I wanted to address this, because it is completely false.
AMP was banned a long time ago, years I believe, well before the post you mention took place. Your facts are completely false. They were banned due to their actions and behaviors on the site, after they were given MULTIPLE warnings. After they were banned, they created more accounts (a violation of our terms). I won't go into details, but lets just say what they did on those accounts was more than reason enough to ban them again and again.
The judge and the law disagree with you. Since the complaint was about AMP, it does have to do with trading. Do you work for AMP or something or are you just that naive in general? If you read the transcript, you will see the judge specifically questioned why Stone wasn't sued. You can read AMP's response and judge for yourself.
@Big Mike, while it does serve a limited purpose to respond to these kinds of posts, you shouldn't let it get to you, or spend much energy on it. This could be like an unlimited game of whack-a-mole; whack one and another one pops up.
You're right, and AMP lost the suit. The judge found nothing at all in it that stood up. You would think it would be hard for someone to either misinterpret or misrepresent that, but evidently some people will.
So yes, whack some of those moles, maybe, but the record does not need to be set straight. It is perfectly straight. After a short while, it is obvious that anyone not understanding or misstating that record is either never going to be convinced, or isn't really all that sincere in what they are writing anyway.
The judge gave the verdict, and that is the final word on all this.
I'm a lawyer in CA, and I'd sure go for it given the state of the CDA law at the time and the stupidity of the JOnes v. Dirty World district court opinion. There's also malicious prosecution:
A malicious prosecution claim “can lead to a more expansive recovery than sanctions, [but] it is also substantially more difficult to navigate successfully,” Mr. Mann and Mr. Haarlow wrote. “To state a claim for malicious prosecution, a plaintiff must demonstrate that (a) he or she won a ‘favorable termination’ of the suit; [t]he defendant brought it (b) without probable cause but (c) with malice, and (d) the plaintiff suffered arrest, seizure of property, or other special damage beyond the normal expense, time, or annoyance arising from an ordinary form of legal controversy.”
In any event, congrats. No AMP business for me, this seemed vindictive.
futures.io (formerly BMT) HAS WON, AMP HAS LOST. GAME OVER.
It's a shame it took so long. Actually it's a shame they couldn't have just sued Stone instead, but I guess as they put it "he has no money.,.., I can chase that cherry 'til the cows come home."
funny how the world works
R.I.P. Joseph Bach (Itchymoku), 1987-2018.
Please visit this thread for more information.
I have a very hard time wondering why people dont just mind their own business. It is child mentality to have the need to "want to be heard", the need for seeking attention, being at the center of the world and everything revolves around me. I know because I have one at home.
This guy is posting his views on another forum that obviously is a competitor to futures.io (formerly BMT) and his anticipated response to his post is obvious - agreement. The virtual world fuels this behavior even more since people are no longer sitting in front of each other and saying things directly - instead they are taking jabs while shielding themselves behind anonymous names. Cowards and spineless is the category that comes to mind. So much that is said on forums and the virtual world in general that will not be said if the parties involved would be face to face. Very few people have principles and stand by them no matter what and very few have the guts to say what they do and do what they say no matter what. You have demonstrated that Mike. I agree with @bobwest on the whack-a-mole metaphor. Let it go.
Trading: Index and Bond Futures and Options, Stocks and Stock Options
Posts: 17 since Jan 2012
Thanks Given: 29
Thanks Received: 18
I have red with attention every line of the documents you have posted, either on futures.io (formerly BMT) and AMP' side. Non just for curiosity, but because I always try to base my personal opinion on solid ground rather than word of mouth. So that if I make a mistake I can't avoid to make, I do it in good faith.
Of course I am glad the judge has closed the case in your favour, so that nobody gets damaged too hard. Even more I like that the decision seems to be very close to the wisdom of who's not familiar with legal technicalisms. I mean, common sense makes me say they pushed this issue too far, showing a quarrelsome attitude most people don't agree with. Finding out that the law (even if it's not my country's law) confirms that view, make me feel good.
GAME OVER.
