Some people have suggested that the fact that Rob received marketing literature prior to him ordering a ZX Vega Plus was vital to him winning his case. That is NOT true.
The specific conditions the judge referred to that made this case potentially different from others brought against Indiegogo in the future was the clarity with which RCL always wrote about backers’ ORDERS and/or PRODUCT rather than their perks. The judge explained that when all the documents were taken together – the invitation received, the IGG campaign page, RCL’s “updates”, social media comments and announcements and plenty of others – they made it VERY CLEAR that a contract of sale had been formed. The ‘invitation’ for backers of the original Vega was just one element that contributed to this, but happened to be the example he gave.
As every backer of the ZX Vega+ had a chance to read the campaign page prior to ordering, received an identically-worded receipt, and have been sent exactly the same updates as provided in Rob’s case, there is still more than enough evidence to prove that a contract of sale was formed in every case, whether an early invitation was received or not.
The reason the judgement was not a ‘catch-all’ solution for all crowd-funding in general was that the judge pointed out that not all campaigns would be so forceful in their announcements that the perk people paid for would definitely be delivered on certain dates.