Some of this has been stated already, but I wanted to place here a clearer template for others who might have avenues of action at their disposal.

It is important that platforms such as Kickstarter not escape accountability any more than project creators and a clear and fair set of guidelines should be laid out by the global community (with probably some variation for various local laws).

I usually include the argument that crowdfunding platforms must logically be one of the following three things:

1) a store. Despite all their whining that KS is not a store, there is sufficient evidence from the behavior of project creators that defining it this way is not inappropriate. If it is decided that KS is indeed a store, it should be held to all consumer and transaction obligations outlined therein.

2) an investment platform. Again, due to the nature of a backer relationship for the realization of a project creator's pitch, and further evidenced by the careful terms of service that have to keep dissuading people who assume that investment actions and terminology are appropriate, it could be that investment platform is the best label. If it is decided that KS is indeed an investment platform, it should be held to all shareholder/investor obligations outlined therein.

3) It is something new that does not fall into either of the other categories. Like many new business models, older established models do not always fit and sometimes the differences are substantial enough to warrant a new category to allow for a better fit for guidelines, legislation, terms of service, and legal responsibility. If it is decided that KS is indeed something new, then a clear definition should be outlined for which appropriate guidelines, protections, and responsibilities for all parties can be created and enforced.

4) None of the above. There is no "none of the above". This is what Kickstarter is trying to gaslight us into accepting, in that they wish to be unaccountable to the requirements of being a market platform (the store model) or an investment platform, yet also they seem unwilling to assist in creating a fair definition of a new thing. This creates a fantasy situation where they sidestep all accountability simply by deciding for themselves what laws and regulations apply to them at their own convenience-- which is not how a free market works.

Clearly we cannot assume that crowdfunding sites will observe an honor system and regulate themselves with any real accountability for themselves or for project creators. If the backer community wants to preserve the integrity of the ideals of crowdfunding, we should take action to create a clear, legal model for crowdfunding that is fair to all parties.

What we have now is a sandbox for creative fraud.