Here are two of their blog postings where the whole issue erupted that can make for interesting reading, though in the middle of it, I decided, that except in a few cases, I would not back further kickstarter projects.
- http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/kickstarter-is-not-a-store
- http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/faq-guidelines-for-hardware-and-product-design-pro
Wizdum, I've heard that before, and it doesn't surprise me. My mental model of what KS is (or used to be) is to fund projects that are at the concept state, and get them into the next level. Products that already exist don't really fit into what they want to do, though like in anything involving judgement, it can be a slippery slope. And the Nano watch was one of the straws that broke the camel's back, because that is the one that has backers suing kickstarter, and has caused them to retrench. Listening to interviews by the KS founders before the whole mess came back to haunt them, they have always been ambivalent about funding actual products (though I suspect a good deal of their money comes from 'products').