MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING OPERATION
According to FTC, an operator used deceptive earnings promises to recruit consumers for a multi-level marketing (MLM) operation that was a pyramid scheme. That operator agreed to settle FTC charges that the operation was illegal and violated federal law. The settlement–
OPERATOR AND PRINCIPALS RECRUITED CONSUMERS: FTC
In June 2007, FTC charged that BurnLounge and its principals recruited consumers claiming that participants were likely to make substantial income operating on-line digital music stores. BurnLounge recruited participants by selling them so-called "product packages," ranging in price from $29.95 to $429.95 per year. More expensive packages purportedly provided participants with an increased ability to earn rewards through the BurnLounge compensation program.
The BurnLounge compensation program primarily provided payments to participants for recruiting new participants, not for selling products or services. FTC alleged that this would result in a substantial percentage of participants losing money.
FTC: DEFENDANTS OPERATED AN ILLEGAL PYRAMID SCHEME
FTC alleged that defendants operated an illegal pyramid scheme, made deceptive earnings claims, and failed to disclose that most consumers who invest in pyramid schemes lose money.
FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT
A federal district court ordered a halt to the allegedly deceptive practices and froze defendant's assets, pending a trial, to preserve them for consumer redress. This settlement ends the litigation with defendant Scott Elliott.
WHAT SETTLEMENT DOES
The settlement bars Elliott from participating in or assisting others in participating in barred marketing schemes, including pyramid schemes. It bars misrepresentations about earnings in any multi-level marketing program or business venture. The settlement enters a judgment of $117,710.69. This is the entire amount earned by Elliott through BurnLounge. That judgment is suspended subject to a payment of $20,000 based on his limited ability to pay.
FTC's VOTE
FTC's vote to accept the settlement was 4-0. The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
NOTE: A stipulated final judgment and order is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the defendant of a law violation. Consent orders have the force of law when signed by the judge.
LAWYER's REFERENCE SERVICE
FTC v. BurnLounge, Inc., et al., United States District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division, FTC File No. 062 3201, July 1, 2008.
# # #
Volume XXVIII
Issue 14
July 21, 2008
Pages 23-24
Advertising Compliance Service is a REFERENCE COMPENDIUM of JLCom Publishing Co., L.L.C.
NOTICE: This publication is not intended to provide legal advice. Persons who need legal services should contact a duly licensed professional.
© Copyright 2008-2009 JLCom Publishing Co., L.L.C. All rights reserved.
Go to the NEXT section of this online Sample Issue
Go to the PREVIOUS section of this online Sample Issue



