Vemma preliminary injunction to be decided in 3 days
Sep.16, 2015 in regulation, Vemma
Following a hearing held today, the Judge hearing the case will purportedly take up to three days to rule on whether a preliminary injunction should be granted.
We’ll have more when the legal docs go up.
here are some updates posted by ted nuyten, while the hearing was going on:
i would go with kevin thompsons opinion that vemma will be allowed to operate in some capacity. like, sell the product without MLM.
Summary from KT:
great update from KT.
if the court finds ‘reasonable’ self consumption on autoship acceptable, this will change the MLM industry forever.
from being the toughest jurisdiction for MLM, the US will instead pave the way for product based pyramid schemes becoming legal.
And what a mess that will be.
Update from BusinessForHome.org (Ted Nuyten), a few minutes old.
It doesn’t really contain anything, but it’s a lengthy story about a day in court. 🙂
I did eventually find something …
The reason for why I didn’t find anything initially, other than “a lengthy story about a day in court”, was because it was written from a personal perspective with focus mostly on irrelevant factors.
Oh, yes, Vemma will be allowed to continue operating without commission paying.
That’s just FTC giving Vemma more rope to hang itself, because you’ll see a huge number of affiliates quitting their autoship since they ain’t getting paid (no qualification needed) and thus, proving FTC’s point that there is no demand for the product without the attached income opportunity.
Just watch FTC’s case against Burnlounge, and how “music sales dropped to nothing even though the site was not closed” figured into their final complaint.
Len Clements: “This whole FTC vs. Vemma episode is so disturbingly wrong…”
“Reasonable amounts of self consumption” is an accepted standard. It doesn’t really matter whether it’s on autoship orders or one time orders.
You probably meant to be specific about it, “if the court finds Vemma’s sale to distributors …”.
The current legal issue isn’t about the pyramid scheme, but about the Preliminary Injunction (assets freeze, receiver, etc.). It’s about whether FTC has a relatively solid case, and about modifications to the preliminary injunction.
The problem with Mr. Clement’s narrative is self-conflicting.
If you follow the FTC narrative, it’s shutting down a 11 year SCAM. Whether Vemma has any time to prepare a defense is irrelevant. If it was truly innocent, it shouldn’t need to.
To anyone who was at the hearing, at any point did Vemma get up and say “for year X, we made $x in retail sales and $x in affiliate purchases”?
And if they did, which was greater?
The hearing wasn’t about that. It was about the preliminary injunction, whether it should be granted, modified or denied. It was a pre-trial hearing.
It will most likely be modified to some degree, e.g. allowing Boreyko’s child support and reasonable living expenses.
The TRO froze all assets and virtually all business activity, placing it under the control of a receiver. The Preliminary Injunction will replace the TRO.
Len Clements has probably misinterpreted something.
The hearing with both parties present was today, September 15th. It could have been heard on September 3rd, but Vemma needed more time to prepare its defense.
If Vemma wasn’t ready on September 3rd, it wouldn’t have been ready on August 21st either (or whatever date the TRO was heard ex parte).
The potential closedown was heard today. The other one was a temporary closedown, not a final one. Vemma has clearly had the chance to defend itself in court.
self consumption is perfectly all right. but, autoship introduces a pay to play factor, and encourages recruitment.
i think autoship just creates a product based pyramid scheme, because burnlounge accepted self consumption as product sales.
self consumption on autoship, is just one step tooo far, IMO.
Autoship in itself isn’t any problem?
Autoship means recurring orders, e.g. monthly orders, the same order each month. It will save time and work both for the customers and the company, if we compare it to non-autoship orders.
It simply means “Continue to send me the same products each month, until I decide otherwise”.
It can be a very convenient solution for some products, e.g. one month supply or 3 month supply of “Dailies Contact Lenses”. The alternative is “email reminders”, where the company frequently sends out new offers and you order new products manually.
duh, no. why should autoship be a problem?
mandatory autoship in MLM is a problem. keep shunting product to affiliates every month and keep paying commissions on that.
it’s pyramid scheme made ‘extra easy’.