Welcome | Sign In
LinuxInsider.com
News

U.S. Settles Web Pyramid Scheme Case Against Bigsmart.com

Print Version
E-Mail Article
Reprints
U.S. Settles Web Pyramid Scheme Case Against Bigsmart.com

According to the FTC, Bigsmart's program was structured so that realizing financial gains depended on the recruitment of other participants.


The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced Thursday that it has settled charges with three operators of Bigsmart.com, an online business opportunity for investors in an Internet shopping mall network that government investigators charged was an illegal pyramid scheme.

According to the FTC complaint, Bigsmart marketed Internet theme malls that featured a collection of links to retail sites maintained by independent third-party merchants, such as MarthaStewart.com, and to an online superstore operated by Bigsmart itself.

Traffic was directed to the malls through personalized Bigsmart "welcome pages" that members bought access to for a US$10 application fee and a $99.95 hosting fee. In return for their investment, the FTC said, members were told they could earn "substantial income" from commissions on products purchased through the sites.

However, the FTC said those claims were false. Moreover, the agency asserted that various Bigsmart promotional materials were misleading and provided the "means and instrumentalities" for others to deceive consumers.

Pyramid Alleged

Government representatives said that each of these practices undertaken by the Mesa, Arizona-based company violated federal consumer protection laws.

"Although Bigsmart claimed that members would make substantial amounts of money, the scheme was structured in such a way that realizing continued financial gains would depend on the continued, successive recruitment of other participants, not on retail sales of products and services to the public," said the FTC.

As part of the settlements -- which the FTC noted does not constitute an admission by the defendants of any wrongdoing -- Bigsmart promoters Darrin Epps and Edward Lamont have been permanently barred from future multilevel marketing plans. The FTC said the lifetime ban was imposed because of the "egregiousness of their recruiting practices in this case and their prior involvement with unlawful multilevel marketers."

Future Prohibitions

A third defendant who served as a "figurehead" president of the company for roughly eight months, Richard Slaback, was barred from participation in such operations for seven years.

The settlements also prohibit all three from ever taking part in a pyramid scheme, making false or misleading claims in selling a business venture, and making or assisting others in supporting misrepresentations about earnings or income in conjunction with any business in which they are engaged.

The defendants must also meet FTC requirements that they monitor their employees or agents to ensure they are not using illegal practices.

In terms of financial redress, Slaback will pay $38,000 to consumers who were taken in by the operation's claims. The amount comes on the heels of a $5 million payment in restitution that Bigsmart principals Mark Tahiliani and Harry Tahiliani agreed to provide to investors in March. The Tahilianis also posted a $500,000 performance bond to settled FTC charges in the case.

Earlier Case

The Commission said that both Epps and Lamont were also previously high-level distributors in Equinox International Corporation, another multilevel marketer the FTC filed suit against in August 1999.

The FTC said it will monitor Bigsmart's compliance with mandates of the settlement, which was approved by a vote of 5-0. The orders were filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.

According to the FTC, Epps and his company Netforce Seminars signed up investors in the pyramid scheme from their offices in Austin and San Antonio, Texas. Meanwhile, Lamont's recruitment efforts were undertaken from offices in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.


Print Version E-Mail Article Reprints More by Clare Saliba


Talkback: Join the Discussion.
Re: U.S. Settles Web Pyramid Scheme Case Against Bigsmart.com
Viviana Muhammad
Posted 2001-12-24
My husband and I invested our money in this online business. We paid $299.95 to join this ...

More by Clare Saliba

One Year Ago: Report: Shipping Costs Bleed E-tailers Dry
February 11, 2002
To get Internet purchases delivered on time and efficiently, many Web merchants will turn to online fulfillment networks and drop shippers.
Jupiter, NetRatings Renew Patent Lawsuit
January 21, 2002
Though still pursuing their merger, Internet measurement firms Jupiter Media Metrix and NetRatings now intend to re-open their patent litigation.
One Year Ago: Power-Starved California Turns To Internet Auction
January 25, 2002
Because of a disastrous experiment in gas and electric deregulation, California's power companies are in dire financial straits.
Don't miss a story -- sign up for our FREE e-mail newsletters and view the latest headlines at a glance.
Tech News Flash [ View Sample ]
E-Commerce Minute [ View Sample ]
ECT News Network Weekly Newsletter [ View Sample ]
Free eBook: Secure Your Datacenter
Click here to download today.
Shortcuts
ECT News Network Information
Reader Services
Corporate
ECT News Network