The Procter & Gamble Company : One Procter & Gamble Plaza : Cincinnati, Ohio 45202, : and : The Procter & Gamble Distributing : Company : One Procter & Gamble Plaza : Cincinnati, Ohio 45202, : Plaintiffs, : -vs- : Amway Corporation : 7575 East Fulton Street : Ada, Michigan 49355, : and : The Amway Distributors Association : Council : 7575 East Fulton Street : Ada, Michigan 49355, : and : Ja-Ri Corporation : 7575 East Fulton Street : Ada, Michigan 49355, : and : Donald R. Wilson : 1190 E. 5425S : Ogden, Utah 84403, : and : WOW International Inc. : 9190 E. 5425S : Ogden, Utah 84403, : and : Wilson Enterprises, Inc. : 1190 E. 5425S : Ogden, Utah 84403, : and : Ronald A. Rummel, Individually, and : d/b/a Rummel Enterprises : 11875 Forestgate Drive : Dallas, Texas 75243, : and : Roger D. Patton : 40818 Pipestone : Magnolia, Texas 77355, : and : Jeffrey G. Musgrove, Individually, and : d/b/a Musgrove Enterprises : 6110 Plantation Bay Drive : Katy, Texas 77449, : and : Kevin Shinn : County Road 1083 : Greenville, Texas 75401, : and : Randy Haugen : 2488 Bonneville Terrace : Ogden, Utah 84403, : and : Freedom Associates, Inc. : 2488 Bonneville Terrace : Ogden, Utah 84403, : and : Freedom Tools, Inc. : 2488 Bonneville Terrace : Ogden, Utah 84403, : and : Randy Walker : 17688 Kuykendahl Road : Spring, Texas 77379, : and : Walker International Network : 1450 (Interstate 45 S #F-13 : Conroe, Texas 77304, : and : Gene Shaw : Box 131 : Whiteright, Texas 75491, : and : Robert Schmanski, Individually, and : d/b/a Schmanski Enterprises : 17167 Beaver Springs : Houston, Texas 77090, : and : Mark Pruitt : 1607 Sweet Grass Trail : Houston, Texas 77090, : and : William Bredemeyer : 722 Sheldon Road : Channelview, Texas 77530, : and : John and Jane Does, 1-5, Individuals, : and : John and Jane Does, 6-10, Business : Entities, : Defendants. :
The Procter & Gamble Company and the Procter & Gamble Distributing Company (collectively "Procter & Gamble" or "Plaintiffs"), for their complaint in this action, state as follows:
1. The matter in controversy exceeds, exclusive of interest and costs, the sum of Seventy-Five Thousand ($75,000.00) Dollars. 2. The jurisdiction of this Court is based upon a federal question, 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c), Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, and diversity of citizenship pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. In addition, this Court has general and specific jurisdiction over each and every defendant in this action. 3. Venue is proper in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division under 18 U.S.C. § 1965(a), Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because the Defendants reside in or conduct business within the State of Texas and/or committed some or all of the acts giving rise to the claims in this action within this judicial district.
4. The Amway Corporation distributes household products for which its
principal competitor is Procter & Gamble. The basic product lines of Amway
and Procter & Gamble coincide in a host of key areas. For instance, Procter
& Gamble's Tide and Cheer laundry detergents are in direct competition with
Amway's SA-8 laundry products; Procter & Gamble's Crest and Gleem
toothpastes compete with Amway's Glister; and Procter & Gamble's Spic n Span
and Top Job compete with Amway's L.O.C. Multipurpose Cleaner.
5. Unlike Procter & Gamble, which sells its products through traditional
retail networks, Amway sells its products through a network of distributors
in what it refers to as a multi-level marketing plan. At first blush, the
plan would appear to focus upon the recruitment of a large sales force to
move Amway products to market through door to-door sales. In reality, the
plan primarily rewards distributors for recruiting new distributors, who
will in turn be rewarded for recruiting new distributors, in a seemingly
endless proliferation of "downlines." Whereas the normal retail distribution
model relies upon a minimal number of middlemen to move products to market,
the Amway system depends upon a multiplicity of layers.
6. Amway's distributors are, in effect, its employees. Amway exerts
substantial control over how and where the plan and product information must
be presented, over the way distributors must manage their "downline," and
over almost every aspect of a distributor's conduct. Amway even describes
how a distributor should deal with a spouse in a divorce.
7. Amway can, and does, exert such tight control because all aspects of the
Amway Corporation and its distribution network are effectively controlled by
the same small group of people. The same families that own Amway also own
the highest level active distributor, Ja-Ri, to which all other distributors
ultimately report. (The name Ja-Ri is a conjunction of the first names of
the two founders of Amway.) Furthermore, Amway and Ja-Ri control the Amway
Distributor's Advisory Council (the ADAC), which is supposedly the forum for
distributors to have a voice in the business.
8. Amway has engaged in a widespread pattern of unfair competition against
Procter & Gamble in an effort to lure consumers into becoming Amway
distributors. Amway has published false claims to the effect that Tide
laundry detergent will form "sludge" that will clog the user's drainpipes.
Distributors are also covertly encouraged to spread a variety of disparaging
remarks about other Procter & Gamble products, such as the false claim that
Crest toothpaste contains abrasives which damage teeth. Most disturbing,
however, are the persistent false rumors circulated by Amway distributors
implying that Procter & Gamble is affiliated with satanism.
9. Amway engages in disparagement and other unfair competition as a part of
its overall effort to lure customers away from Procter & Gamble products,
enticing them to become a part of the Amway distribution scheme.
10. The Amway enterprise is in reality an elaborate, illegal pyramid scheme.
Amway's objective is to entice consumers out of the retail marketplace by
convincing them that purchasing Amway products will make them rich. Of those
who invest the time, money, and personal sacrifice to become Amway
Distributors, only a select few ever break even. Even fewer realize the
profits touted by Amway in its sales pitch--and they do so by siphoning
money from the victims at the bottom.
11. This action seeks to recover the losses Procter & Gamble suffers because
Amway's unlawful pyramid scheme has diverted consumers from the legitimate
marketplace and because the defendants have promoted lies about Procter &
Gamble and its products. A measurable percentage of Amway distributors
previously purchased Procter & Gamble products and would still be purchasing
Procter & Gamble products had they not been misled by the Defendants.
12. All pyramid schemes take from those at the bottom to benefit those at
the top. A simple pyramid is an unadorned payment of money, coupled with the
promise that by recruiting a new crop of victims the payor will become the
payee many times over. To profit requires one to enter the game early,
recruit others, and advance quickly to the top of the pyramid. The promise
is basic: If you allow yourself to be victimized today, you will
profit by victimizing those below you tomorrow. The scheme requires
potentially infinite growth to support the promises made to new recruits.
13. The Amway Pyramid is elaborately disguised as a marketing network in
which "products" flow down in return for money flowing up. The existence of
the "products" creates the illusion of legitimacy and masks the purpose of
the payments. No legitimate distribution network contains so many layers of
middlemen, selling and reselling the same goods a dozen or more times,
encouraging those below to keep the base of the pyramid expanding with new
victims. And, the pressure to keep Amway's pyramid going with new recruits
is enormous, because the Amway Pyramid is in a constant state of collapse
and renewal. In 1996, the average Amway distributor earns just $36.08 per
month beforeexpenses. Every year 50% of Amway's distributors realize
the futility of the venture and withdraw.
14. But Amway's own numbers demonstrate that it is not really in the
business of marketing goods to the public. According to the most recent
statistics available, 82% of all final sales of Amway products are made to
Amway distributors. Hence, like every pyramid scheme, the Amway Pyramid is a
closed system--the profits come not from the distribution of a good or
service to those outside the pyramid, but from a redistribution of
wealth among the layers within the pyramid.
15. The Amway Pyramid has proven so successful at redistributing wealth that
it has spawned a second line of business--the sale of "tools" to lower
level distributors. "Tools" are primarily motivational tapes of dubious
value produced by the highest level Amway distributors. They are sold only
to those within the Amway Pyramid. Buying tapes is characterized as an
essential ingredient to success as an Amway distributor; distributors
are pressured to buy at least one per week. The tape business is immensely
profitable for those at the top, providing additional incentive for them to
replenish the continually collapsing pyramid with new victims.
16. In the early 1980's, Amway acknowledged that the motivational tape
business rendered the entire Amway organization an illegal pyramid scheme.
Amway co-founder, Richard M. DeVos, Sr. told Distributors: "Now, the tape
business, if it is not used as a support for the Amway business, will
oftentimes be an illegal business--in fact, it could be called a pyramid--
because [product] does not get sold to the consumer..." DeVos
continued:
"Let me talk to you about the legal side...that deals with pyramids,
that deals with the illegal operation of a business that does not have
an end consumer, where product is not retailed. That would include all
books and tapes. The sad news, folks, is that when those things go out
that way and become excessive...then it becomes an out and out illegal
pyramid...
17. The motivational tool business has since expanded. More importantly,
DeVos' remarks amount to an admission that Amway is "an out and out illegal
pyramid" by virtue of its being "a business that does not have an end
consumer, where product is not retailed."
18. So long as consumers are misled by inflated promises and lies into
joining the Amway Pyramid, Procter & Gamble will continue to be damaged--
foreclosed from a significant segment of the consumer market and vilified by
false rumors. Amway and the Defendants who help it have engaged in a
persistent pattern of corrupt activity.
Accordingly, Procter & Gamble is entitled to relief.
19. The Procter & Gamble Company is an Ohio corporation with its principal place of business in Cincinnati, Ohio. It is therefore a citizen of Ohio. The Procter & Gamble Company and its subsidiary and affiliated companies manufacture and distribute consumer products and sell them in Texas and throughout the United States. These products include Tide, Era, Cheer and Bold laundry detergents, Crest and Gleem toothpastes, Biz laundry bleach, Ivory, Zest, Camay and Safeguard bar soaps. Cascade dishwashing soap, Folger coffee, Mr. Clean, Comet and Spic & Span household cleaning products, Crisco cooking products, Bounty paper towels, Charmin bathroom tissue, Pert and Prell shampoos, Scope mouthwash, Pampers and Luvs diapers, Bounce fabric softener, Duncan Hines baking mixes, CoverGirl cosmetics. Secret and Sure deodorants, Dawn dishwashing liquid and many other food, laundry, cleaning, and personal care products. A more complete list of these products is attached as Exhibit 1. 20. The Procter & Gamble Distributing Company ("Procter & Gamble Distributing") is an Ohio corporation with its principal place of business in Cincinnati, Ohio. Procter & Gamble Distributing is therefore a citizen of Ohio. Procter & Gamble Distributing sells and distributes Procter & Gamble products, including those identified in the preceding paragraph, to its customers which include retailers and wholesale distributors throughout the United States, including within the State of Texas. Procter & Gamble Distributing is a subsidiary of The Procter & Gamble Company. 21. Defendant Amway Corporation ("Amway") is a Michigan corporation with its principal place of business in Ada, Michigan. Amway is a privately-held company owned and controlled by the DeVos and Van Andel families. (See Exhibit 2.) Amway, through its employees and its chain of distributor- agents, including the Defendants herein, engages in the business of recruiting consumers to become "distributors" of Amway products. Amway products are sold and distributed nationwide and include: Glister anti- plaque fluoride toothpaste, SA8 Plus Premium laundry detergent, Crystal Bright dishwashing soap, Far Corners and Nine to Five coffee products, Durishine household cleaning product, Modern Magic Meals vegetable oil pan coating spray, Meadowbrook paper towels and bathroom tissue, Satinique sport shampoo, Amway Zoom Spray Cleaner, Artistry cosmetics, Deter deodorant, Amway Dish Drops dishwashing liquid, L.O.C multipurpose cleaner, Amway Fabric Softener and Brightener and many other food, laundry, cleaning and personal care products. Amway also sells and distributes, through a catalog,products made by other manufacturers. Amway does not offer for sale any product made by Procter & Gamble. Defendant Amway Corporation may be served with process through its registered agent for service, CT Corporation, at 350 N. St. Paul Street, Dallas, Texas 75201. 22. Many Amway products distributed by Defendants compete with Procter & Gamble's products in the consumer market nationwide. A list of many of the Amway products which compete with Procter & Gamble products is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. Amway specifically advertises against Procter & Gamble's products in its publications such as its monthly AMAGRAMmagazine and its Amway Product Demonstrations Guide, both of which are sent through the U.S. Mails. Copies of examples of such advertisements are attached as Exhibit 3. Information in such advertisements concerning Procter & Gamble products is often inaccurate, false and/or misleading. 23. Defendant The Amway distributors Association Council ("ADAC") is comprised of high-level Amway distributors such as members of the DeVos and Van Andel families, Ja-Ri and Defendants Haugen, Wilson and Rummel. The ADAC is a Michigan corporation whose business address has been the same as Amway in Ada, Michigan. (See Exhibit 4.) The ADAC has 30 board members. Fifteen are elected by less than 1% of Amway distributors. The other 15 are nominated by Amway and elected by other board members. The ADAC, in conjunction with Amway and Ja-Ri, controls and supervises Amway distributors. The ADAC consults and advises Amway on all aspects of the Amway business. The ADAC further consults, advises, enacts and implements Amway disciplinary rules on behalf of Amway. The ADAC was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Defendant The Amway Distributors Association Council may be served with process through its registered agent for service, Kim S. Mitchell, at 7575 East Fulton Street, Ada, Michigan 49355. 24. Defendant Ja-Ri is a Michigan Corporation whose business address is the same as Amway in Ada, Michigan. Ja-Ri was incorporated by Richard M. DeVos, Sr. and Jay Van Andel in 1963. (See Exhibit 5.) Ja-Ri is a privately-held company owned and controlled by the DeVos and Van Andel families. Amway and Ja-Ri are operated as a single entity, using a common place of business, having common employees, and having common owners. Amway and Ja-Ri intermingle their assets and fail to adequately observe corporate formalities. Ja-Ri holds title to real estate used by the DeVos and Van Andel families for residential purposes. Ja-Ri, in conjunction with Amway and the ADAC, controls and supervises Amway Distributors. Ja-Ri was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Defendant Ja-Ri Corporation may be served with process through its registered agent for service, Kim S. Mitchell, at 7575 East Fulton Street, Ada, Michigan 49355. 25. Defendant Donald R. Wilson is a citizen of the State of Utah, residing in Ogden, Utah. At all relevant times, Wilson was a top-level Executive Diamond Amway distributor. Wilson was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Wilson engaged in the wrongful conduct in his individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of Amway and as a representative of defendant, WOW International Inc. ("WOW"), aka Wilson International Network, and Wilson Enterprises, Inc., entities through which Wilson conducts his Amway business activities. WOW is a Utah corporation with its principal place of business at 1190 E. 5425 South, Ogden, Utah. WOW is privately owned and controlled by Don and Nancy Wilson. WOW is one of the corporate entities through which Defendant Don Wilson conducts his business, including his Texas business activities, as an Amway distributor. (Wilson, WOW, Wilson International Network and Wilson Enterprises are hereinafter referred to collectively as "Wilson." ) Wilson conducts business extensively in Texas, conducting seminars for Amway distributors, renting meeting halls and auditoriums in Texas for Amway seminars, arranging speaking engagements by Texas citizens and supervising, training, controlling and benefiting from the efforts of numerous Texas Amway distributors. Wilson's network of Amway distributors is primarily centered in Utah, Texas, Arizona, and Nevada. At all relevant times, Wilson was an agent of Amway. Defendant Donald R. Wilson may be served with process at 1190 E. 5425S, Ogden, Utah 84403. Defendant WOW International, Inc. may be served with process through its registered agent for service, Donald R. Wilson, at 1190 E. 5425S, Ogden. Utah 84403. Defendant Wilson Enterprises, Inc. may be served with process through Donald R. Wilson, one of its principals, officers, agents or directors, at 1190 E. 5425S, Ogden, Utah 84403. 26. Defendant Ronald Rummel is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in Dallas, Texas. At all relevant times, Rummel was an agent of Amway, a Diamond-level Amway distributor and a member of the ADAC. Rummel's business is located in Texas. Rummel transacts business in this District of Texas. Rummel was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Rummel engaged in the wrongful conduct in his individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of Amway and Rummel Enterprises. Rummel and Rummel Enterprises are hereinafter collectively referred to as "Rummel." Defendant Ronald A. Rummel may be served with process at 11875 Forestgate Drive, Dallas, Texas 75243. Defendant Rummel Enterprises may be served with process through its principal, agent or partner, Ronald A. Rummel, at 11875 Forestgate Drive, Dallas, Texas 75243. 27. Defendant Roger D. Patton is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in Magnolia, Texas. At all relevant times, Patton was an agent of Amway and an Amway distributor. Patton's business is headquartered in Texas. Patton transacts substantial business in Texas. Patton was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Patton engaged in the wrongful conduct in his individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of Amway. Defendant Roger D. Patton may be served with process at 40818 Pipestone Road, Magnolia, Texas 77355. 28. Defendant Jeffery G. Musgrove is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in Katy, Texas. At all relevant times, Musgrove was an agent of Amway and an Amway distributor. Musgrove was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Musgrove engaged in the wrongful conduct in his individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of Amway and Defendant Musgrove Enterprises, a Texas partnership entity through which Musgrove conducts his Amway business activities. Musgrove and Musgrove Enterprises are hereinafter referred to collectively as "Musgrove." Defendant Jeffrey G. Musgrove may be served with process at 6110 Plantation Bay Drive, Houston, Texas 77084. Defendant Musgrove Enterprises may be served with process through its principal, agent or partner, Jeffrey G. Musgrove, at 6110 Plantation Bay Drive, Houston, Texas 77084. 29. Defendant Kevin Shinn is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in Greenville, Texas. At all relevant times, Shinn was an agent of Amway and an Amway distributor. Shinn's business is located in Texas. Shinn transacts substantial business in Texas. Shinn was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Shinn engaged in the wrongful conduct in his individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of Amway. Defendant Kevin Shinn may be served with process at County Road 1083, Greenville, Texas 75401. 30. Defendant Randy Haugen is a citizen of the State of Utah, residing in Ogden, Utah. At all relevant times, Haugen was an agent of Amway and an Amway distributor. Although Haugen's principal place of business is in Utah, he transacts a substantial amount of business in Texas. Haugen's business activities in Texas include, but are not limited to, sales of products to Amway distributors in Texas, supervision, training and control of Amway distributors in Texas, sending false and defamatory messages concerning Procter & Gamble to Amway distributors in Texas and receiving benefits from the activities of downline Amway distributors located in Texas. Haugen was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein in his individual capacity as a representative and agent of Amway and Defendant Freedom Tools, Inc., and Freedom Associates, Utah corporations through which Haugen conducts Amway business activities. Haugen and Defendants Freedom Tools, Inc. and Freedom Associates are hereinafter collectively referred to as "Haugen." Defendant Randy Haugen may be served with process at 2488 Bonneville Terrace, Ogden, Utah 84403. Defendant Freedom Associates, Inc. may be served with process through its registered agent for service, Randy Haugen, at 2488 Bonneville Terrace, Ogden, Utah 84403. Defendant Freedom Tools, Inc. may be served with process through its registered agent for service, Randy Haugen, at 2488 Bonneville Terrace, Ogden, Utah 84403. 31. Defendant Randy Walker is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in Spring, Texas. At all relevant times, Walker was an agent of Amway and an Amway distributor. Walker's business is located in Texas. Walker transacts business in Texas. Walker was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein in his individual capacity as a representative and agent of Amway and Defendant Walker International Network, a Texas partnership through which Walker conducts Amway business activities. Walker and Walker International Network are hereinafter collectively referred to as "Walker." Defendant Randy Walker may be served with process at 17688 Kuykendahl Road, Spring, Texas 77379. Defendant Walker International Network may be served through Randy Walker, one of its principals, agents, or partners, at 17688 Kuykendahl Road, Spring, Texas 77379. 32. Defendant Gene Shaw is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in Whiteright, Texas. At all relevant times, Shaw was an agent of Amway and an Amway distributor. Shaw's business is located in Texas. Shaw transacts business in Texas. Shaw was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Shaw engaged in the wrongful conduct in his individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of Amway. Defendant Gene Shaw may be served with process at Rural Route 1, Whiteright, Texas 75491. 33. Defendant Robert Schmanski is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in Houston, Texas. At all relevant times, Schmanski was an agent of Amway and an Amway Distributor. Schmanski's business is located in Texas. Schmanski transacts business in Texas. Schmanski was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Schmanski engaged in the wrongful conduct in his individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of Amway and Schmanski Enterprises. Schmanski and Schmanski Enterprises are hereinafter collectively referred to as "Schmanski." Defendant Robert Schmanski may be served with process at 17167 Beaver Springs, Houston, Texas 77090. Defendant Schmanski Enterprises may be served with process through its principal, agent or partner, Robert Schmanski, at 17167 Beaver Springs, Texas 77090. 34. Defendant Mark Pruitt is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in Houston, Texas. At all relevant times, Pruitt was an agent of Amway and an Amway distributor. Pruitt's business is located in Texas. Pruitt transacts business in Texas. Pruitt was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Pruitt engaged in the wrongful conduct in his individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of Amway. Defendant Mark Pruitt may be served with process at 1607 Sweet Grass Trail, Houston, Texas 77090. 35. Defendant William Bredemeyer is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in Channelview, Texas. At all relevant times, Bredemeyer was an agent of Amway and an Amway distributor. Bredemeyer's business is located in Texas. Bredemeyer transacts business in Texas. Bredemeyer was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Bredemeyer engaged in the wrongful conduct in his individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of Amway. Defendant William Bredemeyer may be served with process at 722 Sheldon Road, Channelview, Texas 77530. 36. Defendants John and Jane Does 1-5, whose complete identities and addresses are unknown as this time, upon information and belief, are individual distributors who are agents of Amway who conduct business in Texas, and are involved in the sale and distribution of Amway consumer products and the development of Amway business. 37. Defendants John and Jane Doe 6-10, whose complete identities and addresses are unknown at this time, upon information and belief are business entities who are agents of Amway and are involved in the sale and distribution of Amway consumer products and the development of Amway business in Texas. 38. Ja-Ri, Wilson, Rummel, Patton, Musgrove, Shinn, Haugen, Walker, Shaw, Schmanski, Pruitt, Bredemeyer, John and Jane Does 1-5 and John and Jane Does 6-10, shall be hereinafter referred to as "Distributor Defendants" unless expressly stated otherwise.
A. Amway and Multilevel Marketing 39. Defendants distribute Amway products through a complex network of resellers that is sometimes referred to as a multilevel marketing scheme. In the United States, this network comprises hundreds of thousands of individuals organized in a pyramidal structure with Amway, Ja-Ri and members of the ADAC at the top of the pyramid. 40. Amway was founded by two salesmen of vitamin supplements. These salesmen, Richard M. DeVos, Sr. and Jay Van Andel, devised an elaborate commission scheme through which they recruited others to sell products. They offered the recruits a portion of the commission on any products sold and retained a portion of the commission themselves. The commission structure encouraged recruits to, in turn, recruit others below them. DeVos and Van Andel named their marketing company "Ja-Ri." Eventually, DeVos and Van Andel began marketing soap and detergent products under the label "Amway." Amway's products compete directly against products distributed through more traditional retail channels by Procter & Gamble. 41. Each new Amway recruit joined the organization below a "sponsor." Amway defines a "line of sponsorship" as the "linkage between all distributors in a specific Distributor organization." The recruiting of new members eventually grew into an enormous chain of sponsors and recruits. In Amway jargon, a recruit is "downline" from his or her sponsor, and a sponsor is "upline" from the recruit. 42. It is estimated that certain members of Amway have more than a million downline members. Ja-Ri is believed to be "upline" from all but one distributor out of the 2-1/2 million Amway members. Ja-Ri technically has one inactive upline sponsor from the early 1950's. In Amway jargon, recruits who fill out an application to join Amway are termed "distributors." B. Amway's Distributors are the Agents and Employees of Amway 43. Amway's distributors are the employees and agents of Amway. Amway and its distributors collectively constitute a single business enterprise, and are dependent upon each other. 44. Amway's "distributors" are commissioned sales agents who must follow an extensive set of rules and regulations controlling the means and manner in which the distributors market Amway products. For instance, Amway distributors must present the "plan" for recruiting new members in compliance with prescribed Amway literature and sales aids, are prohibited from selling products to certain classes of persons, may not sell products in certain places (such as out of their office), are significantly restricted in their ability to sell non-Amway products, are prohibited from resigning without Amway approval, and are even instructed on how to conduct themselves in the event of a divorce. The most fundamental tenet of Amway Distributorship is obedience to the upline distributors--which leads ultimately to Amway itself. 45. Amway has a legally controlling relationship with ifs distributor organization, because the same two families that control Amway also control the highest active distributor (Ja-Ri) in the Amway Pyramid. Both Amway and the distributor network are under common control. 46. The controlling "partnership" relationship between Amway and its distributors is also demonstrated by the interworkings of Amway and the Amway distributors Association Council ("ADAC") (formerly called the "American Way Association" and "Amway Distributors' Association"). 47. The ADAC states that its purpose is to give Distributors a "voice" and "a means by which they could influence policy decisions" of Amway. In reality, the ADAC is merely an arm and instrument of Amway, used as yet another means by which to control its distributors. 48. Richard M. DeVos, Sr. and Jay Van Andel, and/or members of their families, have served on the ADAC since its inception, in their capacities as distributors. For example, Doug DeVos, son of Amway co-founder Richard M. DeVos, Sr., was a member of the ADAC's Executive Council in 1995. Because all members of the ADAC are required to be distributors, DeVos sat on the ADAC as a distributor (Ja-Ri), and not as a representative of Amway. 49. The 30 members of the ADAC are typically those at the highest levels of the Amway Pyramid. Fifteen of the 30 are elected by the less than 1% of Amway distributors entitled to vote. The other 15 are elected by the first 15, from a list of nominees proposed by Amway. 50. The ADAC ostensibly serves as an advisor and paid consultant to Amway. The ADAC also acts as a "board of arbitration." When Amway charges that a distributor has violated an Amway rule, the distributor can appeal the decision to the ADAC. The ADAC then conducts an evidentiary hearing, engages in fact-finding and decides whether Amway's decision was correct. In-house Amway attorneys attend and participate in the ADAC hearings. Theoretically, the ADAC's determination is not binding on Amway, but the distinction is meaningless given that Amway effectively controls the ADAC to begin with. 51. Amway is able to control the ADAC, through its membership (as distributor Ja-Ri) on the ADAC and through its power to nominate ADAC members. Amway therefore controls the purported trade association of its distributors. This control augments Amway's ability to control distributors through its rules and regulations and through Ja-Ri. C. The Amway Pyramid 52. The principal purpose of Amway is not to sell consumer goods at retail in fair competition with Procter & Gamble. Amway's purpose is to divert consumers from the retail marketplace, creating a captive audience which buys Amway products to the exclusion of all others in the false hope that doing so will lead to riches. At present, Amway has successfully recruited roughly 2.5 million consumers. 53. The bedrock of the Amway system is, in their terms, "dreambuilding." The message is twofold: first, that money will solve all your problems; and second, that Amway is a simple and easy way to make vast amounts of money. 54. Once hooked by the dream, the sales pitch to a new distributor switches almost exclusively to the money to be made by recruiting additional distributors. Through Amway's highly developed sliding scale of commissions, the real money comes from a distributor's cut on those he or she recruits-- the distributor's "downline." One survives in Amway not by selling soap to neighbors, but by reselling the dream over and over and exhorting one's downline to do likewise. If new recruits will do as instructed, their downlines should in theory expand exponentially, with each new layer of recruits enriching those above. 55. To sell the dream one is required to buy Amway products. The dream is, after all, ostensibly based upon the distribution of Amway goods. A distributor must show faith in the "product." Becoming a 100% Amway household is promoted as a key to Amway success. Hence Amway diverts consumers from the marketplace not because of the merits of its products, but because the consumer believes that purchasing the product is a prerequisite to obtaining the dream. Meanwhile, Procter & Gamble loses any prospect of fairly competing with Amway for sales to consumers misled into becoming a part of the Amway scheme. 56. First, just 18% of Amway's products are sold to non-distributors; Amway and its distributorship network is in reality a pyramid scheme. The Amway distribution network is not intended to distribute products, but rather to redistribute cash within the pyramid. Like all pyramids, the Amway scheme is a closed system. If is a closed system in which money is funneled from the base to the apex. 57. Second, the Amway model is patently unworkable as a product distribution network. From the top of the distribution chain to the bottom spans dozens of layers of distributors. If Amway were a business in which the objective was to move products to market, it would fail for the sheer multiplicity of middlemen, each of whom must rely upon the price of the product to produce some measure of profit. Those who enter at the bottom of that pyramid face a nearly insurmountable task of creating a downline large enough to generate their own commissions, only worsening the problem. As one publication noted in 1993, "for the present two million distributors to achieve financial independence would mean that perhaps another 50 million distributors would have to be signed up." Canadian Business (July 1993). 58. Third, Amway's data demonstrates the economic absurdity of its distribution model. The average monthly gross income of all Amway distributors before expenses for 1996 was $36.08. Meanwhile, only 1% of Amway Distributors ever reach the first and most basic level of achievement-- direct distributorship, which signifies little more than a break-even operation. Thus the odds are roughly 99 to 1 against a new distributor ever developing a viable--much less thriving--Amway business. Yet all the while, the 99% of Amway Distributors being exploited for the gains of a few continue buying Amway products to the exclusion of Procter & Gamble. 59. Fourth, that Amway is a pyramid is demonstrated by its continual state of collapse. Each year, half of Amway's distributors realize the futility of the enterprise and quit. But Procter & Gamble cannot recoup the sales it lost while those distributors were obediently following the Amway creed, loyally supporting their uplines, and being exposed to the Amway organization's vilification of Procter & Gamble. 60. Finally, Amway's pyramidal structure is revealed by the subsidiary business in "tools" that uses the same network of downlines to distribute products which have no commercial value to anyone outside the Amway Pyramid. The "tools" consist of motivational tape recordings, books and rallies produced or sponsored by the upper echelon of the Amway Pyramid. Recruits are expected to buy the "tools" through standing orders--generally one a week at $5 to $8 each. In fact, they are told that success only comes with purchase of tools. The tools produce enormous profits for the uplines. Sustaining that profit is in itself a substantial motivation to find and keep new Amway recruits, removing consumers from the marketplace to generate the cash necessary to sustain the Amway Pyramid. 61. Defendants' operation of an illegal pyramid by itself constitutes unfair competition that significantly reduces Procter & Gamble's consumers. The pyramid scheme, however, is only one aspect of Amway's pattern of unfair competition. D. Defendants' Other Conduct Specifically Directed at, and Injurious to, Procter & Gamble 1. The Satanism Lie. 62. Procter & Gamble was formed in 1837, and in 1882, it registered a trademark sometimes referred to as the "Moon and Stars" design. The design depicts the man in the moon and 13 stars, one for each of the original American states. Successive minor variations of this design were also federally registered under United States Registration No. 298059. 63. The "Moon and Stars" trademark is a corporate symbol under which Procter & Gamble has conducted business throughout the United States and around the world for over one hundred years. Procter & Gamble's business has always been based upon the principle of providing products of superior quality and value that best meet the needs of consumers. 64. Beginning in the early 1980's, and continuing since that time, Amway distributors have maligned Procter & Gamble and its products by circulating a false and malicious statement to the effect that Procter & Gamble is associated with Satan and that profits from the sale of Procter & Gamble products are contributed to the "Church of Satan." Typically, the false and malicious statement (the "Satanic Message") relates that the President of Procter & Gamble appeared on the Phil Donahue television program and stated that Procter & Gamble was associated with Satan. The Satanic Message typically states that Procter & Gamble's Moon and Stars trademark is a Satanic symbol which has appeared or will appear on Procter & Gamble product labels along with the numbers "666," said to be the mark of the devil. The Satanic Message typically urges that consumers boycott all Procter & Gamble products, including some 40 specifically identified Procter & Gamble products. (See Exhibit 6.) 65. The Satanic Message is a vicious misrepresentation and a false and malicious disparagement of Procter & Gamble. Procter & Gamble is not, and never has been, associated with Satan, the Church of Satan or any similar religion or entity. No product ever manufactured, distributed or sold by Procter & Gamble has been associated with Satan, the Church of Satan or any similar religion or entity. No president or any other employee of Procter & Gamble, including its current president, has ever appeared on the Phil Donahue television program or any other television or radio program and announced an association with the Church of Satan, because there is no association. Procter & Gamble has never supported Satan, the Church of Satan or any similar religion or entity in any manner whatsoever. The Satanic Message, and every portion of it, is false and malicious and calculated to negatively impact Procter & Gamble and the sales of Procter & Gamble products. 66. Procter & Gamble complained to Amway in 1980's that a large number of reports received by Procter & Gamble of circulation of the Satanic Message identified Amway distributors as the source. 67. Amway responded by assuring Procter & Gamble that Amway would do all if could to stop its distributors from further circulating the false and malicious statement. Procter & Gamble relied on Amway's promises and assurances, which came from Amway's top officials. 68. Amway itself has admitted that the Satanic Message is false and malicious and that its repetition by Amway distributors constitutes unfair competition. Nevertheless, and despite its numerous assurances to Procter & Gamble, Amway did little or nothing to stop its distributors from spreading the Satanic Message. As of this date, Procter & Gamble has identified for Amway dozens of Amway distributors who have circulated the false and malicious statement. To date, Amway has taken no disciplinary action whatsoever against any of those distributors. None have been censured. None have been suspended. None have been terminated. In fact, other than a few advisory letters to distributors and distributor organizations who were caught spreading the Satanic Message, the sum total of Amway's efforts to squelch the rumor in its distributor organization was primarily to twice publish in articles buried in Amway periodicals that Amway "does not condone" the spreading of the message about Procter & Gamble. 69. The Satanic Message was disseminated by Amway distributors again in 1995 on a massive scale in different forms and by different media. The first of several known disseminations began in or about April 1995, when Defendant Bredemayer, in Houston, Texas, distributed a written version of the Satanic Message to Defendant Robert Schmanski, also an Amway distributor in Texas. Schmanski, in turn, spread the Satanic Message to Texas Amway distributor Defendant Roger Patton. 70. Roger Patton created a tape recording of the Satanic Message and sent it by telephone to Defendant Jeffrey Musgrove, also an Amway distributor. Patton's vehicle for transmitting the message to Musgrove was an interstate long distance telephone transmission and recording service known as "Amvox." Amvox is operated, sold and provided by Amway to its distributors. Amway established and markets and controls the Amvox system in order to facilitate mass communications between Amway and its distributors and among Amway distributors themselves. Amvox allows an Amway distributor to instantly send a recorded message by telephone to the telephone answering machines of thousands of other Amway distributors throughout the world. Amway profits from its distributors' subscriptions to the Amvox system. 71. Musgrove forwarded the Satanic Message via the Amvox system to Texas Amway distributor Defendant Randy Walker. Walker, a Diamond level Amway distributor, in turn forwarded the Satanic Message via the Amvox system to Defendant Haugen, a top Amway distributor in Defendant Wilson's downline organization. Haugen is, and at all material times was, an "Executive Diamond" Distributor in the Amway Pyramid and a member of the ADAC and the ADAC Executive Committee. 72. Haugen then transmitted the Satanic Message via the Amvox system to thousands of his downline distributors. In accordance with standing orders to pass along any instructions received from upline distributors, the recipients of the Haugen transmission in turn sent the Satanic Message to numerous other Amway distributors. A copy of the transcript of the Amvox version of the Satanic Message is attached hereto as Exhibit 7. 73. The Satanic Message then proliferated through the enormous Haugen organization. Amway itself admits that "thousands" of Amway distributors received Haugen's broadcast of the Satanic Message or subsequent transmissions of it. The false and malicious statement ran rampant through Haugen's organization of over 60,000 downline Amway distributors. It is believed that the message was sent to numerous other Amway distributors and others throughout the United States and elsewhere, including South America. 74. At some point in this process, the Haugen Satanic Message crossed into at least two other, large organizations of Amway distributors. First, the message was sent by top Amway Diamond-level distributor Defendant Ronald A. Rummel, via the Amvox system, of one or more members of Rummel's large distributor organization. Second, the Haugen Amvox message was received by members of another large distributor organization known as International Connection and further disseminated among the many Amway distributors within that group. 75. Concurrently with the transmissions and retransmissions of the Satanic Message via the Amvox system, a written version of the Satanic Message was being disseminated within the Amway distributor organization by numerous Amway distributors. Texas Amway distributor Defendant Kevin Shinn placed written copies of the Satanic Messages in packages of Amway products he distributed to other Amway distributors. 76. Defendant Gene Shaw, another Texas Amway distributor, repeated the Satanic Message from the stage to several hundred Amway distributors at an Amway meeting in Texas. 77. Defendant Mark Pruitt, a Texas Amway distributor, handed out a written version and/or verbally repeated the Satanic Message on a nightly basis to many other Amway distributors during Amway meetings at Pruitt's house. 78. In addition, a flyer containing the Satanic Message and the further suggestion that Procter & Gamble products are poisonous was disseminated by a Texas Amway distributor to numerous other Amway distributors with instructions to pass out copies door-to-door because doing so would help the distributors' Amway business. The distributors complied and handed out numerous copies of the false and malicious document, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 8. 79. Although Haugen later issued by Amvox a purported retraction of his Amvox transmission of the Satanic Message, after he got caught, the purported retraction was not received by all of the recipients of Haugen's broadcast and the subsequent rebroadcasts of the false and defamatory statement. Amway was aware that a month after Haugen's purported retraction, the Satanic Message was still being transmitted among its distributors. (See Exhibit 9.) In fact, Amway was made expressly aware that Haugen's purported retraction was not received by those Amway distributors who were still sending and receiving the Satanic Message through the Amway Amvox system. Amway could have sent a clear message to its Amvox subscribers and Amway distributors through the Amvox telephone message system denouncing this deplorable conduct. It did not do so. 80. At about the same time, Amway distributors began asking their pastors to tell their congregations that Procter & Gamble was associated with Satan. Amway has asserted that churches, not Amway distributors, are the source of the Satanic Message. However, when Amway was made expressly aware that one or more of its distributors was spreading on the Amvox system a message that told Amway distributors to contact every minister of churches and have them tell their congregations about Procter & Gamble and the Satanic Message, Amway, incredibly, did nothing to effectively address this deplorable, malicious and unfair business conduct. (See Exhibit 9.) Amway knew that its distributors were engaging in such conduct, but did nothing to effectively stop it. During the same time period in which the Haugen-initiated rumor was circulating, a 3.5 million member church in Brazil promulgated the rumor and urged a boycott of Procter & Gamble products. 81. Amway did nothing to discipline any of the foregoing Amway distributors who disseminated the false and malicious Satanic Message in 1995. Amway further failed to take steps of effectively stop further dissemination of the message by its distributors or effectively communicate to them that the message was untrue, and that engaging in this conduct was an unfair and illegal business practice. Indeed, Amway did not even inform Procter & Gamble of the foregoing incidents in 1995, including the widespread dissemination of the Satanic Message to thousands of distributors and ministers of churches. 82. Amway knew the foregoing statements about Procter & Gamble were false. Amway is directly responsible for the acts of its agents and employees in spreading the rumor. Furthermore, by failing to act and to effectively stop the spread of the Satanic Message by its distributors within its organization, Amway has encouraged, acquiesced in and/or ratified the foregoing vicious misrepresentations of fact and false statements concerning Procter & Gamble and its products. 2. Additional False and Disparaging Statements by Amway Distributors Concerning Procter & Gamble and Its Products. 83. In addition to the foregoing false statements by Amway distributors concerning Procter & Gamble, Amway distributors, with the knowledge, encouragement, tacit approval and/or acquiescence of Amway, have made numerous other false and misleading statements concerning Procter & Gamble products. 84. In a publication to all Amway distributors, Amway made the clear implication that Procter & Gamble's Tide laundry detergent will form "sludge" in consumers' drain pipes which will clog such pipes. Amway's suggestion concerning Tide was false and was made with knowledge of its falsity. (See Exhibit 10.) 85. Amway distributors have stated to other Amway distributors and/or consumers that Tide contains "fillers" consisting of sand, clay, peanut shells, egg shells and walnut shells. Such statements are false and were made with knowledge of their falsity; Tide has never contained any such fillers. 86. Amway distributors have stated to other Amway distributors and/or consumers that Tide will cause washing machines to rust and does not effectively launder clothes. Such statements are false and were made with knowledge of their falsity. 87. Amway distributors have stated to other Amway distributors and/or consumers that daytime television programs sponsored by Procter & Gamble are Satanic. Such statements are false and were made with knowledge of their falsity. 88. Amway distributors have stated to other Amway distributors and/or consumers that Procter & Gamble's Crest toothpaste contains harmful abrasives that will injure the enamel on consumers' teeth. Amway distributors also use false and misleading product demonstrations to communicate this message. Such statements concerning Crest are false and were made with knowledge of their falsity. 89. Amway distributors have stated to other Amway distributors and/or consumers that Procter & Gamble's fabric softener products will damage the motors of clothes-drying machines. Such statements are false and were made with knowledge of their falsity. 90. Amway distributors have stated to other Amway distributors and/or consumers that Procter & Gamble's Cascade dishwashing soap promotes the growth of harmful bacteria on plates, glasses and eating utensils. Such statements concerning Cascade are false and were made with knowledge of their falsity. 91. In October of 1996, a concerned consumer called Procter & Gamble after seeing an Amway distributor conduct a product demonstration using Tide and Ivory Snow. The Amway distributor claimed these Procter & Gamble products, when mixed with bleach, would lead to "solidification" in her plumbing. The statements concerning Tide and Ivory Snow are false and were made with knowledge of their falsity. 92. Amway distributors are believed to have made other false and disparaging statements to the effect that Procter & Gamble's products contain harmful ingredients and adulterants and/or are harmful to consumers or their property. 3. Defendants' Disparaging Statements about Procter & Gamble and its Products Were False, Malicious and Made for Improper Purposes 93. Defendants have published, circulated, encouraged, acquiesced in and/or ratified the foregoing vicious misrepresentations of fact and false statements concerning Procter & Gamble and its products, which were known to be false and were made, or were allowed to be made, maliciously and/or with reckless disregard as to their truth or falsity and which have caused great harm and damage to Procter & Gamble, its products, and its business. 94. Defendants, individually and in concert, have made or have allowed to be made the foregoing false, defamatory, and product-disparaging statements in connection with the recruiting of additional Amway distributors and/or the promotion and sale of Amway products in order to support their pyramid, obtain economic gain, recruit new Amway distributors and persuade consumers (including Amway distributors) to cease purchasing Procter & Gamble products and instead purchase competing Amway products, all to the benefit of Defendants and to the detriment of Procter & Gamble. 95. Amway distributors tell recruits to accept representations about Amway "on faith." Amway distributors attempt to use religious faith as a recruiting device, and also to mask the fraudulent nature of their illegal pyramid. The Satanic Message is used in the same way, as a recruiting device. Amway distributors state that Procter & Gamble is satanic in order to buttress their false assertions that Amway is Godly. In addition, both false statements are used to coerce Amway distributors to purchase Amway products that they otherwise would not purchase, in lieu of the Procter & Gamble products that they previously purchased and otherwise would be likely to continue to purchase. The Satanic Message is, in short, an additional means of preventing the collapse of the Amway Pyramid. One Amway distributor confirmed that she was told at an Amway meeting: "when you buy of their [Procter & Gamble's] products, you are giving to the devil to keep his work going . . . Billy Graham, Jim Bakker . . . they are Amway people. When you buy Amway, you give to Jesus." 96. The false and malicious statements published and circulated by Amway distributors regarding Procter & Gamble and Procter & Gamble's products deceived consumers, and caused consumers to stop purchasing Procter & Gamble products. For example, a former Amway distributor in Texas stated that while she was a distributor she heard the false Satanic Message and other statements disparaging Procter & Gamble from her upline distributors. At the time, she believed the statements to be true and as a result ceased buying Procter & Gamble products for at least six months. Another Texas Amway distributor stated that she still does not know whether the statements concerning Procter & Gamble are false, because Defendants have failed to fully retract and correct the false statements and representations. The statements have caused distributors to take written versions of the Satanic Message into stores in order of check to see if a Satanic symbol has appeared on Procter & Gamble products. Further, as a result of Defendants' conduct, a customer of Procter & Gamble canceled orders for Procter & Gamble products, stating: "Based on your president's Satan worship and profits of your company going to support Satan's purposes, YOU MAY CANCEL ALL FUTURE SHIPMENTS."97. Amway's failure to discipline any Amway distributor in connection with any of the activities and conduct alleged herein has been in spite of the fact that Amway knew that its distributors were repeatedly and persistently involved in the dissemination and circulation of such statements and wrongful product disparagement activities and despite the fact that Amway publicly pledged to help Procter & Gamble stop the spread of these false statements. 98. Amway's statements, promises and assurances to Procter & Gamble in the 1980's that Amway would do whatever it could to stop its distributors from disseminating the Satanic Message and false statements about Procter & Gamble products were knowingly false, and were intended to induce Procter & Gamble to rely on such statements, promises and assurances. Procter & Gamble reasonably relied on Amway's statements, promises and assurances to Procter & Gamble's detriment. Procter & Gamble refrained from bringing action against Amway in the 1980's in reasonable reliance on Amway's statements. Procter & Gamble only recently discovered that Amway's statements, promises and assurances were fraudulent, and that Amway had done little or nothing to stop its distributors from making the foregoing false statements about Procter & Gamble and its products. 99. Despite Amway's control over its distributors and in direct conflict with its representations to Procter & Gamble, Amway has acted with reckless indifference and has failed to control its distributors, who on numerous occasions over the last fifteen years have continued to spread defamatory statements about Procter & Gamble, to disparage Procter & Gamble's products, and to commit other wrongful conduct detrimental to Procter & Gamble.
100. Plaintiffs incorporate as if fully restated herein their prior allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 99 of this Complaint. 101. Defendants knowingly and intentionally, uttered, published and/or allowed to be uttered or published the foregoing false, malicious and non- privileged statements concerning Procter & Gamble and Procter & Gamble's products. 102. At the time of the utterances and/or publications, Defendants knew of the falsity of the statements and/or acted with reckless disregard as to their falsity. 103. Defendants acted with ill will and intended to interfere in the economic interests of Procter & Gamble in an unprivileged fashion. 104. The utterance and/or publication of the false, malicious, non- privileged statements by Defendants induced others not to conduct business with Procter & Gamble, and/or to cease purchasing Procter & Gamble's products, which proximately caused special damage, including but not limited to, loss of trade, lost sales, lost revenue, and harm to Procter & Gamble's reputation, goodwill and prestige and standing with consumers or customers and in the business community.
105. Plaintiffs incorporate as if fully restated herein their prior allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 104 of this Complaint. 106. Defendants published or allowed to be published the false, malicious and non-privileged statements concerning Procter & Gamble, its executives and employees, and products. 107. The foregoing false statements concerning Procter & Gamble and/or its products are slanderous, libelous and/or defamatory. The foregoing false statements concerning Procter & Gamble and/or its products are, further, slanderous, libelous and/or defamatory per se. Defendants knowingly, intentionally and/or maliciously uttered or published such false and defamatory statements and/or allowed, permitted and/or acquiesced in the uttering or publication of such statements. 108. The false, malicious, non-privileged statements proximately caused harm and damage of Procter & Gamble's reputation, prestige and standing as well as Procter & Gamble's business and products. 109. As a proximate result of Defendants' conduct, Procter & Gamble has suffered damages in an amount of be determined at trial. 110. Defendants' conduct was undertaken in bad faith, was malicious and manifested a wanton disregard of, and/or reckless indifference towards, the rights of Procter & Gamble, thereby entitling Procter & Gamble to punitive or exemplary damages.
111. Plaintiffs incorporate as if fully restated herein their prior allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 110 of this Complaint. 112. Defendants knowingly and intentionally uttered, published and/or allowed to be published the aforesaid false and malicious