Marketers of “FREE” iPad settles with FTC

A group of affiliate marketers has agreed to settle FTC charges that they blasted consumers with more than 30 million spam text messages and directed the recipients to deceptive websites.

Cresta Pillsbury, Jan-Paul Diaz, Joshua Brewer and Daniel Stanitski, and their company Ecommerce Merchants, which did business as Superior Affiliate Management, were among the subjects of a series of FTC complaints filed in March against the senders of text message spam.

The FTC’s complaint alleged that the defendants sent spam text messages to consumers across the country, offering supposedly free iPhones, iPads, and $1000 gift cards to those who clicked on links in the messages. A typical message stated, “FREE MSG: You Have Been Chosen To Test & Keep The New iPad For Free Only Today!! Go To [scam website] And Enter 2244 And Your Zipcode To Claim It Now!”

Those who clicked on the links did not receive the promised items, but were taken instead to sites that requested personal information and required them to sign up for numerous additional offers – often involving other purchases or paid subscriptions.

The defendants also allegedly operated a network of affiliates who blasted out spam text messages on their behalf. The stipulated final order prohibits defendants from operating an affiliate network for deceptive purposes, and requires them to inform members of any future affiliate network they operate of the terms of the order and to monitor the affiliates to prevent them from conducting deceptive or unfair activities.

The order also contains a monetary judgment of $356,950, which represents the full amount of money the defendants earned from the scam after paying their affiliates. The judgment is suspended due to their inability to pay. It also requires the defendants to cooperate with the FTC in any future investigations.

The stipulated final order against Pillsbury, Diaz, Brewer and Stanitski permanently bans them from any involvement with sending unauthorized or unsolicited text messages. In addition, they are prohibited from deceptively presenting an offer as “free,” or misleading consumers about the use of personal information collected in the process of such an offer or the steps required and costs involved in redeeming it.

[The Story]

Comments

  • +9
    Julia
    | 59 replies
    This suit is one of many recently filed by FTC against the text message spammers, and I applaud the agency for their efforts. What caught my attention here is the amount of the monetary judgement: it's not how much the dodgy marketers have stolen from the victims, it's their bottom line. It seems to me the spammers got a deal.
  • +9
    DaFox replies to Julia
    | 18 replies
    As much as I hate "big government", I do think it would be a good idea to give the FTC "sharp teeth" to back up their bark.
  • +2
    Shill Alert
    | 8 replies
    Unless such violations are treated as criminal, there is no real deterrent. They aren't technically criminal violations because the companies who hired the crooks to write laws want it that way. (Anyone who voted democrat and/or republican is also partly to blame.)

    This is a typical case with no real accountability for the perps. The money probably went overseas and/or up their arms and/or noses and so the financial penalty (expense) is "suspended".

    Will they be back doing this or some other scam again? I'm certain they already are, because NO ONE IS STOPPING THEM.
  • +8
    yef replies to Julia
    | 20 replies
    Yeah but the judgement was suspended since these scammers couldn't pay.  Why do criminals get excused from paying what they owe but regular law-abiding citizens do not?  I'd like my mortgage to be suspended if I couldn't pay, but that wouldn't happen -- I'd just get foreclosed on!
  • +1
    bo
    | 1 reply
    Ho hum, on to the next scam....
  • +1
    mishainfotech
    | 2 replies
    If not eligible for monetary punishment then others conviction methods can be used as well. The point is don't let the spammers walk openly......
  • +2
    Cautious
    | 2 replies
    I'm pleased that the FTC is making an effort but with the suspension of the monetary judgement the settlement simply amounts to a stern warning not to do it again. I wish the agency could impose some real penalties on these scammers.
  • +1
    TracFoneGuy
    They should be ordered to not duck down when the firing squad opens up on them.
  • +2
    Shill Alert replies to Cautious
    When people are "pleased" with ineffectiveness, the result is ... more ineffectiveness.
  • +1
    Nancy
    Yeah, I bet they are afraid now. Something is wrong here.
  • +2
    don replies to yef
    | 5 replies
    Good point , so in other words they pretty much got away with it. Everything is nothing but a big joke in this day and age. It will all come to a screeching halt one day. For everybody.
  • +1
    Kevin Fields
    | 2 replies
    The FTC doesn't prosecute criminal acts, they make sure that consumers and businesses are protected from scams. In this case, the FTC did everything within it's power. However, there's nothing which prevents one of the victims, or a state prosecutor, from going after the scammer's personal property or jail time in a criminal procedure.
  • +1
    Yamil
    | 5 replies
    It sucks that the monetary compensation is on hold because their inability to pay. Also, people like these should not be allowed to do any business, period.
  • +5
    Robert Peck, Attorney (Fl and NY) replies to DaFox
    | 1 reply
    Well put; I agree with you.  Consumer fraud protection of the public is one of a few areas (besides military and some highways) where I think it is BEST done by the Federal Government and I applaud this FTC effort.
  • +3
    Robert Peck, Attorney (Fl and NY) replies to yef
    | 3 replies
    Did not look at the order and details, but chances are that if they come into money the Federal Government might be able to assert a claim on their future assets/money.   You can't get blood out of a turnip.  Maybe they should have gone to jail instead of just being fined; I might agree with that (subject to knowing all the facts and how much they cheated people out of).

Post a comment