The Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act.
Currently, in the wake of the of the boss of 'Amway India Enterprises', William S. Pinckney, being arrested under the PCMC Act in Andhra Pradesh, the agents of US-based 'MLM income opportunity' racketeers have been doing everything they can to trivialize these events in an attempt to have so-called 'MLM' companies placed above the law in India.
Officers of the so-called 'Indian Direct Selling Association' have already infiltrated state and national government in India, trying to tamper with proposed new technical legislation (ostensibly designed to replace the role of the police and the PCMC Act in protecting the Indian public from dissimulated pyramid and Ponzi schemes) by redefining so-called 'MLM Direct Selling income opportunities' as automatically legal because they involve products. Thus, attempting to have so-called 'MLM' treated as an entirely separate issue to pyramid and Ponzi schemes, in the Indian Republic.
The proposed new Indian legislation already contains the familiar, vague and essentially-meaningless definition of 'direct selling' (referring to 'customers' and 'end users') which has obviously come from 'MLM' racketeers in the USA.
What has been required for a very long time (not just in India, but all around the globe), is a universal, accurate, common-sense, legal definition of what constitutes an economically-viable direct selling scheme, and which cannot be tampered with by the agents of racketeers or misinterpreted by amoral attorneys.
Thus, vague, and essentially meaningless, terms such as 'customers' and 'end users,' cannot be employed in any accurate definition of lawful direct selling, because these words can be taken to mean the direct sellers themselves in an economically unviable closed market.
A lawful direct selling scheme can only be one sponsored by persons who can immediately provide quantifiable evidence (on demand), that their scheme has ultimately always derived the overwhelming majority of its revenue via its salaried, and/or non-salaried, commission agents regularly retailing products, and/or services, to the general public for a profit (based on value and demand).
Common-sense should reveal to any honest law enforcement agent, legislator or judge, that any alleged 'direct selling scheme' which does not fit the above accurate definition, and which has been offering economically-incestuous commission payments to its own agents on their own purchases, and on the purchases of these agents' own recruits, and on the purchases of the recruits of these recruits, etc. ad infinitum, is a dissimulated closed-market swindle or pyramid scheme without a significant, or sustainable, source of revenue other than its own losing participants, and which, therefore, has been obstructing justice by laundering unlawful losing investment payments (based on the false expectation of future reward) simply by arbitrarily, and falsely, defining these transactions as: 'sales to customers and end users'.
In any alleged 'direct selling scheme,' if products, and/or services have not been regularly retailed to the general public (based on value and demand), then they might as well not exist. This why I usually refer to them as 'wampum.'