China Opens Criminal Probe Into Odyssey (ODY) Network Marketing Scheme
Cangnan County Public Security Bureau has formally opened a criminal investigation into an alleged pyramid scheme organized by Yang Baowan and others under the project name Odyssey (Chinese: 奥德赛斯, ticker ODY). The announcement, dated August 26, 2026, moves the case from regulatory scrutiny into the criminal justice system — a threshold that carries materially different consequences for everyone in the project’s chain of command.
Who Is Actually Exposed?
Since July 2026, defense attorneys have fielded a steady stream of inquiries from people at nearly every level of the Odyssey structure: regional directors, large team leaders, core node operators, marketing partners, KOLs who promoted the project, and ordinary participants who simply recommended it to friends. The recurring question is whether a team leader who never sat in on strategic decisions can still be charged under Article 224-1 of China’s Criminal Law as an organizer or leader of a pyramid scheme.
The legal test in Chinese practice rests less on formal titles than on function. Prosecutors typically look at whether a person:
- Designed or modified the compensation and referral structure
- Exercised decision-making authority over recruitment or fund flows
- Directed, coordinated, or trained subordinate layers of participants
- Received disproportionate economic benefit from network expansion
- Played a role that was indispensable to the scheme’s continued operation
A regional director or team leader with hundreds of downstream members will almost certainly be examined as a potential organizer, even absent a board seat. The size of a downline can itself be treated as evidence of leadership, and in prior cases courts have counted headcount and layered commissions as the primary indicators of culpability.
What Comes Next
The distinction between organizer/leader and ordinary participant determines whether someone faces criminal liability or merely administrative penalties and asset forfeiture. That line is not fixed at the outset of an investigation; it is shaped by evidence gathered on fund flows, communication records, and the actual operational role each person played.
For the broader market, the Odyssey case is another signal that Chinese authorities are willing to escalate token-based recruitment schemes from civil and administrative action to criminal prosecution. Projects structured around multi-tier referral rewards, offline promotional events, and influencer-driven recruitment should expect heightened scrutiny — and participants at every level should understand that the criminal code does not require a formal executive title to attach liability.
