Several Bond Review articles have been the subject of fraudulent DMCA takedowns recently.
The United States’ Digital Millennium Copyright Act allows the owners of copyrighted material to file takedown notices, asking Google or other web providers to remove the copyrighted material.
There is a way to abuse this process to trick Google into removing content from its web searches that you don’t want to be seen. This involves stealing the content from the owner, uploading it elsewhere, changing the date so that your stolen content appears to have been uploaded first, and then filing a takedown notice to Google, claiming that your stolen content is the original, and the real content is the copy.
Google has informed me that this has happened to three Bond Review articles that I know of:
- We review Capital Way – anonymous forex scam with falsified track record
- “Scam” introducer at the heart of Mirror investigation promoting High Street Group
- We review Whiskey Wealth Club – returns of 10% to 20% per year with “relatively little risk”?
It is likely that whoever is the real fraudster has repeated the tactic on innocent firms without their knowledge to make it impossible to identify them (unlike when Carlauren tried this tactic last year shortly before its collapse).
My articles were copied and pasted onto skeptictank.org, which claims to provide “Critical Examination of Doubtful Claims” but, rather ironically given its name, apparently allows third party posters to post articles without any checks.
Skeptictank.org has been informed and, to their credit, were very quick to respond and say that its legal counsel will take a look. They pleaded a high workload due to the US Presidential election. It matters little as the unknown perpetrators will probably remove their copies from Skeptictank themselves, now that they have succeeded in hiding my originals from Google.
Filing a false DMCA takedown requires committing perjury under the laws of the United States of America.
I am not in a position to take legal action as it would require waiving pseudonymity, as well as time and funds I don’t have.
Moreover, the last time this happened, the scheme responsible collapsed within months. Committing perjury under US law indicates a degree of desperation, and it’s safe to say that whoever is responsible has far more to worry about than I do.