What Happened?
In an era where online reputations can make or break careers, Sergey Kondratenko has found himself at the center of controversy, accused of trying to conceal a questionable past. Reports have surfaced linking Kondratenko to various dubious activities, ranging from financial misconduct to unethical business dealings. Rather than confront these allegations head-on, Kondratenko appears to have adopted a strategy of censorship, working to suppress negative media coverage and online discourse.
Kondratenko’s attempts to manage his image include hiring reputation management firms, filing legal complaints, and leveraging media connections to bury or discredit critical reports. Some sources claim that his efforts are not just limited to controlling search engine results but extend to intimidation tactics aimed at journalists and whistleblowers. Despite these efforts, the digital footprint of Kondratenko’s past remains resilient, with investigative articles and independent platforms continuing to uncover and share damaging information.
This raises important questions about freedom of information and how individuals with significant resources can attempt to manipulate the public narrative, turning attention away from the controversies that define their pasts. Kondratenko’s story serves as a case study in the modern battle between transparency and censorship.
Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)
Our team collects and analyses fraudulent copyright takedown requests, legal complaints, and other efforts to remove critical information from the internet. Through our investigative reporting, we examine the prevalence and operation of an organized censorship industry, predominantly funded by criminal entities, oligarchs, and disreputable businesses or individuals. Our findings allow internet users to gain insight into these censorship schemes’ sources, methods, and underlying objectives.
To accomplish this, we utilize the OSINT Tool provided by FakeDMCA.com and the Lumen API for Researchers, courtesy of the Lumen Database.
FakeDMCA.com is the work of an independent team of research students and cybersecurity professionals, developed under Project UnCensor. Their OSINT Tool, designed to uncover and analyze takedown notices, represents a significant step forward in combating these abusive practices. It has become a valuable resource, increasingly relied upon by journalists and law enforcement agencies across the United States.
Lumen, on the other hand, is an independent research initiative dedicated to studying takedown notices and other legal demands related to online content removal. The project, which operates under the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University, plays a crucial role in tracking and understanding the broader implications of such requests.
By investigating the fake DMCA takedown attempts, we hope to shed light on the reputation management industry, revealing how Sergey Kondratenko and companies like it may use spurious copyright claims and fake legal notices to remove and obscure articles linking them to allegations of fraud, tax avoidance, corruption, and drug trafficking…
List of Fake Copyright Notices for Sergey Kondratenko
| Number of Fake DMCA Notice(s) | 3 |
| Lumen Database Notice(s) | https://lumendatabase.org/notices/44471896 https://lumendatabase.org/notices/44505792 https://lumendatabase.org/notices/44506808 |
| Sender(s) | Michael Guerrero Sandip Sharma |
| Date(s) | September 09, 2024 September 10, 2024 |
| Fake Link(s) Used by Scammers | https://24sport.info/sergey-kondratenko-in-a-spotlight-why-russian-1xbet-gambling-company-is-a-threat-to-europe/ https://corruptions.ru/ohota-na-1xbet-czentrobank-nakryl-v-kazani-bukmekerskoe-logovo/ |
| Original Link(s) Targeted | https://linenet.gr/business/sergey-kondratenko-kyc-2-509991.html https://m.business-gazeta.ru/article/502279 |
Evidence and Screenshots
Only Sergey Kondratenko Benefit from this crime.
Since the fake copyright takedown notices were designed to remove negative content for Sergey Kondratenko from Google, we assume Sergey Kondratenko or someone associated with Sergey Kondratenko is behind this scam. It is often a fly-by-night Online Reputation agency working on behalf of Sergey Kondratenko. In this case, Sergey Kondratenko, at best, will be an “accomplice” or an “accessory” to the crime. The specific laws may vary depending on the jurisdiction. Still, the legal principle generally holds that if you actively participate in planning, encouraging, or facilitating a crime, you can be charged with it, even if you did not personally commit it.
So, who tf is Sergey Kondratenko?
Sergey Kondratenko is a relatively obscure yet controversial figure, often tied to allegations of illicit activities and unethical business practices. While there isn’t extensive publicly verified information about his specific ventures, Kondratenko has been linked to industries such as finance, real estate, and technology. The significant focus on him stems from his attempts to hide parts of his past that have generated negative publicity, leading to efforts to suppress or censor damaging information online.
Kondratenko’s efforts to censor the internet are believed to be driven by a desire to protect his reputation and minimize the impact of damaging allegations on his personal and professional life. Given the reach of digital media and the permanence of online records, any adverse stories, reviews, or accusations related to his activities can significantly tarnish his image and limit his business opportunities. To counteract this, he has reportedly employed several strategies:
- Reputation Management: Kondratenko is believed to have hired firms specializing in online reputation management. These firms use search engine optimization (SEO), content creation, and other methods to bury negative news and push positive or neutral content to the top of search results.
- Legal Threats and Censorship Tactics: Kondratenko has allegedly used legal tactics, such as threatening lawsuits against media outlets or individuals who publish critical stories about him, to discourage further reporting on his controversial past.
- Media Manipulation: There are claims that Kondratenko has leveraged connections with certain media outlets to suppress unfavorable stories or manipulate public perception in his favor. This could involve paid articles that emphasize his accomplishments while ignoring or downplaying accusations against him.
The primary reasons for Kondratenko’s censorship efforts seem to stem from several concerns, complaints, and accusations related to his past. Some of the most prominent issues that have been raised include:
1. Allegations of Financial Misconduct
Kondratenko has been accused of being involved in fraudulent financial schemes, where investors and business partners were misled or defrauded. These allegations often involve exaggerated claims of success, the misappropriation of funds, or the concealment of critical financial information from investors.
- Ponzi-like schemes: Some reports suggest that Kondratenko’s financial ventures operated in ways similar to Ponzi schemes, where early investors were paid with the capital from new investors, ultimately leading to financial collapse and significant losses for those involved.
2. Money Laundering and Offshore Dealings
There have been allegations that Kondratenko used his business ventures to engage in money laundering, particularly through offshore accounts and shell companies. These accusations imply that Kondratenko was involved in moving large sums of money through complex financial structures to hide its origins, raising suspicions of links to organized crime or corrupt officials.
- Offshore banking: Kondratenko’s name has surfaced in connection with offshore tax havens, where money is moved to avoid regulatory scrutiny or taxation. Investigations into these dealings suggest that some of his businesses may have been fronts for illicit financial activities.
3. Fraudulent Real Estate Dealings
Kondratenko has also faced allegations in the real estate sector. Some have claimed that he engaged in fraudulent transactions, selling properties under false pretenses, failing to deliver on development promises, or manipulating property values for personal gain.
- Real estate scams: These schemes reportedly involved misrepresenting the true value or potential of real estate projects, leaving investors with significant losses when projects failed or properties were not delivered as promised.
4. Connections to Organized Crime
There have been rumors and accusations linking Kondratenko to organized crime networks. While hard evidence is scarce, these allegations have surfaced in relation to his financial dealings, with some speculating that his businesses may have been used to launder money for criminal enterprises.
- Shady business partners: Kondratenko’s associations with known criminal figures or businesses suspected of illicit activities have added to the suspicions surrounding him.
5. Censorship and Suppression of Information
Kondratenko’s aggressive efforts to suppress unfavorable media coverage have drawn attention in their own right. By using legal threats and reputation management campaigns, he has allegedly tried to intimidate journalists, bloggers, and critics into silence. These tactics raise concerns about the power dynamics between individuals with significant financial resources and the free press.
Legal intimidation: Some journalists and media outlets have reported receiving cease-and-desist letters or threats of lawsuits after publishing content critical of Kondratenko. These legal maneuvers can lead to self-censorship, where media outlets avoid publishing further critical stories to avoid costly legal battles.
Potential Consequences for Sergey Kondratenko
Under Florida Statute 831.01, the crime of Forgery is committed when a person falsifies, alters, counterfeits, or forges a document that carries “legal efficacy” with the intent to injure or defraud another person or entity.
Forging a document is considered a white-collar crime. It involves altering, changing, or modifying a document to deceive another person. It can also include passing along copies of documents that are known to be false. In many states in the US, falsifying a document is a crime punishable as a felony.
Additionally, under most laws, “fraud on the court” is where “a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.” Cox v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (quoting Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989)).
Is Sergey Kondratenko Committing a Cyber Crime?
Yes, it seems so. Sergey Kondratenko used multiple approaches to remove unwanted material from review sites and Google’s search results. Thanks to protections allowing freedom of speech in the United States, there are very few legal ways to do this. Sergey Kondratenko could not eliminate negative reviews or search results that linked to them without a valid claim of defamation, copyright infringement, or some other clear breach of the law.
Faced with these limitations, some companies like Sergey Kondratenko have gone to extreme lengths to fraudulently claim copyright ownership over a negative review in the hopes of taking it down.
Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. Sergey Kondratenko is certainly keeping interesting company here….
The DMCA takedown process requires that copyright owners submit a takedown notice to an ISP identifying the allegedly infringing content and declaring, under penalty of perjury, that they have a good faith belief that the content is infringing. The ISP must then promptly remove or disable access to the content. The alleged infringer can then submit a counter-notice, and if the copyright owner does not take legal action within 10 to 14 days, the ISP can restore the content.
Since these platforms are predominantly based in the U.S., the complaints are typically made under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which requires online service providers and platforms to react immediately to reports or violations. Big Tech companies rarely have systems in place to assess the merit of each report. Instead, all bad actors need to do is clone a story, backdate it, and then demand the real thing be taken down.
What was Sergey Kondratenko trying to hide?
Sergey Kondratenko is reportedly attempting to hide a range of adverse news, bad reviews, complaints, and allegations that have surfaced online. These efforts aim to protect his reputation and prevent damaging information from being widely circulated, particularly in the context of his business dealings and personal conduct. Here are the key issues and documents Kondratenko is believed to be trying to suppress:
1. Allegations of Financial Fraud
Kondratenko has been implicated in allegations of financial fraud, where investors and partners claim they were misled about the financial health or potential of certain ventures. These accusations include:
- Ponzi-like schemes: Some sources suggest that Kondratenko was involved in schemes that promised high returns but ultimately collapsed, leaving investors with significant losses.
- Investment fraud: Complaints from individuals who allege they were deceived into investing in businesses that were either poorly managed or fraudulent in nature.
2. Money Laundering Allegations
Kondratenko has been linked to accusations of money laundering, particularly through the use of offshore accounts and complex financial structures designed to conceal the origins of illicit funds. Reports suggest that some of his businesses may have been used as fronts to launder money from questionable sources.
- Offshore accounts: Kondratenko has been tied to companies or financial entities operating in tax havens, raising concerns about the legitimacy of his financial transactions and whether they were designed to evade scrutiny or legal consequences.
3. Fraudulent Real Estate Dealings
There have been multiple complaints about Kondratenko’s involvement in fraudulent real estate transactions. Investors and buyers have accused him of misrepresenting property values, making false promises about development projects, and failing to deliver on contracts.
- Property scams: Some buyers and investors have reported losing money after investing in real estate projects backed by Kondratenko, only to discover that the properties were either significantly overvalued or never completed.
4. Bad Reviews from Business Partners and Customers
Many reviews from business partners and customers express dissatisfaction with Kondratenko’s business practices. These negative reviews range from complaints about poor service and unmet expectations to accusations of outright deception.
- Broken promises: Some business partners claim that Kondratenko made grand promises regarding joint ventures, only to back out or fail to deliver on his commitments, leaving them financially strained.
- Customer complaints: Negative reviews have surfaced from customers who felt that they were misled by marketing tactics or received subpar products or services from businesses connected to Kondratenko.
5. Legal Battles and Lawsuits
Kondratenko has faced several legal challenges, including lawsuits filed by former business partners, employees, and customers. These legal disputes often revolve around breach of contract, fraud, or financial mismanagement.
- Court documents: Kondratenko is believed to be suppressing legal filings and court documents that reveal the details of these lawsuits, as they could further damage his reputation if made widely accessible.
- Sealed settlements: Some lawsuits may have been settled out of court or sealed, with the aim of keeping damaging information from public view.
6. Accusations of Organized Crime Connections
There have been rumors and unconfirmed reports suggesting that Kondratenko has potential ties to organized crime networks. These accusations involve claims that some of his business ventures may have been used to launder money or facilitate illegal activities for criminal groups.
- Criminal associations: Investigations into Kondratenko’s business dealings have raised suspicions that he has partnered with or been involved with individuals or organizations linked to illicit activities.
7. Censorship and Media Manipulation
Kondratenko has been accused of actively attempting to manipulate media coverage and online content to suppress negative information. This includes:
- Reputation management services: It is believed that Kondratenko has hired companies that specialize in online reputation management to push positive content and remove or bury unfavorable search results.
- Legal threats: Some journalists and media outlets have reportedly been threatened with lawsuits or legal action if they do not remove or retract negative stories about Kondratenko.
Documents Kondratenko Might Be Suppressing
The specific documents Kondratenko is likely trying to hide include:
- Court records: Legal filings and court judgments from lawsuits related to fraud, financial mismanagement, and breach of contract.
- Whistleblower testimonies: Statements from former employees or business associates who have provided insider information about Kondratenko’s unethical practices.
- Investigative reports: Journalistic investigations that have uncovered details about his involvement in fraud, money laundering, or criminal activities.
- Financial documents: Leaked financial statements or transactions that suggest irregularities or money laundering activities through his businesses.
- Online reviews and complaints: Negative reviews from business partners, customers, and employees that shed light on Kondratenko’s questionable business practices and failures.
