Originally Syndicated on September 17, 2024 @ 11:42 pm
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.
By attempting to hide these adverse documents and reviews, Kondratenko aims to avoid further scrutiny and keep his controversial past out of public awareness. However, the persistence of investigative journalists, whistleblowers, and online forums makes it increasingly difficult for him to erase this damaging information completely.
Reputation Agency’s Modus Operandi
The fake DMCA notices we found always use the “back-dated article” technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a “true original” article and back-dates it, creating a “fake original” article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original.
Then, based on the claim that this backdated article is the “original,” the scammers send a DMCA to the relevant online service providers (e.g. Google), alleging that the ‘true’ original is the copied or “infringing” article and that the copied article is the “original,” requesting the takedown of the ‘true’ original article. After sending the DMCA request, the person who sent the wrong notice takes down the fake original URL, likely to make sure that the article doesn’t stay online in any way. If the takedown notice is successful, the disappearance from the internet of information is most likely to be legitimate speech.
How did Sergey Kondratenko purport this DMCA Fraud?
As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Sergey Kondratenko creates a website that purports to be a ‘news’ site. This site is designed to look legitimate at a glance, but any degree of scrutiny reveals it as the charade it is.
The company copies the ‘negative’ content and posts it “on the fake ‘news’ site, attributing it to a separate author,” then gives it “a false publication date on the ‘news’ website that predated the original publication.
The reputation company then sent Google a Digital Millennium Copyright Act notice claiming the original website infringed copyright. After a cursory examination of the fake news site, Google frequently accepts the notice and delists the content.
In committing numerous offences, Sergey Kondratenko either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Sergey Kondratenko, ignorance does not excuse this wrongdoing.
The Reputation Laundering
Rogue Reputation agencies use spurious copyright claims and fake legal notices to remove and obscure articles linking clients to allegations of tax avoidance, corruption, and drug trafficking. Most of these reputation agencies are based offshore, mainly in Russia, India, and Eastern Europe, and they do not worry about complying with US-based laws.
The content in all of the articles for which the fraudulent DMCA notices have been sent relates to allegations of criminal allegations, including corruption, child abuse, sexual harassment, human trafficking and financial fraud against businesses and individuals with ultra-high net worth.
In addition to the misuse of the DMCA takedown process, there is a notable absence of enforcement concerning perjury violations. The statutory requirement related to perjury is designed to deter copyright holders from submitting fraudulent or knowingly false takedown requests, as they may face legal consequences for making false declarations under penalty of perjury. However, to date, there have been no known instances of any individual being prosecuted for perjury in connection with the submission of false DMCA takedown notices.
This lack of enforcement has emboldened copyright holders to exploit the DMCA takedown process to suppress dissent, criticism, or other unfavorable content, without fear of legal repercussions.
Not In Good Company
Some of the people and businesses who have employed this tactic to remove legitimate content from Google illegally include a Spanish businessman-turned-cocaine-trafficker, Organised crime, an Israeli-Argentine banker accused of laundering money for Hugo Chávez’s regime, a French “responsible” mining company accused of tax evasion, child molesters and sexual predators. Sergey Kondratenko is in great company ….
Ironically, the manipulation tactics used to remove public-interest information from the Internet are backfiring on Sergey Kondratenko, which is now associated with the worst of this world.
Here are some of the specimens that share the internet space with Sergey Kondratenko –
Miguel Octavio Vargas Maldonado
Miguel Octavio Vargas Maldonado appears to be the former foreign affairs minister of the Dominican Republic. His name is listed next to more than 500 links to news articles, blogs, social media posts, and YouTube videos targeted for removal or de-indexing. Many of the articles refer to questions over his political fundraising practices. They include accusations that Vargas had received donations from an individual who would later be convicted of drug trafficking. Some targeted links remain active, while others return 404 errors or “file not found.”
José Antonio Gordo Valero
José Gordo joined OneCoin in 2015 and has been named in an indictment for the OneCoin scam in Argentina. The articles listed next to Gordo’s name in the documents reviewed by Rest of World include references to his role at the company.
Diego Adolfo Marynberg
He appears to be the same Marynberg connected to funding right-wing causes, including settlement efforts in Israel. Reports also alleged that his company received preferential treatment in acquiring Argentinian bonds worth millions of dollars. More than 70 URLs appear next to Marynberg’s name in the documents, including pages from the Israeli newspapers The Times of Israel, Haaretz, and Clarin, one of Argentina’s most prominent news sites.
Majed Khalil Majzoub
Majed is an influential businessman with close ties to several governments, including the administration of Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro. Majzoub’s name appears next to more than 180 URLs, mostly from independent outlets. Of the two URLs that pointed to articles from Germany’s Der Spiegel, one now returns an error message; the other, which appears to refer to relations between Venezuela and Colombia, directs to an unrelated story about Brexit.
Frequently Asked Questions
Did Sergey Kondratenko commit a cyber crime?
Yes, filing a fake DMCA notice is illegal. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) allows copyright holders to issue takedown notices to protect their works from unauthorized use online. However, submitting a false DMCA notice can result in legal consequences.
Under the DMCA, a person knowingly submitting a false copyright claim can be subject to penalties, including damages. DMCA notices require the filer to certify, under penalty of perjury, that the content infringes their copyright. If the notice is found to be fraudulent or made in bad faith, the filer can face.
What are the potential consequences for Sergey Kondratenko?
Civil lawsuits: The affected party can sue for damages, legal fees, and other costs.
Perjury charges: False certification in a DMCA notice can result in perjury-related penalties, which vary by jurisdiction.
Other legal penalties: Fines or other penalties depending on the case
Did Sergey Kondratenko commit a Civil or a Criminal offense?
Perjury is a criminal offense, not a civil crime. It involves intentionally lying or making false statements under oath, typically in a court of law or other legal proceedings, such as affidavits or depositions.
Criminal charges: Perjury is prosecuted as a criminal act, and a conviction can lead to fines or imprisonment, depending on the severity of the false statement and its impact on the case.
Felony status: In many jurisdictions, perjury is classified as a felony, which carries more severe penalties than misdemeanour offences.
So, while it may affect civil cases, the crime of perjury itself is strictly criminal.
What is the Streisand effect?
The key idea behind the Streisand effect is that efforts to restrict information can backfire, often causing the information to gain more attention than it would have otherwise. This effect is widespread in the digital age, where users quickly notice and spread censorship efforts on social media and other platforms.
Trying to suppress something can unintentionally lead to it becoming more visible.
Can Sergey Kondratenko purge its Digital past?
Once information is uploaded to the internet, it can be replicated, shared, archived, or stored across multiple servers. If Sergey Kondratenko manage to delete the original post or file, copies may remain accessible in other places, such as web archives, screenshots, or other users’ devices.
In practice, completely erasing content from the internet can be extremely difficult due to how widely information can spread and be stored. Thus, the idea that “the Internet never forgets” reflects the challenge of entirely removing digital content once it has been shared.
What is our next move?
Critical Intel will, in its capacity, do all it can to hold someone responsible for this incident. Here is what we are preparing for –
Since Sergey Kondratenko made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and our original review of Sergey Kondratenko, including but not limited to user contributions, remain a permanent record for anyone interested in Sergey Kondratenko.
A case perfect for the Streisand effect…
What else is Sergey Kondratenko hiding?
Click here to visit the Google Search page for ‘Sergey Kondratenko’. It’s likely if you scroll down to the bottom of this Google search results, you’ll stumble upon this Legal Takedown notice (pictured below)
To make such an investigation possible, we encourage more online service providers to come forward and share copies of content removal requests with us. If you have any information on Sergey Kondratenko that you want to share with us, kindly email the author directly at [email protected].
All communications are strictly confidential and safeguarded under a comprehensive Whistleblower Policy, ensuring full protection and anonymity for individuals who provide information.
References and Citations Used
Over thirty thousand DMCA notices reveal an organized attempt to abuse copyright law.
Reputation Management, or Internet Conspiracy
Exposed documents reveal how the powerful cleaned up their digital past using a reputation laundering firm.
Companies Use Fake Websites and Backdated Articles to Censor Google’s Search Results.
Bad Reviews: How Companies Are Using Fake Websites to Censor Content
How fake copyright complaints are muzzling journalists
Many thanks to FakeDMCA.com and Lumen for providing access to their database.
Photos and Illustrations provided by DALL-E 3 – “a representation of Sergey Kondratenko censoring the internet and committing cyber crimes.”
- Our investigative report on Sergey Kondratenko’s efforts to suppress online speech is significant, as it raises serious concerns about its integrity. The findings suggest that Sergey Kondratenko has engaged in questionable practices, including potential perjury, impersonation, and fraud, in a misguided attempt to manage or salvage its reputation.
- We intend to file a counternotice to reinstate the removed article(s). While this particular instance is relatively straightforward, it is important to note that, in other cases, the overwhelming volume of automated DMCA takedown notices can significantly hinder the ability of affected parties to respond—especially for those not large media organizations.
- You need an account with fakeDMCA.com and Lumen to access the research data. However, accounts are not widely available since these non-profit organisations manage large databases that could be susceptible to misuse. Nevertheless, they do offer access to non-profits and researchers.
- It’s unclear why U.S. authorities have yet to act against these rogue reputation agencies, whose business model seems rooted in fraudulent practices.
- We’ve reached out to Sergey Kondratenko for a comment or rebuttal regarding this investigation. It will strongly suggest they were behind the takedown attempt if they remain silent.
About the Author
The author is affiliated with Harvard University and serves as a researcher at both Lumen and FakeDMCA.com. In his personal capacity, he and his team have been actively investigating and reporting on organized crime related to fraudulent copyright takedown schemes. Additionally, his team provides advisory services to major law firms and is frequently consulted on matters pertaining to intellectual property law. He can be reached at [email protected] directly.
