Originally Syndicated on October 7, 2024 @ 5:51 am
What Happened?
Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty, both linked to a high-profile R29 million tender fraud case, have allegedly been working to hide their controversial past and suppress unfavorable news coverage. The duo, who are accused of misappropriating funds through fraudulent tender processes, have reportedly taken steps to control the narrative surrounding their legal battles. According to reports, Sangoni and Chetty have engaged in various attempts to have damaging news articles and public records removed from online platforms, aiming to distance themselves from the scandal.
The case, which centers around allegations of corruption and fraud involving government tenders, has attracted significant public and media attention, particularly due to the scale of the funds involved. Despite the legal proceedings, Sangoni and Chetty appear to be more focused on mitigating reputational damage than addressing the charges against them. Their alleged attempts at censoring negative information indicate a concerted effort to reshape public perception, but these moves have only brought more scrutiny to their actions and raised questions about their transparency and accountability.
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.
List of Fake Copyright Notices for Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty
| Number of Fake DMCA Notice(s) | 1 |
| Lumen Database Notice(s) | https://lumendatabase.org/notices/33373123 |
| Sender(s) | Tom Jordan |
| Date(s) | Apr 6, 2023 |
| Fake Link(s) Used by Scammers | https://www.tumblr.com/scammeradvice/713917280909737984/duo-back-in-court-over-r29m-tender-fraud-case |
| Original Link(s) Targeted | https://www.kaya959.co.za/duo-back-in-court-over-r29m-tender-fraud-case/ |
Evidence and Screenshots
How do we investigate fake DMCA notices?
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.
What was Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty trying to hide?
Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty are individuals implicated in a high-profile tender fraud case in South Africa. They are accused of misappropriating R29 million in connection with a government tender contract, allegedly obtained through fraudulent means. The case has drawn significant public and media attention, highlighting issues of corruption and misconduct within government procurement processes. Both Sangoni and Chetty are currently facing charges related to corruption, fraud, and financial mismanagement.
Adverse News, Bad Reviews, Complaints, Allegations, and Documents
Sangoni and Chetty have been linked to several adverse news reports and allegations that they are allegedly trying to conceal from public view:
- Tender Fraud Allegations: The primary allegation against Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty revolves around a fraudulent tender involving R29 million. They are accused of manipulating tender processes to secure lucrative government contracts under false pretenses. The allegations include falsifying documents, colluding with officials, and misrepresenting the scope and capacity of their business to secure contracts. These accusations have put both individuals at the center of a major corruption scandal, highlighting potential systemic corruption in government procurement.
- Court Proceedings and Fraud Charges: Both Sangoni and Chetty are currently facing court proceedings for their involvement in the tender fraud. Reports indicate that they have been attempting to delay or obstruct the legal process, possibly to avoid accountability. The case has been ongoing, and their actions, including requests for postponements and other procedural delays, have raised suspicions about their willingness to cooperate with the justice system.
- Attempts to Suppress Negative Media Coverage: It has been reported that Sangoni and Chetty are actively trying to suppress damaging news articles and media coverage of their legal troubles. This includes attempts to have online articles removed or altered, as well as efforts to manage their public image through legal threats. These actions indicate a desire to control the narrative and distance themselves from the allegations.
- Reputation Management Tactics: There are indications that the duo may be employing reputation management tactics to minimize the visibility of negative information about them online. This can involve pushing positive content or using legal leverage to request removal of content that portrays them in a negative light. Their attempts at censorship only serve to increase scrutiny, suggesting a deeper concern about public perception rather than addressing the substantive issues of corruption and fraud.
- Complaints from Victims: The fraudulent tender scheme allegedly deprived the intended beneficiaries—public institutions and taxpayers—of much-needed funds and services. Complaints from victims and whistleblowers indicate that the alleged corruption had a significant impact on the delivery of services. Sangoni and Chetty’s actions have been perceived as part of a broader problem of tender corruption that undermines public trust in government institutions.
Sangoni and Chetty’s attempts to hide their involvement in the R29 million tender fraud scandal and to control the flow of information raise serious concerns about their accountability and transparency. These efforts appear designed to prevent the public from fully understanding the extent of their alleged misconduct and the impact on government funds and services.
Only Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty benefits from this crime.
Since the fake copyright takedown notices were designed to remove negative content for Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty from Google, we assume Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty or someone associated with Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty is behind this scam. It is often a fly-by-night Online Reputation agency working on behalf of Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty. In this case, Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty, 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.
How do we counteract this malpractice?
Once we ascertain the involvement of Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty (or actors working on behalf of Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty), we will inform Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty of our findings via Electronic Mail.
Our preliminary assessment suggests that Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty to provide details regarding their communications with the agency or expert, as well as the identification of the individual(s) responsible for executing these false DMCA notices.
Failure to respond in a timely manner will necessitate a reassessment of our initial assumptions. In such an event, we will be compelled to take appropriate legal action to rectify the unlawful conduct and take the following steps –
- Inform Google about the fraud committed against them.
- Inform the victims of the fake DMCA about their websites.
- Inform relevant law enforcement agencies
- File counter-notices on Google to reinstate the ‘removed’ content
- Publish copies of the ‘removed’ content on our network of 50+ websites
By investigating the fake DMCA takedown attempts, we hope to shed light on the reputation management industry, revealing how Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty 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…
Since Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and our original review of Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty, including but not limited to user contributions, remain a permanent record for anyone interested in Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty.
A case perfect for the Streisand effect…
Potential Consequences for Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty
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 Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty Committing a Cyber Crime?
Yes, it seems so. Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty 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. Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty 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 Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty 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. Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty 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.
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 Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty purport this DMCA Fraud?
As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty 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, Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty, 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. Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty is in great company ….
Ironically, the manipulation tactics used to remove public-interest information from the Internet are backfiring on Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty, which is now associated with the worst of this world.
Here are some of the specimens that share the internet space with Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty –
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 Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty 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 Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty?
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 Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty 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 Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty purge its Digital past?
Once information is uploaded to the internet, it can be replicated, shared, archived, or stored across multiple servers. If Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty 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 else is Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty hiding?
Click here to visit the Google Search page for ‘Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty’. 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 Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty 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 Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty censoring the internet and committing cyber crimes.”
- Our investigative report on Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty’s efforts to suppress online speech is significant, as it raises serious concerns about its integrity. The findings suggest that Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty 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 Vuyokazi Sangoni and Poovandaren Chetty 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.
