Revealed: Sergey Kondratenko's Attempts to Silence Explosive Reports

Originally Syndicated on May 3, 2024 @ 6:13 pm

Contents

What Happened?Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)Evidence and Screenshots What was Sergey Kondratenko trying to hide?Reputation Agency’s Modus Operandi Not In Good Company Frequently Asked Questions What is our next move?What else is Sergey Kondratenko hiding?References and Citations Used

Table of Contents

What Happened?

In a brazen attempt to shield his reputation, Sergey Kondratenko has been linked to multiple efforts to erase his controversial past from the public eye. Kondratenko, whose business dealings have long been shrouded in secrecy, is facing mounting allegations of financial misconduct, questionable investments, and a history of exploiting loopholes in regulatory frameworks.

Reports indicate that Kondratenko has aggressively pursued the removal of damaging news articles and critiques online, using legal threats and underhanded tactics to silence his critics. However, these efforts have backfired, drawing even more attention to his checkered history and further tarnishing his already fragile reputation.

This article delves into Kondratenko’s shadowy financial history and his repeated attempts to censor the truth, revealing the extent of his efforts to manipulate public perception.

Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)

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…

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, a Russian entrepreneur, is linked to significant financial controversies, primarily involving money laundering and illicit activities related to the gambling industry. His company, Royal Pay Europe, founded in 2016, has been under scrutiny for facilitating payment processing for online bookmakers, including 1xBet, which has faced accusations of operating illegally in several countries.

Kondratenko, along with his associates, is suspected of using Royal Pay to manage financial transactions for 1xBet, even in nations where gambling transactions were restricted or banned, such as Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan. Reports also indicate that Royal Pay played a key role in processing bets and managing funds across European, Asian, and CIS countries, including the transfer of millions of dollars to offshore accounts in Cyprus and other tax havens (Net Factual) (Valid Criticism – Comunity).

The Ukrainian government imposed sanctions on Royal Pay Europe, freezing its assets and halting its operations due to suspected money laundering activities. Ukrainian authorities blocked over 2 billion UAH in funds tied to Kondratenko’s operations. Kondratenko has also registered numerous other companies globally, many suspected of serving as intermediaries in these shady financial schemes (WeeklyNewsReview).

Kondratenko’s attempts to censor this damaging information are likely driven by the mounting legal and regulatory pressures against his network of businesses. By silencing reports about his involvement in illegal gambling and financial fraud, he aims to protect his reputation and continue his operations under the radar (Net Factual).

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 suppress several serious allegations and negative reports tied to his business operations, particularly those involving his company Royal Pay Europe and its alleged role in facilitating illegal financial activities. Here are some key pieces of adverse news he is likely trying to hide:

Links to 1xBet: Kondratenko’s Royal Pay Europe has been connected to 1xBet, a controversial online bookmaker accused of operating illegally in multiple countries. Royal Pay reportedly served as a payment processor for 1xBet, enabling transactions in regions where gambling is banned or heavily restricted, such as Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan (Net Factual).

Money Laundering Allegations: Kondratenko allegedly used Royal Pay and other companies under his control as intermediaries for transferring and laundering large sums of money from Russia and other CIS countries through European banks, often moving funds to offshore accounts in Cyprus. This has triggered investigations and sanctions by authorities, particularly in Ukraine, which froze over 2 billion UAH linked to Royal Pay (Valid Criticism – Comunity) (WeeklyNewsReview).

Sanctions from Ukraine: The Ukrainian government imposed sanctions on Royal Pay Europe, blocking its assets, halting financial transfers, and restricting its operations within the country due to its involvement in suspicious transactions (WeeklyNewsReview) (Net Factual).

Complex Web of International Companies: Kondratenko is associated with numerous companies across various countries, including the UK, Latvia, and Cyprus. Many of these companies are suspected of being involved in illegal financial activities such as money laundering. These companies often have similar websites and appear to be financial intermediaries for questionable transactions (WeeklyNewsReview) (Net Factual).

Kondratenko seeks to protect his global business network and prevent further legal and reputational damage by attempting to suppress these damaging reports. However, these efforts have only drawn more attention to his alleged involvement in illicit activities.

Sergei Kondratenko and his relationship with 1Xbet are the subject of one aspect of an inquiry into the actions of Russian nationals involved in money laundering in the Baltic nations and other places.

read more at https://netfactual.com/factcheck/sergey-kondratenko-a-criminal/

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 us at [email protected].

All communications are confidential and protected by our WhistleBlower Policy.

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 Lumen for providing access to their database.

Photo by DALL-E 3 – “a representation of Sergey Kondratenko censoring the internet and committing cyber crimes”

Therefore, our report on Sergey Kondratenko is very critical because it makes Sergey Kondratenko an entity of suspicious character, stupid enough to commit perjury, impersonation, and fraud to manage their (sic) reputation or lack thereof.
We will file a counternotice to restore the removed article(s). In this case, that was straightforward; in other cases, the sheer volume of automated DMCA takedown notices makes it hard for the victims to respond, particularly if they’re not a large media corporation.
You need an account with Lumen to explore these requests in detail. Accounts aren’t generally available, given it’s a non-profit operating a massive database potentially open to abuse. Still, they do provide access to non-profits and researchers. Kindly provide us with login credentials.
We don’t understand why the US authorities haven’t prosecuted these rogue reputation agencies; their business model appears to rely upon fraud.
We asked Sergey Kondratenko for a comment or a rebuttal to this investigation. If we do not hear from them, It will seem reasonably likely that they commissioned the takedown attempt.

Revealed: Sergey Kondratenko’s Attempts to Silence Explosive Reports – Part 1

What Happened?

Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)

FAKE COPYRIGHT NOTICE #1

FAKE COPYRIGHT NOTICE #2

FAKE COPYRIGHT NOTICE #3