Originally Syndicated on September 30, 2024 @ 11:17 am
What Happened?
Tickmill Limited, a well-known player in the forex industry, has recently come under scrutiny for allegedly attempting to suppress damaging information about its past. While Tickmill presents itself as a reputable broker with global operations, a deeper look reveals a series of concerning allegations that the company has reportedly worked to keep out of the public eye. These accusations range from questionable business practices to regulatory issues in various jurisdictions.
Several sources, including prominent forex watchdogs, have raised concerns about Tickmill’s history. Reports suggest that the company has employed tactics to censor negative news, including issuing legal threats and removing unfavorable reviews or content that tarnishes its image. This effort to maintain a clean reputation, however, raises further suspicion about the integrity of the company.
Traders and investors are advised to exercise caution when dealing with firms that engage in such tactics. While Tickmill continues to market itself as a transparent and customer-centric broker, its alleged attempts to silence critics may be indicative of deeper, unresolved issues. For a more detailed account of these claims, visit EarnForex, which offers an in-depth review of Tickmill’s track record .
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 Tickmill Limited
| Number of Fake DMCA Notice(s) | 1 |
| Lumen Database Notice(s) | https://lumendatabase.org/notices/43974799 |
| Sender(s) | BlueCore Technologies llc |
| Date(s) | Aug 20, 2024 |
| Fake Link(s) Used by Scammers | https://www.tickmill.com/ |
| Original Link(s) Targeted | https://www.earnforex.com/forex-brokers/Tickmill/ |
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 Tickmill Limited trying to hide?
Tickmill Limited is a global forex and CFD broker offering trading services to both retail and institutional clients. With operations spanning multiple jurisdictions, the broker is licensed and regulated by several authorities, including the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC), and the Seychelles Financial Services Authority (FSA). Tickmill markets itself as a competitive broker with low trading costs, superior technology, and excellent customer service. The company has expanded its operations over the years, making its mark in the forex trading community.
However, despite its reputation as a well-established broker, Tickmill’s image has been tarnished by accusations and negative feedback from traders. Some of the concerns revolve around its operational transparency and business ethics. In recent years, allegations of questionable practices have emerged, leading to suspicions that the company may not be as reputable as it claims. More alarming is Tickmill’s apparent efforts to suppress negative information and censor damaging reviews online. These actions raise the question: what exactly is Tickmill trying to hide?
2. Complaints and Allegations Against Tickmill
Numerous traders have expressed dissatisfaction with Tickmill’s services, and many of these complaints point to deeper issues within the company. The following are some of the key grievances and allegations raised by clients:
- Withdrawal Issues: One of the most common complaints against Tickmill involves delays in processing withdrawals. Traders have reported waiting extended periods to access their funds, which has led to frustration and concerns about the company’s liquidity. In some cases, traders have alleged that their withdrawal requests were outright rejected, raising red flags about Tickmill’s transparency in handling client funds.
- Slippage and Poor Order Execution: Traders have also complained about significant slippage during trading, where the price at which an order is executed differs from the intended price. While slippage can occur in volatile market conditions, there have been allegations that Tickmill manipulates prices to its advantage, particularly during high volatility, such as news releases. Poor order execution and price manipulation are serious issues that can severely impact traders’ profitability, especially for those engaged in high-frequency or short-term trading strategies.
- Unresponsive Customer Support: Many clients have voiced frustration over Tickmill’s customer support services, reporting long wait times or a complete lack of response. This issue is exacerbated when traders face technical problems or difficulties with their accounts, as prompt and efficient support is critical in such situations. The lack of adequate customer service raises concerns about Tickmill’s ability to maintain its commitment to customer-centric services.
- Unfair Trading Conditions: Allegations have surfaced suggesting that Tickmill engages in unfair trading practices. Some traders believe the broker is involved in stop-hunting, a strategy where brokers manipulate price movements to trigger stop-loss orders placed by clients. These actions create an environment where traders are systematically disadvantaged, casting doubt on the company’s commitment to providing fair and transparent trading conditions.
3. Regulatory Concerns
Despite being regulated by well-known authorities such as the FCA and CySEC, Tickmill’s operations in certain offshore jurisdictions, particularly Seychelles, have raised concerns. Regulation in offshore locations tends to be less stringent compared to more developed markets, creating opportunities for brokers to operate with less oversight.
- Offshore Operations and Loopholes: Tickmill’s licensing in Seychelles is a point of contention for some critics who argue that brokers operating in such jurisdictions may not be held to the same regulatory standards as those licensed in the UK or the European Union. Offshore licenses often come with fewer reporting requirements, less robust client protection measures, and limited regulatory recourse in case of disputes. This has led to suspicion that Tickmill uses its offshore base to operate in ways that may not align with the ethical standards expected from a regulated broker.
- Transparency and Compliance Issues: There have been allegations that Tickmill has not been fully transparent in disclosing its financial operations or adhering to all necessary compliance protocols. Some critics argue that the company’s regulatory adherence may be more lax in regions where oversight is minimal, raising doubts about its overall commitment to fair trading and client protection.
4. Alleged Attempts to Censor Negative Reviews
What is perhaps more troubling than the complaints themselves is the reported effort by Tickmill to suppress these negative reviews and complaints. Over time, several industry watchdogs, forums, and independent review platforms have indicated that Tickmill employs tactics to censor damaging news or remove critical feedback. This includes both legal and non-legal methods designed to suppress information that could damage the company’s reputation. Here are a few examples of these tactics:
- Removal of Unfavorable Reviews: Multiple traders have claimed that their negative reviews about Tickmill were taken down from popular forex review platforms without explanation. This suggests that the company may be exerting influence over these sites to maintain a positive public image. While removing defamatory or false reviews can be justified, the systematic removal of legitimate complaints is a worrying sign of potential information manipulation.
- Legal Threats and Intimidation: There are also reports of Tickmill issuing legal threats to websites, bloggers, and users who publish unfavorable information about the broker. These threats aim to silence critics and deter individuals from publicly discussing their negative experiences. The use of legal intimidation to prevent free speech and open dialogue only raises further suspicions about what Tickmill is trying to hide.
- Blocking Negative Press: It has been alleged that Tickmill actively works to limit the spread of damaging articles and press coverage. Some industry insiders believe that the broker engages in public relations campaigns designed to downplay its negative history while pushing positive content to the forefront. By doing so, Tickmill attempts to shape the narrative around its brand, but at the cost of transparency and openness.
These actions raise the critical question: what exactly is Tickmill trying to conceal? The combination of regulatory concerns, complaints of unfair trading conditions, and efforts to suppress criticism suggest that there may be deeper, systemic issues within the company. The broker’s attempts to control its public image through censorship and intimidation hint at a lack of accountability, which could indicate further undisclosed problems that have yet to surface.
For prospective traders, the ability to access honest feedback and reviews is essential to making informed decisions. The fact that Tickmill is allegedly involved in suppressing such information calls into question the reliability of its marketing claims and its true commitment to transparency.
Tickmill Limited may appear to be a competitive and reputable broker on the surface, but the growing number of complaints and its efforts to suppress negative information warrant a closer look. Traders should approach the broker with caution and take the time to research independent, uncensored reviews to ensure they understand the risks involved. While Tickmill may provide certain advantages, such as low fees and advanced trading platforms, its questionable actions behind the scenes raise important concerns that should not be ignored.
For those interested in learning more, websites like EarnForex provide comprehensive reviews and user feedback, offering a more balanced view of Tickmill’s operations and practices.
Only Tickmill Limited benefits from this crime.
Since the fake copyright takedown notices were designed to remove negative content for Tickmill Limited from Google, we assume Tickmill Limited or someone associated with Tickmill Limited is behind this scam. It is often a fly-by-night Online Reputation agency working on behalf of Tickmill Limited. In this case, Tickmill Limited, 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 Tickmill Limited (or actors working on behalf of Tickmill Limited), we will inform Tickmill Limited of our findings via Electronic Mail.
Our preliminary assessment suggests that Tickmill Limited may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Tickmill Limited, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Tickmill Limited 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 Tickmill Limited 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 Tickmill Limited made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and our original review of Tickmill Limited, including but not limited to user contributions, remain a permanent record for anyone interested in Tickmill Limited.
A case perfect for the Streisand effect…
Potential Consequences for Tickmill Limited
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 Tickmill Limited Committing a Cyber Crime?
Yes, it seems so. Tickmill Limited 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. Tickmill Limited 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 Tickmill Limited 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. Tickmill Limited 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 Tickmill Limited purport this DMCA Fraud?
As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Tickmill Limited 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, Tickmill Limited either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Tickmill Limited, 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. Tickmill Limited is in great company ….
Ironically, the manipulation tactics used to remove public-interest information from the Internet are backfiring on Tickmill Limited, which is now associated with the worst of this world.
Here are some of the specimens that share the internet space with Tickmill Limited –
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 Tickmill Limited 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 Tickmill Limited?
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 Tickmill Limited 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 Tickmill Limited purge its Digital past?
Once information is uploaded to the internet, it can be replicated, shared, archived, or stored across multiple servers. If Tickmill Limited 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 Tickmill Limited hiding?
Click here to visit the Google Search page for ‘Tickmill Limited’. 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 Tickmill Limited 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 Tickmill Limited censoring the internet and committing cyber crimes.”
- Our investigative report on Tickmill Limited’s efforts to suppress online speech is significant, as it raises serious concerns about its integrity. The findings suggest that Tickmill Limited 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 Tickmill Limited 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.
