Beneficiary of Fake DMCA:
- Terrance Stewart – UNCG
- Perjury, Impersonation, Identity-theft, Misrepresentation
Fake Link/Website Used:
Date of Submission:
- July 04, 2018
- August 08, 2018
- May 14, 2018
- May 26, 2018
- May 18, 2018
- August 03, 2018
- June 20, 2018
ANALYZING THE FAKE DMCA
** Investigation in progress **
Yes, that’s right. Our team and friends are currently investigating this fake DMCA incident and analyzing all the public data we have with us. Right now we have the evidence captured and archived, we are still waiting for a response from Terrance Stewart – UNCG, Google and other related parties involved in this fake DMCA. This could take up to a couple of weeks.
However, make no mistake. This is indeed a case of copyright take-down fraud purported in order to hide online content. Once we compile all the facts of this case with due diligence, the final report will be published here.
We fight for the truth. If you have anything to contribute to this report or want to provide critical information against Terrance Stewart – UNCG, you can get in touch with us at [email protected] We’re open for dialogue, unless your intention is to threaten us and waste your time.
SO WHAT WERE THEY TRYING TO HIDE ?
In particular, a negative review/story against Terrance Stewart – UNCG which potentially hurt business and reputation. Here is an excerpt from that report –
UNCG clearly knew that Plaintiff had OCD from the time Plaintiff’s father informed Coach Stewart who reported the information to his supervisors in the Department. However, the fact that UNCG was aware of Plaintiff’s impairment, standing alone, is insufficient to show that UNCG regarded Plaintiff as substantially limited in any major life activity. See id. (citation omitted). Plaintiff argues that comments made and actions taken by Coach Stewart and other Department officials show that UNCG regarded Plaintiff as disabled. First, Plaintiff notes that when Coach Stewart initially learned of his OCD, he asked if Plaintiff should be “ red-shirted” to treat the condition like a broken ankle.
However, Coach Stewart made this inquiry before he knew anything about the nature of Plaintiff’s condition. Once Plaintiff’s father told him more about Plaintiff’s OCD, Coach Stewart allowed Plaintiff to continue playing on the team and even selected him to participate in the first tournament of the 2002-03 season, indicating that he did not regard Plaintiff as disabled. Plaintiff also alleges that immediately after he performed poorly in that tournament, Coach Stewart angrily commented, “ I don’t give a damn about your OCD.” This stray statement is insufficient to show that Coach Stewart regarded Plaintiff as disabled. If this comment were to support the notion that Coach Stewart viewed any of Plaintiff’s life activities as substantially limited, it would have to be Plaintiff’s golf game.
However, golfing is not considered a major life activity under the Rehabilitation Act. See Colwell v. Suffolk County Police Dep’t, 158 F.3d 635, 643 (2d Cir.1998). Even if it were, nothing about this comment suggests that Coach Stewart thought Plaintiff’s game was “ substantially limited” as the term is strictly interpreted under the Rehabilitation Act. Following this comment, Plaintiff remained on the team and participated in practices and qualifiers for the rest of the season. Therefore, Coach Stewart’s mere inquiry about “ red-shirting” Plaintiff and one stray comment made in anger after a tournament does not show that UNCG regarded Plaintiff as disabled.
Read the full article at – https://ada.osu.edu/AHEADLEGAL07/14)CostellovUniversityofNorthCarolina2006.rtf
WHAT IS A FAKE DMCA AND WHY ARE WE LISTED HERE ?
Soon after we published the first set of our investigation reports on fake DMCAs, we managed to generate interest from online media such as Techdirt, Adweek and Huffington Post. Some of the key stories included our revelations on Roosh V, Idea Buyer, Qnet , Tai Lopez ,Amira Nature Food, Grant Cardone and more. We also shared unpublished data and information with 3 different law agencies who looked into this scam.
And we got results. We dented this fake DMCA industry and made sure we act as deterrent to the rogue reputation firms indulged in these criminal practices. Here are some of the outcomes and changes we made possible with the help of several other citizen lawyers and agencies –
- Ripoff Report wipes out Google (fake) Removals with a stroke of genius ! Thank you Ed – at webactivism.com
- Court finds evidence of ‘fraud on the Court’ in one of the missing-defendant libel takedown cases – at washingtonpost.com
- Default judgment aimed at deindexing apparently accurate information about person convicted of sex offense – at washingtonpost.com
- Panic and desperation getting the better of rogue reputation services – at webactivism.com
- Google still deindexing some material found by courts to be defamatory — but it’s being more skeptical – at washingtonpost.com
- Google Apparently No Longer Humoring Court Orders To Delist Defamatory Content – at techdirt.com
- Paul Levy Discovers Head Of Reputation Management Company Signed Off On Forged/Fraudulent Court Docs – at techdirt.com
- Filing Bogus Lawsuits As Part Of A ‘Reputation Management’ Strategy Costs Firm $71,000 – at techdirt.com
- Richart Ruddie Settles anti-SLAPP Claims, Makes Restitution; but the Guilty Companies Remain Unpunished – at typepad.com
- Who Filed Fake Copyright Infringement Complaints Against AgencySpy? – at adweek.com
- The Dark Art of Fake DMCA Takedown Requests – at huffingtonpost.com
Fake Fraudulent DMCA might seem inconspicuous, until it’s you at the receiving end of this crime. This is not a prank. This is not an inconvenience. This is not random. These fake DMCA cases are calculated criminal schemes targeting very specific and rather important information/content. These hitjobs are usually against media, in order to help their client hide important information from public’s eye, all in the name of Reputation Management. Millions of dollars are spent doing this, and if no one wants to bring this topic to the fore, we will.
Our team will not constantly monitor and publish these reports on a DAILY basis without fail. And we do not plan to publish and forget. We will take constructive steps in order to expose the faces behind this scam, and to try and undo the damages. AND IF YOU INDEED PART OF THIS SCAM, WE WILL ENSURE THAT YOU GET WHAT’S COMING YOUR WAY.