{"id":14247,"date":"2024-01-27T10:27:05","date_gmt":"2024-01-27T10:27:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/taxpolicy.org.uk\/?p=14247"},"modified":"2024-01-27T12:23:45","modified_gmt":"2024-01-27T12:23:45","slug":"mogul_fraud","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/heacham.neidles.com\/2024\/01\/27\/mogul_fraud\/","title":{"rendered":"Mogul Press – using fraud to silence criticism of their deceptive business practices"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
I’ve written previously<\/a> about a business called Mogul Press, which spams people on social media from fake profiles, often with stolen photos of real people. They claim to be a “PR agency” but their business appears to actually involve charging for paid placements in low quality media.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Mogul Press didn’t much like our article. At that point I thought they had several options:<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I didn’t appreciate was that they had a fourth option – fraud.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I received this from Google:<\/p>\n\n\n\n It’s a “takedown notice” under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act<\/a>. The idea is that a copyright owner can submit an online form to a service provider, e.g. Google complaining that an indexed page on the internet breaches its copyright. Google will then delist the page and notify its owner. If the owner disagrees there’s a copyright breach then they can file a “counter-notice<\/a>“. The complainant then has a couple of weeks to begin an actual legal action for breach of copyright; if it doesn’t, the service provider restores access. <\/p>\n\n\n\n I assumed they’d complained about my use of images of their website. These are copyrighted, but I’m perfectly entitled to use them for purposes of comment\/criticism under the US “fair use” doctrine<\/a>. In theory, I could sue Mogul Press for filing a bad-faith takedown notice<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n But I was wrong. We can now see copies of the actual complaints<\/a> and they aren’t incorrect, or bad faith. They’re simply fraudulent:<\/p>\n\n\n\n The “tribunepost.com” link (archived version here<\/a>) is just a direct copy of our article. Mogul Press created it (naturally breaching our copyright) and then filed a DMCA notice claiming that we’d copied them. This is, very obviously, just fraud.1<\/a><\/sup>I asked Mogul Press what they were up to, and they didn’t reply – so I think we can discard the possibility that someone else did this without telling Mogul Press<\/span> <\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems reasonably clear we’d have a claim for damages against Mogul Press under the DMCA. Google has taken legal action<\/a> against similar fraudulent takedown requests<\/a> in the past. Criminal offences<\/a> may also have been committed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Given the likelihood Mogul Press and its CEO, Nabeel Ahmad, are just scammers with no easily-traceable assets, it’s probably not worth spending time suing them. I’ll probably hurt them more financially by publishing this article – and that would be an entirely fair outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n