Negative SEO

jazzc said:

I am not knowledgeable in US law. I am simply assuming from the fact that this "niche" exists for quite some time that there 's no serious legal action being taken against them.

Click to expand...

There are several civil law suits in various stages of litigation. We are trying to instigate criminal prosecution.

jazzc said:

Me too. That 's why I 'm assuming their legal or at least not too illegal to be brought down that way.

Click to expand...

Many of the federal crimes amount to misdemeanors which prosecutors often feel are too small to go after.

jazzc said:

Not really. Investigation for criminal activities doesn't mean it 's criminal activities in regards to the mugshots. Plus, from an investigation to shutting down the "niche" as illegal is a huge step.

Click to expand...

Remember Megaupload? They did nothing illegal in the US. The US Govt. and the **AA's brought down Kim Dotcom. They have not been able to extradite him from the Au. yet, but they are trying. The Megaupload issue was a five year investigation. The difference is the deep pockets of the **AA's.

jazzc said:

Aren't courts responsible to decide that? And assuming you 're right, isn't the law enforcement 's job to make sure the law is held?

Click to expand...

The problem here is two fold. The first is getting past the hidden registrations (not hard at all), and then the shell corporations (very difficult and time consuming) to find someone to serve. Then you go into the issue that many of these people is that the shell corporations are often in countries that allow many other things that are illegal. Internet law is not the same in all countries. In the US it is pretty much confined to intellectual property.

jazzc said:

In which case they 've broken the law and should be help responsible by the law.

Click to expand...

Breaking the law and being able to prosecute for those violations are two separate and disparate issues. In the US you have the best judicial system that MONEY CAN BUY. Tracking down who is bought is a tall order.

jazzc said:

My mindset is that in a democracy, there is no room for self righteous vigilantes. Unless you are part of law enforcement and you have been given the task to regulate, if you are breaking the law, you are no less a criminal than the others. If you are not breaking the law, well, then everything is perfectly fine.

Click to expand...

If the internet were not the US wild west, you might have a point. You have to deal with what is and not what you think it should be. Sure, I disagree with the riots after the first Rodney King trial; but, those riots brought about a second federal trial in which four were convicted for the beating of Rodney King.

Kim Dotcom was in NZ at the time was he not? I also believe he had CDN or at least a single server associated with Mega Video in the US for NA offset of potential customers, so unless I'm completely off kilter here, I wouldn't compare your cause with injustice one way or another in his case.

dinkish said:

Kim Dotcom was in NZ at the time was he not? I also believe he had CDN or at least a single server associated with Mega Video in the US for NA offset of potential customers, so unless I'm completely off kilter here, I wouldn't compare your cause with injustice one way or another in his case.

Click to expand...

Kim Dotcom hosted in Virginia. Megaupload was registered in Hong Kong. Dotcom lived in NZ. Dotcom was born Kim Schmidt. Schmidt had a record in Germany for fraud prior to starting Megupload. His sole connection to the US was the servers in Va. He has never set foot in the US.

Contrasting with some of the mugshot sites. Many of the operators are US citizens and host on either Amazon or The Planet (Softlayer). Their registrations are all hidden and the larger ones tend to go through Fabulous.com and Moniker. When you trace the companies they admit to being, you mostly find that they claim West Nevis ownership. When you dig into West Nevis business records, there is no such company. Then you trace Fabulous.com (A Belize registrar) to Brightcove and some other business. When you finish the chasing around all the blind ends, you end up with Marchex in Seattle. Marchex recently split off a division to handle the smut/libel sites. The company that Marchex split off to handle the smut sites is Archeo. Marchex is listed on the stock exchange as MCHX.

Kyle Prall on the other hand, did, and probably still does, own Moniker. Kyle Pralls business partner is Ryan Russells. Ryan Russells is known in Canada as Ryan Russel and is wanted on unspecified computer crimes. It is believed that Russel is actually a Russian and the same Russian that claims ownership of PissedConsumer and has a strong association with a Russian criminal hacking ring. Kyle Prall's father was a judge in Tx. and pulled Pralls chestnuts out of the fire more than once. Prall also had a strong connection with the Disciples in Chicago. He also burnt them and they have a hit on him. Just like Megaupload, none of the listed address pan out - they are false.

One thing is striking, it is those in the Domain name game that seem to be playing a large role. You also have a ring of attornies around the issue.

While not a full disclosure, you can see the similarities, and the differences. You have to be the judge of the validity and the similarities/differences. The judgement that you make will only be valid for you because another will see it differently. However, the money comparison and the money paid by deep pockets makes this a valid comparison in my mind.

Laundering charges and special interests in my "judgement" are only tax related.

I'm not in complete disagreement with you, but this is hardly the forum to broadcast this topic in, beyond the thread title which is why I'll stfu.

Interesting shit indeed! Gotta say I think those mugshot sites are scum of the earth, so good luck Justus. One thing, you probably should have used the word adversary instead of competitor. Competitor makes it sound like you are in the same business.

@jazzc - sometimes it's guys like justus, who have a cause, that get new laws written or existing laws more forcefully enforced. What these mugshot sites do is really an act of blackmail and I would be more than happy to see them shutdown.

hamish11 said:

Interesting shit indeed! Gotta say I think those mugshot sites are scum of the earth, so good luck Justus. One thing, you probably should have used the word adversary instead of competitor. Competitor makes it sound like you are in the same business.

@jazzc - sometimes it's guys like justus, who have a cause, that get new laws written or existing laws more forcefully enforced. What these mugshot sites do is really an act of blackmail and I would be more than happy to see them shutdown.

Click to expand...

I appreciate the kind words. However, as I have written several times, it is more than just me. You are probably correct about the use of the word adversary.

Where this is relevant to the thread, though it began with a specific question of how to turn a perceived attack around on an attacker. What it evolved to was a showing of negative SEO on a level that many here have never even thought of. You have people producing video's with damning information and telephone calls. I have produced two videos myself showing the process that they use in live screen captures as I walked through the process. You have them using every smut site they can to harass and intimidate (and not just me). You also have them using half truths and propaganda (and some deep pockets) to promote their side. As said, you have negative SEO on a level that most do not even dream of and it is some serious junk. People think that Neg SEO is just what you can do online. It is far more than that, it is what you can do in peoples minds. At any rate....

everybody hates negative seo , karma is a ...

hamish11 said:

@jazzc - sometimes it's guys like justus, who have a cause, that get new laws written or existing laws more forcefully enforced. What these mugshot sites do is really an act of blackmail and I would be more than happy to see them shutdown.

Click to expand...

Mugshot sites are indeed blackmailers that pray on people. That 's indisputable.

What is important though is that once you go into the path that anyone can be a judge and a policeman, you 've abandoned democracy and are supporting chaos. And while in this case you applaud justus 's actions, what happens when some other vigilante decides for whatever reason that you are the scam of the earth and comes after you? Will he be at fault? Not by your standards, since you 've granted him the right to be a judge and a policeman.

What I am saying is that disputes must be handled within a generally accepted framework, which happens to be the democratic one - not the "I 'll take things in my hands because I believe it 's the right thing to do" one.

jazzc said:

Mugshot sites are indeed blackmailers that pray on people. That 's indisputable.

What is important though is that once you go into the path that anyone can be a judge and a policeman, you 've abandoned democracy and are supporting chaos. And while in this case you applaud justus 's actions, what happens when some other vigilante decides for whatever reason that you are the scam of the earth and comes after you? Will he be at fault? Not by your standards, since you 've granted him the right to be a judge and a policeman.

What I am saying is that disputes must be handled within a generally accepted framework, which happens to be the democratic one - not the "I 'll take things in my hands because I believe it 's the right thing to do" one.

Click to expand...

I agree with you to a point, but it can't always be that black and white on the internet. There is no accepted framework for monitoring and punishment on the internet. It's only the rich companies that throw money at a legal battle.

Sam Woods said:

I agree with you to a point, but it can't always be that black and white on the internet.

Click to expand...

The internet isn't a bubble in its own space. It 's not populated by aliens of Alpha Century.

The people are responsible by law for their actions. If I break some law of my country, it doesn't matter if I do it on the internet or in the town square. I am accountable. If I break a law of another country while being there, I am again accountable for my actions.

You think you are not accountable in the internet because you haven't done anything illegal that would bother someone to take measures against you

jazzc - I was referring to this part "To date, I and the others I work with have successfully passed anti mugshots legislation in Utah and Georgia. The legislation we had introduced in Florida has not passed this year, but will come up next year. We have also had legislation introduced in Texas that is still running through the process. We have also played roles in lawsuits in Ohio, Nebraska, and a few that are coming up that I cannot speak about at the time." Where Justus is working within the system to change things. As far as the neg seo goes, that is completely up to him as he is the victim since they used the tactics against him first. Since his advesaries used neg seo first, he has every right to throw some karma at them, although it may not me the best course, since it can become an ever escalating tit for tat situation. But is Justus supposed to just sit back and swallow it?

So, I guess the question is, if you jazzc were the victim of some heavy handed negative seo, what, if anything, would you do about it?

jazzc said:

The internet isn't a bubble in its own space. It 's not populated by aliens of Alpha Century.

The people are responsible by law for their actions. If I break some law of my country, it doesn't matter if I do it on the internet or in the town square. I am accountable. If I break a law of another country while being there, I am again accountable for my actions.

You think you are not accountable in the internet because you haven't done anything illegal that would bother someone to take measures against you

Click to expand...

What I'm saying is it's almost impossible to be held accountable in many situations unless you piss off the wrong people. It's the whole issue of which laws do we use? If we used all of them from every country the internet wouldn't be the place it is today. And then there's the problem of who's going to chase down every person who does anything wrong? (not just the ones who go against the big corps)

btw though I am with you on this, I just think it's a major unresolved issue.

hamish11 said:

So, I guess the question is, if you jazzc were the victim of some heavy handed negative seo, what, if anything, would you do about it?

Click to expand...

I would probably do something about it, if it mattered. But consciously. I wouldn't pretend to do this as a favor to humanity though

And if I broke the law in the process, I wouldn't try to justify my actions with that line of logic.

Here is my input to the previous five posts. As to whose law, or what internet law someone abides by is a huge issue in the European Union right now. There is some momentum to the the "Right to be forgotten." Every big data company that you have heard of such as Google, and many that you have never heard of are in the Eu. attempting to derail that initiative. By throwing money at the problem, as is done in the US, big data has delayed the issue for nine months ending in Sept. or Oct.

Big data believes that they have the right to all information about a person without regard to the accuracy of that information or the individuals permission to use that data. They further believe that they have the right to use that data in any way they choose and that they should be free from oversight. This is generally how the matter is currently addressed in the US. Is it right? I do not believe that it is. I believe that every person in the world has the right to control their information. This is part of the purpose of the Lanham Act. Someone may have your picture, information, etc., but unless you agree to allow the use of that information in writing, it is an actionable tort (if you can find someone to serve). 29 US states have encoded parts or all of the Lanham act (which also covers cybersquatting) into state law.

Here is where the problem comes in. Attorneys have to eat too. Attorneys are very expensive for this type of action, figure around $500,000 USD. Government attorneys are loath to take on this type of problem though they are violations of state law and federal law due to the reasons previously given. Additional reasons are the pockets of the companies behind this. I named one earlier, another one is Lexis-Nexis (yep, the legal publishers), you also have companies like ComCom. Bing was successfully sued in the EU for allowing negative content and it was not that long ago that Google lost the same issue in Au. In each case the affected SE lost 224,000 USD. Each company still indexes negative content. Why? Because there is more money to be made from indexing that content than will be lost in any court battle. Google has also had two of their executives arrested in Brazil. Facebook executives in Italy may be facing murder charges for allowing the cyber bullying of a teenage girl. Even if successful, it will not stop anything; any prosecution would probably fail.

Therefore, for all practical purposes the problem is unresolvable with in the framework of existing law. Since the problem is unresolvable within the current framework, there is no framework. Just look how many posts there are on "How do I bury..." So, my own position is, no matter how distasteful, you do what you need to.

Unsupported negative content should be abolished by making the content hosters (Webmasters) legally liable. Unfortunately this would require ending the safe haven of those providers in the US by ending section 520 of the Communications Decency Act. This would end web 2.0 as we know it. The alternative is to play hardball while seeking another way of addressing the problem. This is the seeking of legislation. But, legitimate methods are to increase their cost of business, public relations and propaganda campaigns, truthful exposure, hacktivism, and whatever else it takes.

Trust me on this, in two years of operating that single site I have made a grand total of $50. It is a major cost sink, not just for operation, which is minor, but the cost of paying for records requests, the hours researching the material written, tracking through private registrations and shell corporations, and much more than is let on here. I would love to be able to lay down and live my life. They will not allow that. they leave no option but to return fighting. Well fighting I know, and am friends with. I told them once to stop the crap, they intensified, did some really shady stuff, and started a battle. They probably should have read the "Art of War," the "Book of Five Rings," and "The Prince" before they started.

Each person must choose their own actions and how they handle it. This also means paying any consequence that result from their actions. The mugshot and other negative content websites choose their actions but are currently evading consequences for those actions outside of having to hide. You can be a footstool, or you can be proactive. But, for all practical purposes, there is no legal framework to work within.

You can restrict his IP via .htaccess and you good to go.

mmmm .. this popcorn is Mighty Fine.

The show is a big hit too!

Props to the OP for bringing this here. Rather enlightening.

One can only dream that the fucker running Rip***Rep*** gets it shoved back up his ASS * 1 billion. I know youre on a slightly different mission - but their ilk is pretty much all the same.

Anyhow - thanks for the thread and the info - learning a bunch.

That neg seo kw list is hilarious

marsmadness said:

Um, why are you indexing search results on your site? Did I understand that correctly? Those pages shouldn't be in any Search Engine index.

Click to expand...

Here I will make it easy for you large bright yellow letters do you no favor. You are yelling when you do that.

The rest of your post indicates that you have either not read what is in the thread, or that you do not understand what is in the thread.

I will not make friends with these people. Making friends with them would mean taking the site down. I have already included the link to a chain of email where they made their extortion demands. You may capitulate and choose to pay an extortionist, I wont. I will deal with the neg SEO and do what I choose to do.

How I choose to index searches is simply what I chose to do. You do not like what I choose to do, then do not do it yourself.

You go ahead and hire a fiver, I do my own work.

Great comments and feed back guys. Learned a couple new things by reading this thread. I hope you were able to resolve this neg. seo issue.