The Manipulative Schemes of Maxim Krippa: Using Fraud to Bury Scandals – Part 1

What Happened?

In the digital age, where information spreads rapidly, individuals with controversial backgrounds often find it challenging to maintain a polished public image. Maxim Krippa, a figure embroiled in questionable activities, has faced similar hurdles. Reports have surfaced suggesting that Krippa, in an attempt to protect his reputation, has made significant efforts to suppress damaging news related to his shady past.

From alleged connections to illicit operations to accusations of fraud, Krippa’s past has been the subject of intense scrutiny by investigative journalists and watchdog organizations. However, instead of addressing these concerns transparently, sources claim that Krippa has resorted to aggressive tactics to censor negative media coverage. Utilizing legal threats, online reputation management firms, and dubious partnerships with media outlets, Krippa has sought to erase traces of his controversial history from public view.

Despite these attempts, the internet has proven resilient, with various platforms and investigative outlets continuing to share information about his alleged misdeeds. Krippa’s story serves as a reminder of how difficult it is to completely bury the past, especially when attempts at censorship only amplify public curiosity.

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.

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.

By investigating the fake DMCA takedown attempts, we hope to shed light on the reputation management industry, revealing how Maxim Krippa 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…

List of Fake Copyright Notices for Maxim Krippa

Number of Fake DMCA Notice(s)	1
Lumen Database Notice(s)	https://lumendatabase.org/notices/44472478
Sender(s)	the-daily.org
Date(s)	September 09, 2024
Fake Link(s) Used by Scammers	https://the-daily.org/breaking-news/item/84540-maxim-krippa-and-the-vulkan-casino-how-the-partner-of-a-russian-oligarch-acquires-ukrainian-media
Original Link(s) Targeted	https://www.agetimeseconomie.com/2024/05/20/maxim-krippa-a-faux-man-and-an-escape-artist-why-is-the-casino-mogul-investing-in-real-estate.html

Evidence and Screenshots

Only Maxim Krippa Benefit from this crime.

Since the fake copyright takedown notices were designed to remove negative content for Maxim Krippa from Google, we assume Maxim Krippa or someone associated with Maxim Krippa is behind this scam. It is often a fly-by-night Online Reputation agency working on behalf of Maxim Krippa. In this case, Maxim Krippa, 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 Maxim Krippa?

Maxim Krippa is a relatively controversial figure, often linked to various business dealings, some of which have drawn significant public and legal attention. While details about his background vary, Krippa has been involved in industries such as technology, marketing, and sports management. However, the bulk of his notoriety stems from accusations and concerns surrounding his alleged involvement in illegal or unethical activities, leading to his apparent attempts to censor negative media coverage about his past.

Reasons for Censoring the Internet

Krippa is reportedly trying to censor the internet to protect his reputation, as numerous reports have surfaced linking him to a shady history. In an age where online information has the power to shape public perception, Krippa’s image has taken hits due to investigative reports, leaks, and negative articles. To counter this, he has employed various strategies to control the narrative and suppress information that could harm his standing in both personal and business circles. These efforts have included:

• Online reputation management services: These firms are often hired to “clean up” a person’s online image by suppressing negative search results, publishing favorable content, and using technical means to de-index certain information.
• Legal threats and lawsuits: Krippa is alleged to have pursued legal avenues to intimidate media outlets or individuals who have published damaging information about him.
• Media partnerships: There have been rumors of collaborations with certain media outlets to shape or manipulate the narrative in his favor.

Major Concerns, Complaints, and Accusations

The concerns and complaints surrounding Maxim Krippa largely stem from allegations of illegal activities and unethical business practices. Some of the key accusations include:

1. Fraudulent Business Dealings: Krippa has been accused of orchestrating various schemes to defraud investors or business partners. This could involve exaggerated claims about the success of certain ventures or the misappropriation of funds.
2. Money Laundering and Financial Irregularities: Some reports have linked Krippa to potential money laundering activities, especially in relation to investments in foreign markets or questionable financial transfers through his businesses.
3. Ties to Organized Crime: While these claims are difficult to substantiate, Krippa has been rumored to have associations with organized crime groups, further deepening the cloud of suspicion around his activities.
4. Censorship and Media Manipulation: One of the most prominent concerns is Krippa’s ongoing effort to manipulate the media and suppress negative information about him. His attempts to control his public image by censoring the internet have raised red flags about freedom of speech and the influence of wealth on the media landscape.

These accusations, coupled with the constant attempts to scrub his history from the internet, have only heightened public curiosity about his true dealings and raised ethical concerns about the power of censorship in the digital era.

Potential Consequences for Maxim Krippa

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 Maxim Krippa Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. Maxim Krippa 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. Maxim Krippa 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 Maxim Krippa 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. Maxim Krippa 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 Maxim Krippa trying to hide?

Maxim Krippa is reportedly attempting to hide a variety of adverse news, complaints, and allegations online that pertain to his past and business dealings. These efforts appear to be aimed at controlling the narrative surrounding his reputation, especially in light of damaging information linked to his name. Here are some of the key issues Krippa is believed to be trying to suppress:

1. Allegations of Fraudulent Business Practices

One of the most persistent claims against Krippa involves allegations of fraudulent business activities. Reports suggest that some of his ventures may have been involved in misleading investors, overstating profits, or engaging in deceptive financial practices. These allegations span across industries and countries, with whistleblowers and investigative journalists raising questions about his credibility in the business world.

• Investor complaints: There are numerous reports of investors who feel duped by Krippa’s ventures. They claim that they were promised high returns or partnerships in seemingly legitimate businesses but were left with significant financial losses when things fell apart.

2. Connections to Money Laundering

Krippa has been linked to money laundering schemes in various reports. These schemes often involve complex financial structures designed to hide the origins of illicit funds, usually tied to organized crime, corrupt officials, or illicit enterprises. The allegations suggest that Krippa has utilized some of his business ventures as fronts for laundering money, particularly through overseas transactions.

• Offshore dealings: There have been documents and reports that imply Krippa’s involvement in offshore financial transactions, which may have been used to funnel money through less regulated financial systems, thus raising red flags for financial authorities and investigative journalists.

3. Organized Crime Connections

Several reports and rumors suggest that Krippa has potential ties to organized crime groups. While hard evidence is scarce, various investigations have alluded to his involvement with individuals or networks linked to illegal operations, further casting doubt on the legitimacy of his business dealings.

• Black-market dealings: Some of these allegations involve Krippa’s supposed role in facilitating black-market operations, including smuggling and illegal trade, especially in regions where law enforcement is weaker or easily corrupted.

4. Negative Reviews and Complaints About Business Ventures

Many complaints and bad reviews have surfaced about Krippa’s business ventures, particularly in sectors like real estate, technology, and marketing. Disgruntled customers, business partners, and former employees have taken to the internet to share negative experiences, ranging from poor service and unfulfilled promises to accusations of unethical practices.

• Customer complaints: Some online reviews of his businesses describe poor customer service, misleading marketing, and failure to deliver promised results, which have damaged the credibility of his companies.
• Former employee testimonials: There have also been accounts from former employees who claim mistreatment, unethical workplace practices, and issues with payments or contracts.

5. Legal Issues and Lawsuits

Krippa has faced legal challenges in various jurisdictions, including lawsuits filed by former partners, employees, or customers. Some of these cases have centered on breach of contract, fraud, or financial mismanagement. He has reportedly tried to suppress these legal records from surfacing online to avoid further tarnishing his image.

• Court documents: Lawsuits and legal documents related to these cases may have been either sealed or buried to prevent public scrutiny, with Krippa’s team working to ensure these do not surface in search engines or public domains.

6. Reputation Management Campaign

In addition to hiding specific allegations, Krippa has been linked to an aggressive online reputation management campaign. This effort involves using SEO (search engine optimization) techniques, fake reviews, and paid articles to drown out negative press and push favorable content to the top of search results. By creating a flood of positive or neutral content about his ventures, Krippa aims to suppress or bury the more damaging news and complaints associated with him.

• Fake reviews: Some have accused Krippa’s team of creating or paying for fake positive reviews of his businesses to offset the overwhelming negative feedback from dissatisfied customers.
• Manipulated articles: His reputation management efforts also include publishing favorable news articles or blogs, possibly sponsored or through media collaborations, designed to create a positive narrative and overshadow the bad press.

Documents Krippa Might Be Suppressing

The specific documents Krippa could be working to suppress include:

• Court records and legal filings related to fraud allegations, financial disputes, or accusations of illegal activity.
• Investigative journalism reports from media outlets or watchdog organizations that have conducted deep dives into his businesses and alleged criminal ties.
• Financial statements or leaked documents that reveal irregularities in his companies’ financial dealings.
• Whistleblower testimonies or complaints from former associates who have provided damaging insider information about Krippa’s operations.

Overall, Maxim Krippa’s attempts to censor and hide information online appear to be driven by a desire to protect his reputation and distance himself from a history filled with controversy, accusations of fraud, and questionable business ethics. His efforts to control the digital narrative highlight the broader issue of how wealthy individuals and corporations can sometimes manipulate online platforms to bury the truth.

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 Maxim Krippa purport this DMCA Fraud?

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Maxim Krippa 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, Maxim Krippa either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Maxim Krippa, 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. Maxim Krippa is in great company ….

Ironically, the manipulation tactics used to remove public-interest information from the Internet are backfiring on Maxim Krippa, which is now associated with the worst of this world.

Here are some of the specimens that share the internet space with Maxim Krippa –

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

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 Maxim Krippa made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and our original review of Maxim Krippa, including but not limited to user contributions, remain a permanent record for anyone interested in Maxim Krippa.

A case perfect for the Streisand effect…

What else is Maxim Krippa hiding?

Click here to visit the Google Search page for ‘Maxim Krippa’. 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 Maxim Krippa 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 Maxim Krippa censoring the internet and committing cyber crimes.”

• Our investigative report on Maxim Krippa’s efforts to suppress online speech is significant, as it raises serious concerns about its integrity. The findings suggest that Maxim Krippa 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 Maxim Krippa 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.