DigitalEuroMarket

A summary of what happened?

DigitalEuroMarket is an online forex broker that has attracted significant criticism and allegations of fraudulent activities. Several reviews and reports have raised concerns about the company’s legitimacy and business practices.

Major Concerns and Complaints:

1. Lack of Regulation:
   • DigitalEuroMarket operates without oversight from any recognized regulatory authority, a major red flag in the financial industry. This absence of regulation means clients lack protection and have limited recourse in disputes.
     Personal Reviews
2. Association with Dubious Services:
   • The company collaborates with platforms offering “Automated trading software,” which are often linked to scams. This association raises further doubts about DigitalEuroMarket’s credibility.
     Personal Reviews
3. Aggressive and Misleading Sales Tactics:
   • Reports indicate that DigitalEuroMarket employs aggressive sales strategies, including unsolicited calls promising unrealistic returns and offers that seem too good to be true, such as doubling initial deposits.
     Personal Reviews
4. Difficulties with Fund Withdrawals:
   • Clients have reported significant challenges in withdrawing funds, with delays extending for months. Some allege that the company uses stalling tactics to prevent chargebacks, effectively trapping clients’ money.
     Personal Reviews
5. Potential for Financial Loss:
   • Due to its unregulated status and questionable practices, there is a high risk that clients may lose their investments without any means of recovery.
     Personal Reviews

In summary, DigitalEuroMarket exhibits several warning signs commonly associated with fraudulent brokers, including lack of regulation, associations with dubious services, aggressive sales tactics, and withdrawal issues. Potential investors are strongly advised to exercise caution and consider these factors before engaging with the company.

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.

What was DigitalEuroMarket trying to hide?

DigitalEuroMarket‘s attempts to hide unfavourable content through the misuse of copyright notices while allegedly engaging in perjury present serious legal concerns. These actions suggest a calculated attempt to manipulate legal systems to suppress free speech, a fundamental violation of copyright law principles and an abuse of legal processes. The use of such tactics not only undermines the integrity of copyright protection but also potentially constitutes perjury, further entangling DigitalEuroMarket in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information DigitalEuroMarket may be trying to remove from the internet –

Investigative Report: DigitalEuroMarket – A Deep Dive into Allegations and Complaints

Introduction

DigitalEuroMarket, an online forex broker, has garnered significant attention due to numerous complaints, allegations of fraudulent practices, and customer dissatisfaction. Operating in the highly competitive and regulated forex market, the company’s lack of transparency and regulatory oversight has raised red flags. This investigative report delves into the core allegations and concerns surrounding DigitalEuroMarket, examining the patterns of behavior that have led to its tarnished reputation.

1. Lack of Regulatory Oversight

One of the most critical issues with DigitalEuroMarket is its unregulated status:

• No Recognized Licensing: Unlike legitimate brokers that operate under regulatory bodies like the FCA (UK), CySEC (Cyprus), or ASIC (Australia), DigitalEuroMarket has no known affiliation with any regulatory authority.
• Risks of Unregulated Brokers: Without regulation, customers lack basic protections such as segregated accounts, dispute resolution mechanisms, or guarantees against mismanagement of funds.

Expert Commentary: “Regulation is the backbone of trust in financial markets. DigitalEuroMarket’s unregulated status should be an immediate warning to potential investors,” said a financial expert from a compliance organization.

2. Aggressive and Misleading Sales Tactics

DigitalEuroMarket has been repeatedly accused of employing unethical sales strategies to lure unsuspecting clients:

• Unsolicited Calls: Customers have reported receiving persistent and aggressive cold calls from the company, urging them to invest quickly to “capitalize on time-sensitive opportunities.”
• Unrealistic Promises:
  • Sales agents allegedly claim that clients can double or triple their initial investments in a short time.
  • Testimonials featuring improbable success stories are used to build a false sense of trust.
• High-Pressure Tactics:
  • Potential investors are pressured into making immediate decisions without the opportunity to conduct due diligence.
  • Agents reportedly suggest that delays in investing could result in “lost opportunities.”

Impact on Clients: Many victims, particularly inexperienced investors, have been persuaded to invest significant sums under false pretenses, often leading to financial losses.

3. Associations with Questionable Services

DigitalEuroMarket is reportedly linked to platforms offering “automated trading software,” a common tool used in fraudulent schemes:

• Unproven Technology: The company promotes software that purportedly generates substantial profits through algorithmic trading, but many clients report losing money instead.
• Lack of Transparency:
  • Clients are not given access to the trading strategies or algorithms used by the software.
  • There is no verification of the claimed success rates.

Red Flags:

• Automated trading services are often a hallmark of scam brokers, as they provide a pretext for brokers to justify losses or obscure transactions.

4. Withdrawal Issues

Difficulties with withdrawing funds are among the most severe allegations against DigitalEuroMarket:

• Delayed Withdrawals:
  • Clients report waiting months to access their funds, with no clear communication from the company.
• Stalling Tactics:
  • In some cases, clients are asked to provide additional documentation or pay “processing fees,” which further delays withdrawals.
• Blocked Withdrawals:
  • Customers allege that their accounts were frozen or closed entirely after attempting to withdraw funds.
  • This effectively locks their money within the platform, leaving them with little recourse.

Testimonial: A former client shared, “I deposited €5,000, and when I requested a withdrawal, they asked for endless verification documents. Eventually, they stopped responding altogether.”

5. Risk of Total Financial Loss

DigitalEuroMarket’s practices pose a significant risk of financial loss for clients:

• Unclear Fund Allocation:
  • Clients have no visibility into how their funds are being used or traded.
  • There is no assurance that client deposits are segregated from the company’s operating funds.
• Involuntary Account Closures:
  • Several clients have reported that their accounts were closed without explanation, with their funds unrecoverable.

Analysis: The combination of unregulated operations, aggressive sales tactics, and withdrawal challenges creates a high-risk environment where clients are more likely to lose their investments.

6. Customer Complaints and Negative Reviews

Online forums and review platforms are rife with complaints against DigitalEuroMarket:

• Scam Accusations:
  • Clients frequently describe DigitalEuroMarket as a scam, citing lost funds, poor communication, and unethical practices.
• Fake Reviews:
  • The company has been accused of posting fabricated positive reviews to counteract genuine negative feedback.
  • These reviews often lack detail or appear overly generic.

Insights from Personal-Reviews.com:

• In a detailed review, the platform labeled DigitalEuroMarket a scam, warning potential clients about its unregulated status and predatory behavior.

7. No Legal Accountability

DigitalEuroMarket’s operational model leaves clients with little legal recourse:

• Offshore Registration: The company appears to operate from jurisdictions with lenient financial oversight, making it difficult to hold it accountable.
• No Consumer Protection:
  • Clients have no access to compensation schemes or regulatory dispute mechanisms.
  • In the event of fraud, recovering funds is almost impossible.

8. The Bigger Picture: Pattern of Fraudulent Practices

DigitalEuroMarket exhibits many hallmarks of fraudulent brokers:

• Unverified Success Claims: The company’s claims of guaranteed returns are unsubstantiated and misleading.
• Opaque Operations: There is minimal information about the company’s leadership, location, or financial practices.
• Reliance on Inexperience: The company appears to target novice investors who may not recognize the red flags associated with unregulated brokers.

Expert Opinion: “DigitalEuroMarket is a textbook example of a high-risk, unregulated broker preying on vulnerable investors. Without regulatory oversight, clients are essentially gambling with their money,” said a financial fraud investigator.

Conclusion

DigitalEuroMarket presents a significant risk to investors due to its unregulated status, unethical sales tactics, withdrawal difficulties, and association with questionable trading tools. The combination of these factors has led to widespread allegations of fraudulent activity, eroding any trust in the company.

Key Findings

1. Unregulated Status: Operating without regulatory oversight puts clients at substantial risk.
2. Aggressive Marketing: Misleading promises and high-pressure sales tactics are central to its client acquisition strategy.
3. Withdrawal Issues: Clients face prolonged delays or outright denial of access to their funds.
4. High Risk of Financial Loss: The lack of transparency and accountability heightens the likelihood of losing investments.
5. Damaged Reputation: Persistent negative reviews and scam allegations undermine the company’s credibility.

Recommendations for Investors

• Avoid Unregulated Brokers: Always verify a broker’s regulatory status with recognized financial authorities.
• Conduct Thorough Research: Check independent reviews and client testimonials before investing.
• Report Suspicious Activity: Victims should report issues to financial regulators or consumer protection agencies in their jurisdiction.

DigitalEuroMarket’s practices serve as a cautionary tale for investors. The company’s questionable methods highlight the importance of vigilance and due diligence when navigating the forex market. Potential clients are strongly advised to steer clear of this broker and seek out reputable, regulated alternatives.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

Once we ascertain the involvement of DigitalEuroMarket (or actors working on behalf of DigitalEuroMarket), we will inform DigitalEuroMarket of our findings via Electronic Mail.

Our preliminary assessment suggests that DigitalEuroMarket may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from DigitalEuroMarket, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to DigitalEuroMarket 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 –

Since DigitalEuroMarket made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and sensitive information targeted online by these events get a lot more exposure and traffic than what it would have received originally

We hope this becomes an excellent case study for 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, which DigitalEuroMarket is finding out the hard way.

Potential Consequences for DigitalEuroMarket

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 DigitalEuroMarket Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. DigitalEuroMarket 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. DigitalEuroMarket 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 DigitalEuroMarket 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. DigitalEuroMarket 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.

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by DigitalEuroMarket 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, DigitalEuroMarket either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about DigitalEuroMarket, ignorance does not excuse this wrongdoing.

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. FSMSmart is certainly keeping interesting company here.

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.

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. DigitalEuroMarket is in great company ….

What else is DigitalEuroMarket hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [DigitalEuroMarket] + {Negative Keyword, such as Scam, Fraud, Complaints, Lawsuit, Sanction, etc} on Google. 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 industry experts and researchers. If you have any information on DigitalEuroMarket that you want to share with experts and journalists, 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.