Dr. Duane F. Austin

A summary of what happened?

Dr. Duane F. Austin is a medical professional who has faced significant controversy over his practice, particularly due to allegations of medical malpractice and unethical behavior in suppressing negative information online.

Here are three major concerns and accusations against Dr. Duane F. Austin:

1. Substandard Surgical Practices: Dr. Austin has been accused of performing surgeries that did not meet medical standards, resulting in poor patient outcomes. Numerous patient complaints and malpractice claims have been filed against him, leading to regulatory scrutiny from state medical boards and ongoing investigations into his practice.
2. Efforts to Censor Negative Information: Dr. Austin has reportedly attempted to suppress negative reviews and news articles about his professional conduct. This includes using fraudulent DMCA notices to remove damaging online content, which raises concerns about transparency and accountability in his efforts to manage his reputation.
3. Regulatory Fines and Scrutiny: Besides the malpractice claims, Dr. Austin has faced fines and regulatory action due to his substandard care. The Connecticut Department of Public Health has been closely monitoring his practice, and his attempts to censor negative information have drawn even more attention to his conduct.

These issues have led to growing distrust in his practice and ongoing legal challenges, significantly impacting his reputation within the medical community.

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 Dr. Duane F. Austin trying to hide?

Dr. Duane F. Austin‘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 Dr. Duane F. Austin in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Dr. Duane F. Austin may be trying to remove from the internet –

Here are up to 10 adverse news items, allegations, lawsuits, sanctions, complaints, and negative reviews related to Dr. Duane F. Austin:

1. Medical Malpractice Allegations: Dr. Austin has faced multiple medical malpractice claims, from accusations of substandard surgical practices that allegedly resulted in poor patient outcomes. These incidents have led to many patient complaints and investigations into his conduct.
2. Regulatory Fines: The Connecticut Department of Public Health has fined Dr. Austin for violating medical standards. These fines were imposed following investigations into the quality of care provided at his practice.
3. Patient Complaints of Subpar Care: Numerous patients have publicly complained about the quality of care they received from Dr. Austin, with several alleging that his negligence led to long-term medical issues. These complaints have contributed to the erosion of trust in his practice.
4. Suppression of Negative Reviews: Dr. Austin has allegedly tried to suppress negative online reviews, including utilizing fraudulent DMCA takedown requests to remove critical articles and reviews about his practice. This has raised questions about his commitment to transparency and accountability.
5. Legal Threats to Silence Critics: There have been reports that Dr. Austin or his legal representatives have used legal threats to intimidate patients and critics who have spoken out against him. These tactics have been viewed as an attempt to control the narrative surrounding his practice.
6. Failed Reputation Management Efforts: Dr. Austin’s attempts to remove negative information about him from the internet have drawn even more attention to the controversy, resulting in what is known as the “Streisand Effect,” where efforts to hide something only make it more prominent.
7. Ongoing Regulatory Scrutiny: Due to the severity of the complaints and malpractice allegations, Dr. Austin continues to be closely monitored by medical licensing and regulatory boards. His professional conduct and medical standards are being monitored for further violations.
8. Perjury Allegations Related to Censorship Attempts: There are accusations that Dr. Austin may have committed perjury by falsely filing DMCA claims to remove content, a potential legal issue that could add to his existing troubles.
9. Negative Professional Reputation: Due to the accumulation of malpractice claims, regulatory action, and online criticism, Dr. Austin’s professional reputation has been severely damaged. This has led to a decrease in patient trust and increased public scrutiny.
10. Impact on Patient Trust: The numerous complaints and attempts to suppress critical information have resulted in a significant loss of trust from patients and the general public, making it difficult for Dr. Austin to restore his credibility within the medical community.

These incidents have contributed to Dr. Duane F. Austin’s ongoing legal and professional challenges, significantly impacting his career and reputation.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

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

Our preliminary assessment suggests that Dr. Duane F. Austin may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Dr. Duane F. Austin, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Dr. Duane F. Austin 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 Dr. Duane F. Austin 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 Dr. Duane F. Austin is finding out the hard way.

Potential Consequences for Dr. Duane F. Austin

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 Dr. Duane F. Austin Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. Dr. Duane F. Austin 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. Dr. Duane F. Austin 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 Dr. Duane F. Austin 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. Dr. Duane F. Austin 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 Dr. Duane F. Austin 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, Dr. Duane F. Austin either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Dr. Duane F. Austin, 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. Dr. Duane F. Austin is in great company ….

What else is Dr. Duane F. Austin hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Dr. Duane F. Austin] + {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 Dr. Duane F. Austin 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.