We are investigating FX Global for allegedly attempting to conceal critical reviews and adverse news from Google by improperly submitting copyright takedown notices. This includes potential violations such as impersonation, fraud, and perjury.
FXGlobal was a forex and CFD broker operating under the umbrella of Goldenburg Group Limited, a company authorized by the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC) with license number 242/14. The broker offered trading services in currency pairs, precious metals, and various CFDs through platforms like xStation and MetaTrader 4.
FXGlobal has ceased its operations and no longer provides services to clients. This termination of services has raised concerns among former clients regarding the status of their accounts and funds.
Regulatory Status:
While FXGlobal operated un of CySEC through its parent company, Goldenburg Group Limited, the cessation of its services has led to questions about its compliance and regulatory standing during its operational period.
Client Communication:
There have been reports of inadequate communication from FXGlobal regarding its shutdown, leaving clients uncertain about the retrieval of their investments and the process for addressing grievances.
Recommendations for Affected Clients:
Contact the Parent Company: Clients should reach out directly to Goldenburg Group Limited to inquire about account closures, fund withdrawals, and any other concerns arising from FXGlobal’s cessation.
Consult Regulatory Authorities: Engaging with CySEC can provide guidance on the appropriate steps to take and offer information on any available recourse mechanisms.
Seek Legal Advice: If issues remain unresolved, consulting with legal professionals experienced in financial services can help in understanding and pursuing available options.
The abrupt discontinuation of FXGlobal’s services has left clients facing uncertainties regarding their investments. Proactive engagement with the parent company and relevant regulatory bodies is crucial to address these concerns and to seek resolution.
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.
FX Global‘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 FX Global in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information FX Global may be trying to remove from the internet –
Investigative Report: FXGlobal – Allegations, Complaints, and Regulatory Scrutiny
Overview: FXGlobal, a forex and CFD broker, operated under the umbrella of Goldenburg Group Limited, a Cyprus-based financial services provider regulated by the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC). Promising access to a variety of trading instruments, including forex, commodities, and CFDs, FXGlobal targeted retail investors seeking opportunities in financial markets. However, the broker’s abrupt cessation of operations, combined with a history of complaints, allegations of unethical practices, and regulatory scrutiny, has tarnished its reputation.
This investigation explores the adverse news, client grievances, and regulatory concerns surrounding FXGlobal, shedding light on its operational history and the broader implications for its clients.
1. Background and Operational History
FXGlobal operated as one of several trading brands under Goldenburg Group Limited, a financial services provider headquartered in Cyprus. As a CySEC-regulated entity, Goldenburg was bound by the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II (MiFID II), which sets high standards for transparency, client protection, and operational integrity.
Services Offered by FXGlobal:
Trading Instruments: FXGlobal provided access to forex pairs, precious metals like gold and silver, stock CFDs, and indices.
Trading Platforms: Clients traded on industry-standard platforms like MetaTrader 4 (MT4) and xStation, known for their advanced analytical tools.
Target Audience: The broker targeted retail traders across Europe and beyond, leveraging CySEC’s regulatory framework to offer services in multiple jurisdictions.
Cessation of Operations:
FXGlobal abruptly shut down its services, raising concerns among clients about the status of their investments. The lack of clear communication and failure to assist clients in withdrawing funds exacerbated these concerns.
2. Allegations and Complaints Against FXGlobal
While operational, FXGlobal faced a barrage of complaints and allegations, ranging from unethical business practices to issues with fund management.
a. Abrupt Cessation Without Client Communication
The broker ceased operations without prior notice, leaving clients confused about the process for account closures and fund withdrawals.
Many clients reported that customer support became unresponsive during this period, fueling speculation about financial mismanagement or insolvency.
b. Aggressive Sales and Marketing Tactics
FXGlobal’s sales representatives allegedly used high-pressure tactics to persuade clients to deposit larger amounts:
Promises of high returns were reportedly exaggerated to entice deposits.
Some clients claimed they were urged to increase their trading volumes or invest additional funds, often under the pretext of recovering previous losses.
c. Withdrawal Delays and Non-Payment of Funds
One of the most common complaints was the broker’s refusal or significant delays in processing withdrawal requests:
Clients reported waiting weeks or months for withdrawals, with some stating they never received their funds.
Inadequate communication regarding withdrawal policies compounded these grievances.
d. Poor Customer Support
Many clients expressed dissatisfaction with FXGlobal’s customer support:
Delayed or generic responses to inquiries.
Unresolved issues related to fund recovery or account closures.
e. Conflict of Interest Allegations
Some traders accused FXGlobal of employing tactics to ensure clients lost trades, suggesting conflicts of interest:
Allegations included manipulation of spreads, slippage during high-volatility periods, and execution delays, all of which could negatively impact a trader’s profitability.
3. Regulatory Concerns and Sanctions
FXGlobal’s parent company, Goldenburg Group Limited, faced scrutiny and regulatory actions during its operation. These issues have cast doubt on FXGlobal’s adherence to CySEC regulations.
Goldenburg Group’s Regulatory Challenges:
Fines and Warnings: In 2021, CySEC imposed a fine of €270,000 on Goldenburg Group Limited for regulatory violations. These included:
Failure to adequately assess client suitability.
Providing misleading information about risks and potential returns.
Inadequate safeguarding of client funds.
Compliance Failures: Regulatory investigations found that the company’s practices fell short of MiFID II standards, particularly regarding transparency and risk disclosure.
Impact on FXGlobal:
As a brand under Goldenburg, FXGlobal’s reputation was directly affected by the regulatory actions against its parent company.
Clients questioned the broker’s operational integrity and its ability to provide a safe trading environment.
4. Online Reviews and Public Perception
FXGlobal received mixed reviews on various online platforms, with a significant portion of negative feedback highlighting systemic issues.
Common Complaints in Reviews:
Withdrawal Problems: Traders reported difficulties accessing their funds, citing delayed or denied withdrawal requests.
Aggressive Sales Practices: Many reviews described high-pressure tactics to upsell trading packages or encourage larger deposits.
Lack of Transparency: Clients criticized the broker for unclear policies, especially regarding fees and fund withdrawal procedures.
Positive Reviews:
Some clients praised the platform’s user-friendly interface and the variety of trading instruments available.
However, these positive reviews were often overshadowed by complaints about unethical practices and poor customer service.
5. Broader Implications for Retail Investors
The case of FXGlobal underscores critical challenges in the retail trading industry:
a. Risks Associated with Offshore Brokers
FXGlobal’s reliance on its CySEC license to target clients across Europe highlights the need for stricter oversight of cross-border financial services.
While CySEC is a recognized regulator, its enforcement of MiFID II standards has faced criticism, particularly in cases involving multiple trading brands under one umbrella company.
b. Importance of Transparency
FXGlobal’s lack of clear communication during its operational shutdown left clients vulnerable and uncertain about their investments.
This emphasizes the importance of transparency and robust communication channels in building trust with clients.
6. Recommendations for Affected Clients
Contact the Parent Company:
Clients should reach out to Goldenburg Group Limited for assistance with account closures, fund withdrawals, and other concerns.
File a Complaint with CySEC:
Affected clients can file formal complaints with CySEC to seek regulatory intervention or guidance on recovering funds.
Seek Legal Advice:
Legal professionals specializing in financial services can help clients explore options for compensation or legal action against the broker or its parent company.
Use Financial Ombudsman Services:
The Cyprus Financial Ombudsman may provide an additional avenue for clients seeking to resolve disputes with FXGlobal.
Conclusion:
FXGlobal’s history is marked by complaints of unethical practices, withdrawal issues, and a sudden cessation of operations that left clients in limbo. Despite being regulated under CySEC, its parent company, Goldenburg Group Limited, faced significant regulatory scrutiny, raising questions about FXGlobal’s compliance with investor protection standards.
The case highlights the importance of transparency, effective regulation, and client protection in the retail trading industry. For investors, it serves as a cautionary tale about the risks of engaging with brokers that lack robust operational and regulatory safeguards. Clients are urged to remain vigilant, conduct thorough research, and prioritize brokers with proven track records of integrity and compliance.
How do we counteract this malpractice?
Once we ascertain the involvement of FX Global (or actors working on behalf of FX Global), we will inform FX Global of our findings via Electronic Mail.
Our preliminary assessment suggests that FX Global may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from FX Global, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to FX Global 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 –
By investigating the fake DMCA takedown attempts, we hope to shed light on the reputation management industry, revealing how FX Global 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…
Since FX Global 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 FX Global is finding out the hard way.
Potential Consequences for FX Global
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 FX Global Committing a Cyber Crime?
Yes, it seems so. FX Global 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. FX Global 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 FX Global 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. FX Global 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 FX Global 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, FX Global either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about FX Global, 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. FX Global is in great company ….
What else is FX Global hiding?
We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [FX Global] + {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 FX Global 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.
Authorities we may contact and share this report with for further actions
GOOGLE LEGAL HEAD
Halimah DeLaine Prado
NEWS DESK
Washington Post & NY Times
The above decision-makers and authorities will be provided a comprehensive dossier of our findings, including anonymously submitted evidence and tips. We invite journalists to contact us to receive a copy of our complete investigation here
Credits and Acknowledgement
16/10/2024
Many thanks to FakeDMCA.com and Lumen for providing access to their database.
Photos and Illustrations provided by DALL-E 3 – “a representation of FX Global censoring the internet and committing cyber crimes.”
We’ve reached out to FX Global for a comment or rebuttal regarding this investigation. It will strongly suggest they were behind the takedown attempt if they remain silent.
Our investigative report on FX Global‘s efforts to suppress online speech is significant, as it raises serious concerns about its integrity. The findings suggest that FX Global 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 FX Global 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
16/10/2024
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.
0/5
Based on 0 ratings