Jon Mac at CommerceHQ

A summary of what happened?

Jon Mac is an entrepreneur known for founding CommerceHQ, a platform aimed at enabling individuals to create and scale e-commerce businesses. CommerceHQ markets itself as a tool for simplifying the process of setting up online stores, but it has faced criticism from users.

Three major concerns, complaints, and accusations against Jon Mac, as reflected in user feedback and reviews, include:

1. Misleading Advertising: Some users claim that CommerceHQ’s marketing overpromises success, making it seem like anyone can easily build a profitable store. The reality, they argue, is far more complex, and the platform does not always deliver the results that are advertised. Users have expressed frustration with what they feel are inflated claims about the simplicity and profitability of using the service.
2. Technical Problems and Platform Performance: A significant number of complaints focus on the technical side of CommerceHQ, citing software bugs, performance issues, and missing features. These problems can cause disruptions for business owners who rely on the platform for their stores. For an e-commerce platform, reliability is critical, and when it fails, it can result in lost sales and revenue.
3. Poor Customer Service: Another common issue involves dissatisfaction with customer support. Users have shared their experiences of receiving little to no help when encountering problems with the platform. In some cases, customer service is reported to be unresponsive or slow, which only compounds the frustration for those trying to resolve urgent issues affecting their businesses.

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 Jon Mac at CommerceHQ trying to hide?

Jon Mac at CommerceHQ‘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 Jon Mac at CommerceHQ in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Jon Mac at CommerceHQ may be trying to remove from the internet –

Jon Mac, the founder of CommerceHQ, has faced a number of complaints and criticisms, particularly from users who feel they were misled by the platform’s promises or have encountered issues after purchasing the service. CommerceHQ markets itself as an easy-to-use tool for creating successful e-commerce businesses, but reviews on platforms like Trustpilot and Reddit highlight various problems users have experienced.

Common Complaints Against CommerceHQ and Jon Mac

1. Misleading Claims and Advertising
   A significant portion of the negative feedback stems from the perception that CommerceHQ, under Jon Mac’s leadership, oversells its potential. Many users sign up for the platform with high expectations after seeing advertisements promising quick success, easy store setup, and high profits. These promises often resonate with aspiring entrepreneurs, but for many, the reality does not match up. Users report that achieving success on the platform is far more complex and difficult than advertised. Some have expressed feeling misled by marketing materials that suggest a fast track to financial freedom. This type of complaint often characterizes platforms targeting beginners in the e-commerce space.
2. Technical and Performance Issues
   Another major concern is the platform’s technical performance. Users have reported various bugs, missing features, and other issues that disrupt their business operations. When you’re running an e-commerce business, even minor technical glitches can have a significant impact on sales, and consistent platform problems can lead to customer dissatisfaction. Some users have noted that the promised functionality isn’t always delivered, which leaves them feeling frustrated after investing time and money into the platform. These complaints often involve the claim that CommerceHQ does not provide the robust functionality that Jon Mac’s advertisements suggest.
3. Poor Customer Service
   A recurring theme in the negative reviews is dissatisfaction with customer service. Users have shared experiences of reaching out to CommerceHQ’s support team only to receive slow or no responses. For those facing critical issues with their stores, this lack of responsiveness can have a direct impact on their businesses, leading to loss of sales or other operational problems. In some cases, users report that their questions were either ignored or handled poorly, adding to the frustration of dealing with platform issues. This type of complaint is particularly problematic for a service like CommerceHQ, where users expect reliable support for technical and operational challenges.
4. High Costs and Upselling
   Some users have also expressed frustration over the costs associated with CommerceHQ, especially in relation to the value they receive. There are complaints that, beyond the initial sign-up costs, there is constant upselling of additional services or features. This creates a sense that the platform is more focused on extracting money from its users than delivering a valuable and functional service. People feel that they are paying too much for features that either don’t work as promised or require additional payment for upgrades.

Allegations of Unethical Business Practices

On forums like Reddit, some users have shared stories of feeling “scammed” or tricked into spending money on a service that doesn’t deliver what it promises. In one particular Reddit post titled “Today I was the idiot who fell to an eCommerce scam,” the user describes their negative experience with an e-commerce platform, which could be interpreted as a reflection of frustration with platforms like CommerceHQ. These kinds of posts contribute to the perception that Jon Mac’s platform is engaging in deceptive or unethical practices by leading users to believe that success is easily achievable when, in fact, it’s far more complicated.

Negative Reviews and Public Backlash

Looking at public reviews on Trustpilot and similar platforms, it’s clear that there is a segment of CommerceHQ users who feel let down by the platform. On Trustpilot, many 1-star reviews echo the concerns mentioned above, particularly the misleading nature of the advertising, technical shortcomings, and poor customer support. These complaints are crucial because they paint a picture of a service that, for some, fails to live up to its promises and leaves users feeling frustrated, misled, and out of pocket.

Summary of Key Issues

• Inflated marketing promises that don’t align with the actual complexity of building a successful e-commerce store.
• Technical issues such as software bugs, poor platform performance, and missing functionality.
• Customer support that is unresponsive or slow, especially when users face urgent problems.
• High costs and upselling for features or services that users feel should be included or better supported.
• Allegations of unethical business practices related to misleading users about potential success on the platform.

For a deeper understanding of these complaints, you can visit Trustpilot reviews or read about user experiences on forums like Reddit.

While there are success stories from users of CommerceHQ, the negative feedback suggests that prospective customers should approach the platform with caution, doing thorough research before committing to it. This will help them better understand what they are signing up for and manage their expectations about the platform’s potential and support.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

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

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

Potential Consequences for Jon Mac at CommerceHQ

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 Jon Mac at CommerceHQ Committing a Cyber Crime?

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

What else is Jon Mac at CommerceHQ hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Jon Mac at CommerceHQ] + {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 Jon Mac at CommerceHQ 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.