Laetitude

A summary of what happened?

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 Laetitude trying to hide?

Laetitude‘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 Laetitude in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Laetitude may be trying to remove from the internet –

Investigative Report: Laetitude – Allegations, Complaints, and Scrutiny

Overview: Laetitude is a multi-level marketing (MLM) company based in Dubai that offers cryptocurrency trading bots and investment opportunities. Launched in 2021, the company markets itself as a platform to help individuals grow wealth through automated trading and recruitment incentives. However, it has faced significant criticism and allegations of fraudulent activities, with many describing its business model as a Ponzi scheme.

This report provides an in-depth investigation into the controversies surrounding Laetitude, exploring its operations, leadership, complaints, and broader implications for potential investors.

1. Founders and Leadership

David El Dib – Founder and CEO

• David El Dib, one of the key figures behind Laetitude, has a controversial history in the cryptocurrency and MLM sectors.
• He has been associated with the BitClub Network, a notorious Ponzi scheme that defrauded investors of over $722 million. His role as a promoter in BitClub Network raised immediate concerns about his credibility and intentions with Laetitude.

Stefan Stumpf – International Leader

• Stumpf is another prominent figure within Laetitude and has also been linked to the BitClub Network. His involvement in a previous fraudulent operation adds to skepticism about Laetitude’s leadership.

Ties to BitClub Network

• Both El Dib and Stumpf were involved in promoting the BitClub Network, which used a similar MLM structure to recruit investors, promising returns through cryptocurrency mining that never materialized. These connections have led to allegations that Laetitude is merely a rebranded continuation of past fraudulent ventures.

2. Business Model and Operations

Laetitude markets its services as cryptocurrency investment opportunities facilitated by automated trading bots. The company’s operations include:

Membership Packages

• Laetitude offers various membership tiers, ranging from $500 to $3,700, with corresponding investment limits up to $50,000.
• These memberships grant access to trading bots that allegedly generate profits by analyzing cryptocurrency markets.

MLM Structure

• The company relies heavily on a multi-level marketing (MLM) model, incentivizing affiliates to recruit new members.
• Affiliates earn commissions for each new recruit, along with residual income from a binary team structure, a common feature in pyramid schemes.

Opaque Financial Returns

• Laetitude advertises high returns from its trading bots but provides little evidence to back these claims. Investors have reported inconsistencies in profit distribution and a lack of transparency in how returns are generated.

3. Allegations and Complaints

Ponzi Scheme Allegations

• Laetitude has been accused of operating as a Ponzi scheme, where returns are paid to earlier investors using funds from new recruits rather than legitimate trading profits.
• The company’s heavy reliance on recruitment rather than product sales is a hallmark of such schemes.

Lack of Transparency

• The company’s ownership and management details are obscured, with its operations run through Spring7 FZ LLC, a shell company based in the UAE. This raises concerns about accountability and regulatory compliance.

Complaints About Returns and Withdrawals

• Investors have reported difficulty withdrawing funds, with some claiming that the promised returns were either delayed or never materialized.
• Complaints about the platform’s vague terms and conditions, along with sudden changes in withdrawal policies, have further fueled skepticism.

Aggressive Recruitment Tactics

• Affiliates have reported pressure to recruit new members and upgrade their investment packages to maintain earnings. These tactics prioritize recruitment over delivering tangible investment benefits.

4. Regulatory and Legal Concerns

Unregistered and Unregulated Operations

• Laetitude is not registered with any major financial regulatory body, such as the UAE Central Bank or the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
• Operating without regulatory oversight leaves investors unprotected and raises the risk of financial mismanagement or fraud.

Jurisdictional Challenges

• The company’s base in Dubai, coupled with its use of a shell company, complicates regulatory enforcement. Many offshore jurisdictions have lenient financial laws, enabling companies like Laetitude to operate with minimal scrutiny.

Potential Legal Action

• As of now, no confirmed lawsuits have been filed against Laetitude. However, its leadership’s past involvement in the BitClub Network, which faced legal action in multiple countries, suggests the possibility of future investigations.

5. Online Reviews and Public Perception

Laetitude has faced widespread criticism online, particularly on forums and review platforms.

Negative Feedback

• Ponzi Scheme Claims: Many reviews describe Laetitude as a Ponzi scheme that exploits the cryptocurrency hype to attract unsuspecting investors.
• Unprofessional Conduct: Users have complained about unresponsive customer support and sudden changes to policies that negatively impact investors.
• Financial Losses: Some investors report losing significant sums due to the company’s practices.

Supporters and Positive Reviews

• A small number of users praise the company’s trading bots and affiliate opportunities. However, these reviews are often suspected to come from affiliates incentivized to promote the platform.

6. Broader Implications for Cryptocurrency and MLM

The Laetitude case highlights critical issues in the cryptocurrency and MLM industries:

Regulation of Crypto-MLM Models

• The combination of cryptocurrency and MLM creates a high-risk environment for investors, as the lack of regulation enables fraudulent schemes to flourish.
• Authorities worldwide are increasing scrutiny of such operations, but enforcement remains challenging due to jurisdictional loopholes.

Investor Awareness

• Many Laetitude investors are drawn by promises of high returns without fully understanding the risks. Educating the public about the dangers of unregulated platforms is essential to prevent similar cases.

7. Recommendations for Investors

Due Diligence

• Potential investors should thoroughly research the platform, verify its regulatory status, and seek independent financial advice before investing.

Beware of Recruitment-Based Models

• MLM structures that prioritize recruitment over tangible products or services are often red flags for Ponzi schemes.

Monitor Regulatory Developments

• Keep track of any legal or regulatory actions against Laetitude or its leadership, as these could impact its legitimacy and operations.

Conclusion:

Laetitude’s operations raise significant concerns, from its ties to individuals involved in previous Ponzi schemes to its opaque financial practices and heavy reliance on recruitment. While it presents itself as a legitimate cryptocurrency investment platform, the lack of transparency, regulatory oversight, and investor complaints suggest otherwise.

For potential investors, the risks associated with Laetitude far outweigh its advertised benefits. Thorough due diligence and caution are strongly advised, as the platform exhibits many characteristics of fraudulent schemes. As regulatory scrutiny of cryptocurrency MLMs intensifies, Laetitude’s future remains uncertain, but its controversial practices serve as a warning to those seeking quick financial gains in unregulated markets.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

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

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

Potential Consequences for Laetitude

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 Laetitude Committing a Cyber Crime?

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

What else is Laetitude hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Laetitude] + {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 Laetitude 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.