We are investigating Prabu Elangovan 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.
Prabu Elangovan, a 33-year-old resident of Brampton, Ontario, has been charged with multiple offenses related to online child exploitation. Operating under the online alias “hornyprab,” Elangovan allegedly engaged in inappropriate communications with minors. The charges against him include:
Luring a Child: Engaging in online communication with a minor for the purpose of facilitating a sexual offense.
Making Sexually Explicit Material Available to a Child: Distributing inappropriate content to minors.
Invitation to Sexual Touching: Encouraging minors to participate in sexual activities.
These charges stem from an investigation by the Peel Regional Police’s Internet Child Exploitation Unit, which focuses on protecting children from online predators. Elangovan’s arrest highlights the ongoing issue of online child exploitation and the importance of vigilance in monitoring internet activities to safeguard minors.
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.
Prabu Elangovan‘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 Prabu Elangovan in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Prabu Elangovan may be trying to remove from the internet –
Investigative Report: Prabu Elangovan – A Case of Criminal Convictions and Professional Downfall
Introduction
Prabu Elangovan, a former physiotherapist from Mississauga, Ontario, has been at the center of grave criminal and professional misconduct. Convicted of transmitting sexually explicit material to a minor and facing significant professional sanctions, Elangovan’s actions have had far-reaching consequences. This report provides a detailed examination of the allegations, legal proceedings, professional consequences, and public reaction surrounding the case of Prabu Elangovan.
Background
Prabu Elangovan, once a practicing physiotherapist, was a licensed member of the College of Physiotherapists of Ontario. While his professional record initially appeared unblemished, allegations of criminal misconduct shattered his reputation. His case serves as a stark reminder of how breaches of trust, both legal and professional, can severely impact an individual’s career and standing in society.
Criminal Allegations and Convictions
1. Charges Brought Against Elangovan
Details of the Crime:
Elangovan was charged with transmitting, making available, or distributing sexually explicit material to a minor under 16 years of age, a severe violation under Canada’s Criminal Code, Section 171.1(b).
The investigation revealed that Elangovan engaged in inappropriate online communication with a minor, leveraging his digital presence to send explicit content.
Alias and Online Activity:
Reports indicate that Elangovan operated under an alias in some interactions, a common tactic among individuals attempting to conceal their identity during illicit online activities.
2. Criminal Conviction and Sentencing
Court Proceedings:
Elangovan’s case was tried in the Ontario Court of Justice, where he was found guilty on December 9, 2021.
The court established that his actions were deliberate and constituted a clear breach of the law.
Sentencing:
Elangovan received:
A 90-day intermittent jail term starting January 7, 2022.
An 18-month probation period, requiring participation in rehabilitative programs as directed by a probation officer.
3. Prohibitions and Long-Term Sanctions
Conditions of Probation:
Elangovan was prohibited from attending public parks or swimming areas frequented by children under 16, except under specific conditions.
He was banned from seeking or maintaining any employment or volunteer position placing him in a position of authority over minors.
He was restricted from unsupervised contact with anyone under 16, apart from his own children or in routine commercial settings.
Sex Offender Registry:
As part of his sentencing, Elangovan was mandated to register as a sex offender for ten years, a designation that limits his professional and personal freedoms.
Professional Sanctions and Resignation
1. Immediate Professional Restrictions
Initial Restrictions:
In response to the allegations, the College of Physiotherapists of Ontario imposed restrictions on Elangovan’s practice in March 2019. He was prohibited from treating patients under the age of 18 unless a guardian was present during the session.
This restriction reflected a precautionary measure to prevent further potential harm while investigations were ongoing.
2. License Resignation
Voluntary Resignation:
On September 1, 2022, Elangovan resigned from the College of Physiotherapists of Ontario. His resignation was coupled with an acknowledgment of his criminal conviction and an agreement not to reapply for licensure for at least one year.
His resignation effectively ended his career in physiotherapy and removed his ability to practice in a regulated healthcare environment.
Public Reaction and Concerns
1. Betrayal of Trust in the Healthcare Profession
Elangovan’s conviction and actions struck a nerve within the community, particularly because of his role as a physiotherapist. Healthcare professionals are held to high ethical standards due to the trust and responsibility inherent in their roles.
Community Reaction:
Members of the community expressed outrage and disappointment, particularly given the inherent expectation that healthcare professionals prioritize the well-being and safety of all patients, including minors.
Professional Reputation:
The case highlighted the importance of strict regulatory oversight within the healthcare sector to ensure practitioners adhere to ethical and legal standards.
2. Concerns About Online Safety
Predatory Behavior Online:
Elangovan’s case underscores the risks posed by online predators, particularly those who use digital platforms to target vulnerable minors.
Advocacy groups called for greater awareness and education about online safety for children, emphasizing the need for parental vigilance and systemic protections.
Legal and Ethical Implications
1. Criminal Implications
Elangovan’s conviction and sentencing serve as a reminder of the severe legal consequences for engaging in sexually exploitative behavior. His actions violated fundamental laws designed to protect minors from harm.
2. Ethical Breaches
Violation of Professional Ethics:
As a healthcare professional, Elangovan was bound by a code of ethics that emphasizes patient safety and trust. His actions represent a fundamental breach of these principles.
Impact on Public Trust:
Cases like Elangovan’s contribute to a broader erosion of trust in regulated professions, underscoring the importance of swift and decisive action by regulatory bodies.
Impact on Victims
Psychological Harm:
Victims of such crimes often face long-term psychological consequences, including anxiety, depression, and trust issues.
The nature of Elangovan’s actions highlights the need for robust support systems for survivors of online exploitation.
Broader Risks:
The case serves as a stark reminder of the potential dangers faced by minors in digital spaces, necessitating enhanced protective measures.
Calls for Action
1. Strengthening Regulatory Oversight
The College of Physiotherapists of Ontario’s response demonstrates the importance of proactive measures in addressing allegations of misconduct. However, the case underscores the need for even stricter preemptive and investigative actions.
2. Enhancing Public Awareness
Educational Campaigns:
Efforts to educate parents, caregivers, and children about online safety and the risks of predatory behavior are critical.
Community Engagement:
Advocacy groups and law enforcement agencies should collaborate to foster community vigilance against online exploitation.
Conclusion
The case of Prabu Elangovan serves as a stark reminder of the far-reaching consequences of criminal behavior, both for the perpetrator and their victims. From legal convictions to professional sanctions, the repercussions of Elangovan’s actions have been significant and will likely continue to shape discussions around accountability and safety in both the healthcare sector and digital spaces.
As the legal and professional outcomes highlight the importance of accountability, this case underscores the need for vigilance, transparency, and proactive measures to protect vulnerable populations from exploitation. For healthcare professionals and regulatory bodies, it reinforces the critical importance of upholding ethical standards to maintain public trust and safety.
How do we counteract this malpractice?
Once we ascertain the involvement of Prabu Elangovan (or actors working on behalf of Prabu Elangovan), we will inform Prabu Elangovan of our findings via Electronic Mail.
Our preliminary assessment suggests that Prabu Elangovan may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Prabu Elangovan, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Prabu Elangovan 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 Prabu Elangovan 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 Prabu Elangovan 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 Prabu Elangovan is finding out the hard way.
Potential Consequences for Prabu Elangovan
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 Prabu Elangovan Committing a Cyber Crime?
Yes, it seems so. Prabu Elangovan 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. Prabu Elangovan 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 Prabu Elangovan 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. Prabu Elangovan 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 Prabu Elangovan 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, Prabu Elangovan either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Prabu Elangovan, 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. Prabu Elangovan is in great company ….
What else is Prabu Elangovan hiding?
We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Prabu Elangovan] + {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 Prabu Elangovan 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 Prabu Elangovan censoring the internet and committing cyber crimes.”
We’ve reached out to Prabu Elangovan 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 Prabu Elangovan‘s efforts to suppress online speech is significant, as it raises serious concerns about its integrity. The findings suggest that Prabu Elangovan 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 Prabu Elangovan 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