Shalom MecKenzie at DraftKings

A summary of what happened?

Shalom Meckenzie, one of the key figures behind DraftKings and the founder of SBTech, is no ordinary entrepreneur. With SBTech’s merger into DraftKings, Meckenzie has become one of the most influential figures in the online sports betting industry, leveraging a significant shareholding and a seat on the board. Yet, beneath the surface of DraftKings’ monumental success lies a swirling storm of controversies, legal challenges, and allegations that cast a shadow over Meckenzie’s reputation and the company’s operations.

1. Allegations of Involvement in Black-Market Gambling

One of the most serious concerns surrounding Shalom Meckenzie centers on his former company, SBTech. Reports have surfaced suggesting that SBTech may have operated in markets where gambling is strictly prohibited, allegedly generating substantial revenue from these activities. According to investigative findings, SBTech is suspected of having facilitated illegal gambling operations in jurisdictions with stringent anti-gambling laws, often through subsidiaries and front companies designed to obscure its involvement.

These allegations are deeply troubling for DraftKings, which is publicly traded and must adhere to strict regulatory standards. The potential legal ramifications of these claims could be catastrophic, particularly if regulators and authorities decide to take enforcement action. The scandal has sparked debate about the company’s risk management practices and raised questions about how much the executives knew about SBTech’s dealings before the merger.

2. Insider Trading Accusations

The controversy took an even sharper turn with the revelation of Meckenzie’s significant stock sale just before a damning report became public. Shortly before a research firm published an investigation detailing SBTech’s alleged ties to black-market gambling, Meckenzie sold a large block of his DraftKings shares, amounting to approximately $34 million. The timing was highly suspect and triggered suspicions of insider trading.

Critics argue that Meckenzie may have had prior knowledge of the impending report and acted to protect his financial interests. If proven, insider trading accusations could result in severe legal consequences and further erode trust among investors. The situation has prompted calls for thorough investigations into Meckenzie’s actions, as well as the broader corporate culture at DraftKings. The accusations have placed DraftKings under a magnifying glass, with questions being raised about ethical conduct and transparency at the highest levels of the company.

3. Securities Fraud and Investor Lawsuits

The legal challenges facing Meckenzie and DraftKings have intensified with a class-action lawsuit accusing company executives of securities fraud. The lawsuit claims that DraftKings executives, including Meckenzie, failed to disclose SBTech’s alleged involvement in illegal activities during the merger process. Investors argue that they were misled about the true nature of the company’s operations and that material information was withheld, violating securities laws.

The crux of the lawsuit is that DraftKings’ executives knowingly presented an overly optimistic and sanitized version of the company’s history and financial health. If SBTech’s black-market operations had been disclosed, investors argue they would have made different investment decisions. The potential consequences of this lawsuit are significant, as a ruling against DraftKings could lead to hefty financial penalties and a lasting impact on the company’s reputation. Moreover, the case has fueled speculation about whether other executives may have also benefited from undisclosed information, creating a pervasive atmosphere of distrust.

A Pattern of Secrecy and the Struggle for Transparency

What emerges from these allegations is a picture of a business empire that may have been built on secrecy, opaque dealings, and questionable ethics. Meckenzie’s rise to prominence, from founding SBTech to becoming a top shareholder at DraftKings, is a story of entrepreneurial savvy and risk-taking. However, the undercurrents of controversy suggest that this success may have been underpinned by practices that regulators and the public find deeply concerning.

Critics have pointed out that DraftKings’ executives, including Meckenzie, appear to have prioritized rapid expansion and profit growth over transparency and regulatory compliance. The accusations have intensified the scrutiny from both regulators and the financial community, with many calling for a more transparent account of DraftKings’ and SBTech’s operations. Investors who were once lured by the promise of high returns in the booming sports betting industry are now faced with unsettling questions about the integrity of the company’s leadership.

Implications for the Future

As legal proceedings and investigations continue, the fate of Shalom Meckenzie and his role at DraftKings hangs in the balance. If the accusations are substantiated, the repercussions could extend far beyond financial penalties. DraftKings could face stricter regulatory oversight, damage to its brand, and the erosion of investor confidence.

The allegations have also sparked a broader discussion about the sports betting industry’s rapid rise and the ethical obligations of companies navigating this high-stakes market. In a sector where regulatory compliance is paramount, the accusations against Meckenzie and DraftKings could serve as a cautionary tale, highlighting the potential pitfalls of prioritizing growth over accountability.

For now, the narrative remains unresolved, but the stakes are undeniably high for Meckenzie, DraftKings, and the entire sports betting landscape. The coming months will be crucial in determining whether these accusations lead to lasting reforms—or if they will be yet another chapter in the turbulent history of a company fighting to maintain its place at the top of the betting world.

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 Shalom MecKenzie at DraftKings trying to hide?

Shalom MecKenzie at DraftKings‘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 Shalom MecKenzie at DraftKings in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Shalom MecKenzie at DraftKings may be trying to remove from the internet –

How do we counteract this malpractice?

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

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

Potential Consequences for Shalom MecKenzie at DraftKings

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 Shalom MecKenzie at DraftKings Committing a Cyber Crime?

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

What else is Shalom MecKenzie at DraftKings hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Shalom MecKenzie at DraftKings] + {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 Shalom MecKenzie at DraftKings 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.