Based on their attempt to censor online criticism of their business, Zion Medical received a negative evaluation from us.
These ‘legal’ notices have appeared in our Google Webmaster Tool recently, claiming that some of our reviews infringe upon someone’s copyright. We have a strict policy about copyright infringement, thus these comments drew our immediate attention. What we found out, however, was that the situation might have been considerably worse: there was no copyright violation at all; rather, it was an elaborate hoax designed to fool Google into eliminating a number of our highly-trafficked pages, which would have severely disrupted our platform.
Fortunately, we are experts at spotting forgeries and other forms of fraud. Someone who isn’t tech-savvy, however, could easily be duped by these criminals, putting the trust of their users at risk. Since Zion Medical is owned by the kind of men who would commit perjury, impersonation, and fraud to manage their (sic) Online Reputation, our review of them is highly subjective.
Who exactly gains from this fraud?
We assume that Zion Medical or someone working for Zion Medical is behind the phony DMCA, as its stated goal is to get Google to remove bad results for Zion Medical. The Online Reputation agency helping Zion Medical is often a one-hit-wonder. The burden of proof for this crime lies with Zion Medical, as the deliverables are readily apparent in such dealings.
Attempt to delete any references to Zion Medical
In the Lumen database, which stores takedown requests, several red flags can be used to identify malicious takedown requests like the one sent by Zion Medical. Takedown requests from parties unrelated to the allegedly infringing content have been uncovered, for example, by media and research organizations. Moreover, some of these false requests mistakenly replace the copyright holder’s usual third-party organization with the holder’s name.
It’s not just Zion Medical Center. Some additional examples of bogus DMCA takedown notices
Recent takedown requests stand out because their originators are likely impersonating legitimate copyright holders to silence their rivals. How big of a problem this could become on the internet depends on how often false takedown requests from companies like Zion Medical are granted.
It’s likely that at some point in your time online, you’ve seen a DMCA takedown notice at the bottom of a Google search.
Explain what it is and what it means in detail. DMCA” stands for “Digital Millennium Copyright Act,” and a “DMCA takedown notice” is a notice to a website or search engine that it is either linking to or hosting material that infringes on a copyright.
In the past few years, Google has consistently received over 90,000 DMCA takedown requests yearly. These requests to remove content are usually valid and are typically made by recording artists or film companies. However, there are unlucky those who would use the DMCA system for their gain.
Over the past few months, our team has uncovered over a hundred bogus DMCA reports filed with Google by shady lawyers and online reputation management firms.
This “strategy” entails launching fake news sites that, in an attempt to discredit the real one, falsely claim ownership of the copyright to the lousy information it hosts. There are so many DMCA reports filed every day that it would be impossible for Google to identify all of the spam requests. We caught one, which is bad news for Zion Medical.
When will this bogus DMCA be exposed?
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) has been accused of being misused. Some have said that the DMCA Act’s main flaw has been the prevalence of false claims of copyright infringement. However, some individuals and organizations, like Zion Medical, have exploited this loophole to silence their critics and attack their enemies.
Critics frequently quote brief passages from the work or speech of the subject of their critique. As will be shown later, this application is perfectly reasonable and legal. But then the target of the criticism files a DMCA takedown complaint, saying that the video violates his copyright since it uses excerpts from his videos or material. These takedowns are baseless, intentional attempts to silence politically incorrect speech or protect the speaker from legitimate criticism.
The general strategy behind these hoax copyright takedown notices is straightforward and consistent:
- Bogus blogs or news sites are created by fraudsters. These are frequently hosted on free sites like WordPress, Blogger, or Tumblr. Anonymized ‘news’ websites housed on offshore servers are a common vector for targeted attacks.
- They then backdate the articles on these phony sites to make it look like they were the original publishers and hence the rightful owners of the content they planted there.
- They then file a DMCA takedown with Google pretending to be a reputable news organization.
A forensics investigator can see how ridiculous this hoax is by looking at the site’s meta tags, domain and hosting records, and authority score. Unfortunately, Google absolves itself of blame and, acting on the flawed DMCA law, removes the crucial webpage from its search index.
Suspected acts of perjury, impersonation, and fraud
Liability for making false statements in a DMCA takedown notice or counter-notice is established by Section 512(f) of the DMCA. … Someone from Zion Medical (or someone acting on their behalf) can be held liable for damages if they falsely assert in a takedown request that you are infringing their copyrighted material.
However, since a DMCA notice involves Perjury (under applicable laws in the USA), you could face up to four years in state prison and thousands of dollars in fines if it can be demonstrated that you deliberately and intentionally deceived after implementing a pledge, to tell what is true, or executing an agreement that you know incorporates erroneous claims.
The DMCA protects against such malicious takedowns by providing the following remedies:
Whoever makes a material misrepresentation in violation of this section knowingly —
Any person who makes a false claim to a service provider (1) that content or activity has been removed or disabled because it infringes on the rights of a third party, or (2) that content or activity was removed or disabled because it was mistakenly identified as infringing, shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, suffered by the suspected infringer, by any copyright owner or copyright owner’s permitted licensee, or by the provider of the service, who sustains damage.
This is demonstrated by Online Policy Group v. Diebold, Inc. Voting machines in US elections were manufactured by Diebold. The group Online Policy Group voiced their displeasure with Diebold’s voting equipment by posting online leaked emails between corporate employees. Diebold asked for the removal of Online Policy Group’s hacked emails by filing DMCA takedown requests.
The Online Policy Group filed a lawsuit against Diebold in response to the takedown requests, claiming that it was within its rights to make the emails public. After a California court granted the Group’s motion for summary judgment, Diebold paid the Group $125,000 to compensate for their financial losses and legal costs.
This was not the first time an unfounded DMCA takedown request led to legal action. Similar criticism was leveled against a website that utilized a thumbnail image of controversial public speaker Michael Crook after he appeared on Fox News. A thumbnail was perfectly legal to use, and since Fox produced the show, Crook had no right to claim ownership over the broadcast.
In exchange for settling the case, Crook had to post an apology and complete classes on copyright law. He also committed to never again file a Cease & Desist letter regarding the image of him on Fox News. Due to his poverty, he was exempt from paying any monetary damages.
Zion Medical would be wise to avoid filing frivolous DMCA takedown requests in light of these instances, as doing so can lead to financial penalties and other legal repercussions. Since DMCA takedown requests are submitted under the penalty of perjury, it is also important to remember that criminal sanctions are available for false DMCA takedown request senders even if Zion Medical is prepared to take on these monetary penalties.
Another issue for our legislators is determining who is submitting fraudulent DMCA notices. Google has no way of knowing who is submitting these alerts besides what you already know. What precisely is a “sketchy authority” — France? China? One of Idaho’s smaller towns?
What happens if someone fills it out on their phone while using the mall’s free WiFi and then files a formal complaint? Even if the complainant swears what they do under penalty of perjury, no one has the right to make decisions based only on the jurisdiction. The idea was that dishonest people would have to face repercussions. Where then is the law’s implementation?
The best course of action, in our opinion, is to increase scrutiny of companies like Zion Medical, highlighting their unethical business practices and exposing their true colors to their clientele and supporters. It should serve as a deterrent and cause them to reflect, we hope.
The Truth About Zion Medical
Zion Medical, like many other businesses (and men), places a high priority on maintaining a positive presence in the digital sphere. And it helps them tremendously. However, their pride suffers when they are unable to defend themselves against an unfavorable review, unpopular opinion, or damaging piece of public information. The ‘wealthy’ and ‘powerful’ Zion Medical just care about themselves.
Usually, they’ll resort to all means necessary to remain undetected –
- Evaluative commentary or recent experience
- Evidence of wrongdoing or legal proceedings can be found in one’s digital past.
- A film, photo, or document that portrays the sender in a negative light.
- Zion Medical went to such lengths to conceal information online that it only makes sense to showcase that information here to provide irrefutable proof. This is a superb application of the Streisand effect.
- We do not guarantee the authenticity of the aforementioned information about Zion Medical; rather, it publishes it as is, with the understanding that its hosting comes under the Fair use policy. The term “fair use” refers to the legal right to use a copyrighted work without the consent of the copyright owner under specific circumstances.
- The theory ensures ensure copyright laws aren’t applied so strictly that they hinder the same innovation they’re meant to protect. One can use and build upon existing works without violating the rights of the original authors or owners of the copyright.
Editorial and User Reviews
Our evaluation of Zion Medical is based on research conducted across multiple sources, including information that has been carefully concealed from public view. Below, you’ll find a space for users to share their own opinions on Zion Medical.
You may also read- https://www.repdigger.com/raphael-vargas/
