Our review of Jerry Couvaras is based on their attempt to hide critical review and information from the internet, by filing a fraudulent copyright takedown notice.
We care a lot about copyright, so these posts caught our eye right away. But what we found out could have been much worse: there was no copyright problem, and the whole thing was a trick to get Google to remove some of our top-ranking web pages, which would have caused a lot of problems for our platform.
We know a lot about how to spot fakes and scams in general, which is a good thing. But it would be easy for someone who doesn’t know much about technology to be tricked by these crooks and put the trust of their users at risk.
Because of this, our review of Jerry Couvaras is very personal. Jerry Couvaras is one of these suspicious businesses (men) who are dumb enough to lie, impersonate, and commit fraud to control their online reputation.
Who benefits from this scam?
Since the fake DMCA is meant to get Google to remove negative information about Jerry Couvaras, we think that Jerry Couvaras or someone connected to him is behind this scam. Most of the time, Jerry Couvaras is being helped by a fly-by-night Online Reputation firm. Since the promises are clear, Jerry Couvaras needs to own up to this crime or say who is behind it.
Jerry Couvaras lives in Atlanta, Georgia, and works as President & CEO at Atlanta Bread Company.
Jerry Couvaros
Jerry Couvaras was arrested in Johannesburg, South Africa, in March 2004 and charged with fraud after about 2,000 South Africans lost a total of $5.54 million in a claimed investment scheme that failed in 1993 when two investment companies went out of business.
There was no link between the charges and the Atlanta Bread Company. Basil Couvaras was put in charge of the company while Jerry Couvaras stayed in Johannesburg until the charges could be settled in his role as president and CEO. Basil Couvaras was also charged later in the case.
Attempt to remove content for Jerry Couvaras
| Type | Details |
| Sender | Patrick Szabo |
| Date | November 18, 2021 |
| Allegedly Original Link | https://patriickszabo.tumblr.com/post/668255968536264704/defrauded-south-african-investors-for-554 |
| Allegedly Infringing Link | |
| Lumen Database Record | https://www.lumendatabase.org/notices/25758014 |
The above DMCA Notices about Jerry Couvaras are fake and false, which could make Jerry Couvaras liable for perjury, impersonation, and fraud.
When you look at the Lumen database, which keeps track of requests to remove online content, there are a number of red flags that make it clear that requests like the one from Jerry Couvaras are not made in good faith. For example, news organizations and research companies have found takedown requests from groups that have nothing to do with the content that was being taken down.
Some of these fake requests also mistakenly use the name of the person who owns the copyright instead of the name of the third-party group that the person usually hires to file these requests.
Jerry Couvaras doesn’t stand alone. Here are some more fake DMCA scams.
What’s different about the current wave of takedown requests is that the people making them are pretending to be real copyright owners in order to hurt their competitors. How big of a problem this could become on the internet will depend on how successful fake takedown requests from people like Jerry Couvaras are.
If you’ve used the internet for a while, you’ve probably seen a DMCA takedown letter (shown below) at the bottom of a Google search result at least once.
What does it mean, and what is it? DMCA” stands for “Digital Millennium Copyright Act,” and a “DMCA takedown notice,” tells a website or search engine that it is linking to or storing content that violates a copyright.
Over the past few years, Google has gotten more than 90,000 DMCA takedown requests every year. Most of the time, these requests to take down content are valid. Musicians and movie companies often file these requests. But the DMCA system is also being used wrongly by some people and companies.
Recently, our team found that shady lawyers and online reputation management companies had filed more than 100 fake DMCA reports with Google. They did this to get rid of online evidence of past bad behavior.
This new “strategy” includes making fake news websites that claim to own the rights to negative content that is already on a real news website. Google can’t catch all of these fake DMCA requests because there are so many of them every day. We caught one, which was bad for Jerry Couvaras.
How to expose this fake DMCA
Some people have said that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) has been abused. Some people say that one of the biggest problems with the DMCA Act is that it has led to a lot of false claims of copyright theft. But people and businesses like Jerry Couvaras have been able to use this process to attack enemies and rivals and silence critics.
Critics often use small bits of video or text from the person they are attacking to explain what they are saying. As we’ll talk about below, this use would be fair and legal. But the person being criticized will then file a DMCA takedown notice, saying that the video violates his copyright because it uses parts of his films or text. These takedowns aren’t right. They are just attempts to silence speech that is fine and protect the person from criticism.
Most of these fake copyright takedown letters work in pretty much the same way:
- Scammers set up fake blogs or news websites. Most of the time, these are hosted for free on sites like wordpress.com, blogspot.com, or tumblr.com. In some targeted attacks, anonymous “news” sites are set up and housed on servers in other countries.
- They put the content they want to steal on these fake websites. Usually, they change the dates of the articles to make it look like they were the first ones to post them and therefore own the copyright to that content.
- Then, they pretend to be a real news organization and file a DMCA takedown with Google.
Alleged Perjury, Fraud, and Impersonation
Section 512(f) of the DMCA makes it illegal to put fake information in a DMCA takedown notice or counter-notice. … If Jerry Couvaras or someone working for Jerry Couvaras sends you a takedown notice saying that you are using their copyrighted material without permission, but you know that this is not true, you can sue them and win damages.
But since a DMCA notice involves perjury (according to US law), you could spend up to four years in state prison and have to pay thousands of dollars in fines if it can be proven that you lied after swearing to tell the truth or signing a document that you know makes false claims.
The DMCA has a solution for these takedowns done in bad faith.
Anyone who knowingly lies about something important in this section—
(1) that material or activity is infringing, or (2) that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification, shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, incurred by the alleged infringer, by any copyright owner or copyright owner’s authorized licensee, or by a service provider who is hurt by such misrepresentation because the service provider relied on such misrepresentation in removing or disabling the material or activity.
17 U.S.C.A. § 512
The case of Online Policy Group v. Diebold, Inc. is a great example of this. Diebold made the machines that are used in votes in the US. Diebold’s machines were criticized by the Online Policy Group, and e-mails from the company that they had gotten were put on the Internet. Diebold sent DMCA removal requests to get Online Policy Group to remove access to the e-mails that they had put online.
Online Policy Group sued Diebold over the takedown requests, saying that the Group had the legal right to print the e-mails. A California court agreed with the Group and gave their request for summary judgment. Diebold then made a deal with the Group to pay $125,000 for their financial losses and legal fees.
The case was just one of many where unfounded DMCA takedown requests were at issue. Michael Crook, a controversial public speaker, appeared on Fox News and was then criticized on a website that used a thumbnail picture of him. Not only was it okay to use a thumbnail picture, but since Fox made the show, Crook couldn’t even say that he owned it.
The case was settled, and Crook agreed to a number of embarrassing conditions. He had to take courses on copyright law, promise never to file another “Cease and Desist” request about the picture of him on Fox News, apologizes to the public, and do other things that were inconvenient for him. He didn’t have to pay any money in damages because he was poor.
With these cases in mind and knowing how much trouble a false DMCA takedown request can cause, it is important for people like Jerry Couvaras to stop making takedown requests that aren’t backed up by evidence. If they don’t, they could face fines and other court orders. Also, it’s important to remember that even if Jerry Couvaras is ready to risk these civil damages, sending a false DMCA takedown request can get you in trouble with the law, since these requests are sent under the threat of perjury.
Who is filling out fake DMCA complaints is another problem that our government needs to deal with. Google doesn’t know more about who is filling out these notices than you do. What exactly is a “sketchy jurisdiction”? China? Idaho’s small city? And if someone fills it out while using WiFi in a crowded shop, who is going to find out who that person is?
No one has the right to make choices based only on the jurisdiction, especially if the complainant swears what they do under the penalty of perjury. The idea was that people who lie would have to deal with the repercussions. So, where is the rule of law?
So, in our opinion, the best way to punish people like Jerry Couvaras is to bring their acts to more people’s attention and let their customers, clients, and followers know where they stand on moral and ethical issues. We hope that it will stop them and make them think.
What were they trying to hide?
Businesses (and guys) like Jerry Couvaras put a lot of money into their online reputation and for good reason. And it does great things for them. But it hurts their pride when they can’t fix a bad review, an unpopular opinion, or bad public information. And for someone as “rich” and “powerful” as Jerry Couvaras, it’s all about their pride.
Most of the time, they will do anything to hide –
- A review, opinion, or new information
- A digital past is a record of something illegal or wrongdoing.
- Media files like videos, photos, or papers that aren’t good for you.
- Since Jerry Couvaras tried so hard to hide something online, it seems right to show it here and make a lasting record of it.
Conclusion
Jerry Couvaras is a visionary business owner and leader who has done a lot to improve the grocery shopping industry in Africa. The business community has given him a lot of praise and credit for his dedication to innovation, sustainability, and community involvement.
Under Couvaras’s direction, Food Lover’s Market has grown into a successful and socially responsible business that serves as a model for healthy business practices in Africa and beyond.
