What Happened?

IFX Capital has been caught in a web of controversy, attempting to obscure a shady past and censor damaging news about its operations. According to a detailed report by BrokerChooser, IFX Capital has been linked to numerous allegations of misconduct, including misleading clients, imposing hidden fees, and obstructing withdrawals. Customers have shared their grievances, ranging from unexpected losses due to opaque terms and high-risk strategies to the unresponsiveness of customer support when issues arise.

The report also highlights IFX Capital’s attempts to suppress negative reviews and unfavorable information. By employing aggressive reputation management tactics and working to remove critical content, the firm aims to curate an artificially positive image, masking the widespread dissatisfaction among its clients. These attempts to silence genuine concerns raise serious questions about transparency and integrity, casting doubt on whether IFX Capital can be trusted with investors’ hard-earned money.

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.

List of Fake Copyright Notices for IFX Capital

Number of Fake DMCA Notice(s)	1
Lumen Database Notice(s)	https://lumendatabase.org/notices/44097781
Sender(s)	SynergyNet Solutions LIMITED
Date(s)	Aug 25, 2024
Fake Link(s) Used by Scammers	https://tradersunion.com/scam-or-safe/ifx-capital-review/
Original Link(s) Targeted	https://brokerchooser.com/safety/ifx-capital-broker-safe-or-scam

Evidence and Screenshots

How do we investigate fake DMCA notices?

To accomplish this, we utilize the OSINT Tool provided by FakeDMCA.com and the Lumen API for Researchers, courtesy of the Lumen Database.

FakeDMCA.com is the work of an independent team of research students and cybersecurity professionals, developed under Project UnCensor. Their OSINT Tool, designed to uncover and analyze takedown notices, represents a significant step forward in combating these abusive practices. It has become a valuable resource, increasingly relied upon by journalists and law enforcement agencies across the United States.

Lumen, on the other hand, is an independent research initiative dedicated to studying takedown notices and other legal demands related to online content removal. The project, which operates under the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University, plays a crucial role in tracking and understanding the broader implications of such requests.

What was IFX Capital trying to hide?

IFX Capital is a brokerage firm that offers various financial services, including trading in forex, commodities, and other investment products. However, the company has been mired in controversy due to numerous complaints, allegations of misconduct, and an overall lack of transparency. The report from BrokerChooser reveals several red flags that IFX Capital appears to be actively attempting to hide from the public.

1. Adverse News and Allegations

• Misleading Clients: IFX Capital has been accused of providing misleading information to clients regarding the nature of their investments. According to BrokerChooser, customers were often led to believe that they were participating in secure and profitable investments, only to face unexpected risks and substantial financial losses.
• High-Risk Investment Strategies: There are reports that IFX Capital pushes high-risk trading strategies without adequately informing clients about the associated dangers. This lack of disclosure has led to many clients experiencing unexpected losses, raising questions about the ethical practices of the firm.

2. Customer Complaints and Bad Reviews

• Hidden Fees and Charges: One of the most common complaints against IFX Capital involves the imposition of hidden fees that were not disclosed during the initial agreement. Clients reported discovering unexpected charges on their accounts, which significantly affected their profitability and left them feeling deceived.
• Withdrawal Issues: Many clients have faced significant difficulties when attempting to withdraw their funds. Complaints indicate that IFX Capital imposes various obstacles, such as excessive paperwork, lengthy delays, or outright refusals, making it challenging for investors to access their money.
• Unresponsive Customer Support: Another major issue highlighted by clients is the unresponsiveness of IFX Capital’s customer support team. Many customers reported being ignored or receiving vague responses when they attempted to resolve issues, leading to further frustration and mistrust.

3. Attempts to Hide and Censor Negative Information

• Suppression of Negative Reviews: IFX Capital has reportedly made efforts to remove or bury negative reviews and unfavorable information. This includes attempting to get critical content taken down from online platforms, thereby preventing potential clients from seeing the real experiences of past investors.
• Reputation Management Tactics: The firm appears to be using aggressive reputation management tactics to counteract negative feedback. This includes promoting positive reviews that may not be genuine and overshadowing critical content to create an illusion of credibility and reliability.

4. Lack of Transparency and Regulatory Concerns

• Opaque Business Practices: BrokerChooser points out that IFX Capital has been less than forthcoming about its business practices. Key information, such as the terms of service, fees, and risk disclosures, is often obscured or buried in fine print, making it difficult for clients to fully understand the nature of their investments.
• Unclear Regulatory Status: IFX Capital’s regulatory status is also called into question. The lack of transparent information about whether the company is properly licensed raises concerns about its compliance with financial regulations, suggesting that it may not be authorized to offer the services it advertises.

5. Warnings to Potential Clients

• High-Risk Engagement: Given the numerous complaints and negative feedback, potential clients are advised to exercise caution when dealing with IFX Capital. The firm’s track record of misleading information, hidden fees, withdrawal issues, and attempts to hide negative reviews indicates a high-risk engagement that could lead to financial loss.
• Thorough Research Needed: Investors are urged to conduct thorough research and verify the company’s regulatory credentials before considering any financial engagement. The red flags highlighted by former clients should be carefully considered, as they indicate a pattern of questionable behavior and unethical practices.

IFX Capital has been attempting to hide a history of unethical practices, including misleading clients, pushing high-risk investments without proper disclosure, imposing hidden fees, and making it difficult for investors to withdraw their funds. The company’s efforts to suppress negative information and curate a positive image indicate a deliberate attempt to obscure the truth about its operations. These actions raise serious concerns about transparency and integrity, suggesting that potential investors should approach IFX Capital with extreme caution.

Only IFX Capital benefits from this crime.

Since the fake copyright takedown notices were designed to remove negative content for IFX Capital from Google, we assume IFX Capital or someone associated with IFX Capital is behind this scam. It is often a fly-by-night Online Reputation agency working on behalf of IFX Capital. In this case, IFX Capital, at best, will be an “accomplice” or an “accessory” to the crime. The specific laws may vary depending on the jurisdiction. Still, the legal principle generally holds that if you actively participate in planning, encouraging, or facilitating a crime, you can be charged with it, even if you did not personally commit it.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

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

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

1. Inform Google about the fraud committed against them.
2. Inform the victims of the fake DMCA about their websites.
3. Inform relevant law enforcement agencies
4. File counter-notices on Google to reinstate the ‘removed’ content
5. Publish copies of the ‘removed’ content on our network of 50+ websites

By investigating the fake DMCA takedown attempts, we hope to shed light on the reputation management industry, revealing how IFX Capital 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 IFX Capital made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and our original review of IFX Capital, including but not limited to user contributions, remain a permanent record for anyone interested in IFX Capital.

A case perfect for the Streisand effect…

Potential Consequences for IFX Capital

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 IFX Capital Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. IFX Capital 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. IFX Capital 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 IFX Capital 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. IFX Capital 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.

How did IFX Capital purport this DMCA Fraud?

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by IFX Capital 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, IFX Capital either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about IFX Capital, ignorance does not excuse this wrongdoing.

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.

Not In Good Company

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. IFX Capital is in great company ….

Ironically, the manipulation tactics used to remove public-interest information from the Internet are backfiring on IFX Capital, which is now associated with the worst of this world.

Here are some of the specimens that share the internet space with IFX Capital –

Miguel Octavio Vargas Maldonado

Miguel Octavio Vargas Maldonado appears to be the former foreign affairs minister of the Dominican Republic. His name is listed next to more than 500 links to news articles, blogs, social media posts, and YouTube videos targeted for removal or de-indexing. Many of the articles refer to questions over his political fundraising practices. They include accusations that Vargas had received donations from an individual who would later be convicted of drug trafficking. Some targeted links remain active, while others return 404 errors or “file not found.”

José Antonio Gordo Valero

José Gordo joined OneCoin in 2015 and has been named in an indictment for the OneCoin scam in Argentina. The articles listed next to Gordo’s name in the documents reviewed by Rest of World include references to his role at the company. 

Diego Adolfo Marynberg

He appears to be the same Marynberg connected to funding right-wing causes, including settlement efforts in Israel. Reports also alleged that his company received preferential treatment in acquiring Argentinian bonds worth millions of dollars. More than 70 URLs appear next to Marynberg’s name in the documents, including pages from the Israeli newspapers The Times of Israel, Haaretz, and Clarin, one of Argentina’s most prominent news sites.

Majed Khalil Majzoub

Majed is an influential businessman with close ties to several governments, including the administration of Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro. Majzoub’s name appears next to more than 180 URLs, mostly from independent outlets. Of the two URLs that pointed to articles from Germany’s Der Spiegel, one now returns an error message; the other, which appears to refer to relations between Venezuela and Colombia, directs to an unrelated story about Brexit. 

Frequently Asked Questions

What else is IFX Capital hiding?

Click here to visit the Google Search page for ‘IFX Capital’. 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 us. If you have any information on IFX Capital that you want to share with us, 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.

---

References and Citations Used

Over thirty thousand DMCA notices reveal an organized attempt to abuse copyright law.

Reputation Management, or Internet Conspiracy

Exposed documents reveal how the powerful cleaned up their digital past using a reputation laundering firm.

Companies Use Fake Websites and Backdated Articles to Censor Google’s Search Results.

Bad Reviews: How Companies Are Using Fake Websites to Censor Content

How fake copyright complaints are muzzling journalists

---

Many thanks to FakeDMCA.com and Lumen for providing access to their database.

Photos and Illustrations provided by DALL-E 3 – “a representation of IFX Capital censoring the internet and committing cyber crimes.”

• Our investigative report on IFX Capital’s efforts to suppress online speech is significant, as it raises serious concerns about its integrity. The findings suggest that IFX Capital 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 IFX Capital 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

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.