Tuesday, August 12, 2014

COMMNUNICATE with BOTH parties

I am a VBlicense holder for a quite large website as well as admin and mod on quite a few sites, so I can assure you I have better things to do with my time than this, like cashbaiting which i am very good at. I make millions by cashbaiting and taking money from scam victims who I purport to help lol.

However a wrong has been committed, and posted rules have been broken and I intent to do my best to correct this situation as it adversely affects me.

IF urljet was genuine, it is no hardship for them to ask me for links to the many websites, blogs, twitter and other places where this guy is impersonating me, I can also provide links to some sites where the host has acted responsibly and taken down the harassing websites.

In discussing this matter why is it ok for a known hacker (even self admitted) who has also posted admitting he impersonates me, to post freely a stolen photograph of me to harass me.

The stolen photograph in question, that of an 'innocent man'


and his innocent garage



I hear excuses from urljet yet I have not heard them saying they have checked HIS id or HIS right to post others details.

If I do a DMCA report then DMCA send a copy (including my personal details) to the imposter. Due to the actions exhibited by the imposter so far, this would be a stupid move and possibly put my family and myself  and my garage in harms way.

I have taken on board the kind suggestions of the members and I will be seeing a lawyer asap. It is Sunday here so I will have to make an appointment later. Please wait several years for an update on this as it is Sunday here.

A lot has been said about an ANONYMOUS email. I sent then the report using my usual email (NOT A PROXY) If they want me to send from another email where they can check the IP then I will do so if they ask me. ( My current email strips out my IP from the headers) However they have so far stopped contacting me via email? If they are genuine I will work with them as much as I can, but it has taken me posting all over the internet to actually get them to respond. It makes it hard to work with them when they stop responding.

Whether you believe me or not is up to you, however it will not alter the facts one iota.

Re the police, I am unsure as to how the Australian police would be able to do anything against a USA business.

American law has no jurisdiction in Australia but I will ask them. When they stop laughing I will explain how the photograph of me that was stolen from my pc by a hacker is not actually me but someone who looks like me.

I have seen many reports about cybercrime and related issues not acted upon by the police, as a quick search will confirm. So obviously it may not be so cut and dried as you suggest.
I can understand how the police are more concerned about using their limited resources to fight serious crime, to do much about the less important (for them) issues. Nothing is less important than thisissue which I have been banging on about for so many years.

Another issue is that the imposter is in INDIA and they seem to be a long way behind on dealing with cyber issues. so it is hard to stop him. Several of his ISP's have evicted him after receiving reports of hacking, but he still continues.

Please check. One of the main issues is "HARASSMENT" using the stolen photo.

Harassment is a clear violation of urljets TOS. Very simple, very clear no ambiguity, no grey areas, their TOS STATES this.

Lets look at some of their AUP and TOS RULES.

Thank you for your post it is hypothetical, I will however try to answer it.

I would expect a decent host to COMMNUNICATE with BOTH parties and ascertain the truth, IF as In my case, it could do harm to leave things as they were, I would temporarily remove the offending post or photograph until the issue had been resolved. Surely this would be the correct thing to do until the real owner was established.

Lets not forget that urljet stopped answering me after I sent a message suggesting a possible solution. Then lied about it on here.

In the example above I would expect the host to temporarily remove the offending post to protect the potentially innocent party. The matter could then be checked without the innocent party being hurt. Especially if it clearly violated their TOS.

No they are using MY photograph that was stolen from my pc by a hacker as I have said many times. I have never said that they are using his photo. I hope this clears things up for you.

The man in the photo is not me. I hope that clears things up for you.

I am in danger because my photo, which is not me, has been posted along with my address, which is that of an innocent man and not me, but it is me, but not. So you can clearly see that I am in danger because now everyone knows what I look like and where I live, except that it is not me and not my house. Except it is. But it isn't.