What Happened?
AAFX Trading, an online forex and CFD broker, has been accused of attempting to conceal a troubling past and suppress negative feedback regarding its operations. While the broker advertises itself as a globally regulated platform offering tight spreads and high leverage, a closer look reveals a growing number of complaints from traders. Issues such as delayed withdrawals, poor customer service, and alleged manipulative practices have surfaced on various forums, with users expressing frustration over unresolved disputes and unexpected losses.
Furthermore, AAFX Trading’s regulatory status has been a point of contention. Operating from offshore jurisdictions with limited oversight, many traders have questioned the broker’s legitimacy and the security of their funds. Allegations of price manipulation and slippage during high-volatility periods have also raised concerns about the fairness of the trading environment.
What has raised even more suspicion are the reported efforts by AAFX Trading to censor damaging news and reviews. Several users claim that their negative feedback on public forums and review platforms has been removed or hidden, leading to accusations that the broker is attempting to maintain a clean image while ignoring legitimate complaints. These tactics raise red flags about AAFX Trading’s commitment to transparency and integrity, urging traders to exercise caution before engaging with the platform.
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 AAFX Trading
| Number of Fake DMCA Notice(s) | 1 |
| Lumen Database Notice(s) | https://lumendatabase.org/notices/43973751 |
| Sender(s) | Soleil Holdings.L TD |
| Date(s) | Aug 20, 2024 |
| Fake Link(s) Used by Scammers | https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/forex-reviews/11616/aafxtrading-forex-brokers-scam |
| Original Link(s) Targeted | https://www.earnforex.com/forum/tags/aafx-trading/ |
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 AAFX Trading trying to hide?
AAFX Trading is an online forex and CFD broker that offers trading services to clients worldwide. It claims to provide a wide range of financial instruments, including currencies, commodities, stocks, and indices, with attractive features such as high leverage, tight spreads, and a variety of account types. The broker operates from offshore jurisdictions, particularly St. Vincent and the Grenadines, which has raised concerns about its regulatory status and the level of protection it offers to traders.
AAFX Trading promotes itself as a competitive and user-friendly broker, but despite its marketing efforts, the company has garnered significant criticism from traders and industry watchdogs. Its regulatory status is notably weak, given its registration in offshore territories known for lax oversight, leading to doubts about the platform’s transparency and integrity.
Despite its global presence, AAFX Trading has faced numerous complaints from traders. The following are the adverse news, bad reviews, complaints, and allegations that AAFX Trading seems to be actively trying to hide from public scrutiny:
1. Withdrawal Delays and Fund Access Issues
One of the most frequent complaints about AAFX Trading is related to withdrawal delays. Many traders have reported difficulties in accessing their funds, with some claiming that their withdrawal requests were either significantly delayed or outright denied. This is particularly concerning for users who rely on timely withdrawals to manage their trading profits. Unexplained delays have raised concerns that AAFX Trading may be facing liquidity issues or is deliberately withholding client funds to avoid paying out profits.
Withdrawal problems are a significant red flag for any broker, and these recurring issues have led traders to question the financial stability and honesty of AAFX Trading.
2. Unclear Regulatory Standing and Offshore Operation
AAFX Trading is registered in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, an offshore jurisdiction with minimal regulatory oversight. The lack of strong regulation is a point of contention, as many traders prefer brokers that are regulated by well-established authorities like the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) or the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC). The weak regulatory environment in which AAFX Trading operates means that clients have little legal recourse in the event of disputes or misconduct, leaving them vulnerable to potential fraud.
This offshore status has led to suspicions about the legitimacy of AAFX Trading’s operations, with many traders concerned about the safety of their funds and the broker’s compliance with international financial regulations.
3. Allegations of Price Manipulation and Unfair Trading Conditions
Several traders have accused AAFX Trading of manipulating prices to their disadvantage, particularly during times of high market volatility. There have been reports of significant slippage, where traders’ orders are executed at prices far different from those requested, often resulting in unexpected losses. Additionally, some users claim that their accounts were closed or frozen after making profitable trades, raising concerns about the fairness of the trading environment on the platform.
Price manipulation and order slippage are serious allegations that point to potential misconduct within the platform. If true, these practices undermine the trust that traders place in the broker, as it suggests that AAFX Trading may be actively working against its clients’ interests.
4. Poor Customer Support and Unresponsive Service
Many traders have reported negative experiences with AAFX Trading’s customer support. Complaints include unresponsive service, long wait times, and a lack of helpful resolutions to issues. Traders who encounter problems with withdrawals, trade execution, or account management often find it difficult to get satisfactory answers from the support team. This lack of efficient customer service only exacerbates the frustrations of users who are already dealing with financial losses or technical issues.
Poor customer service is a common issue among brokers with offshore operations, and in AAFX Trading’s case, it raises further questions about the broker’s commitment to providing a quality trading experience.
5. Efforts to Suppress Negative Reviews and Feedback
In addition to operational complaints, AAFX Trading has been accused of trying to suppress negative feedback and reviews. Some traders claim that their critical reviews on various platforms, including forums like EarnForex, have been removed or hidden from public view. This suggests that AAFX Trading may be actively working to maintain a positive public image while ignoring or covering up legitimate complaints from dissatisfied customers.
By attempting to censor negative feedback, AAFX Trading raises suspicions about its transparency and integrity. A broker that is truly committed to providing excellent service should address customer concerns openly, rather than trying to bury negative reviews.
6. Allegations of Operating a Scam
Given the combination of withdrawal issues, poor customer support, price manipulation claims, and regulatory concerns, some traders have gone as far as to label AAFX Trading as a scam. These users point to the broker’s offshore registration, withdrawal problems, and the apparent manipulation of trades as evidence that AAFX Trading may be engaging in fraudulent practices.
While such accusations are difficult to prove, the volume and consistency of the complaints against AAFX Trading suggest that there are serious issues with the platform’s operations. For traders, this raises concerns about the safety of their funds and the trustworthiness of the broker.
AAFX Trading’s efforts to suppress negative reviews and complaints, combined with its problematic withdrawal process, unclear regulatory standing, and allegations of price manipulation, suggest that the broker is trying to hide more than it reveals. The serious issues raised by traders, from withdrawal delays to unfair trading conditions, paint a troubling picture of a platform that may not be as reliable or transparent as it claims.
For potential traders, these red flags are cause for caution. The broker’s offshore registration, lack of strong regulatory oversight, and reported attempts to censor damaging information only add to concerns about its legitimacy. Traders considering AAFX Trading should carefully research the platform, read uncensored reviews, and weigh the risks before engaging with this broker.
Only AAFX Trading benefits from this crime.
Since the fake copyright takedown notices were designed to remove negative content for AAFX Trading from Google, we assume AAFX Trading or someone associated with AAFX Trading is behind this scam. It is often a fly-by-night Online Reputation agency working on behalf of AAFX Trading. In this case, AAFX Trading, 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 AAFX Trading (or actors working on behalf of AAFX Trading), we will inform AAFX Trading of our findings via Electronic Mail.
Our preliminary assessment suggests that AAFX Trading may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from AAFX Trading, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to AAFX Trading 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 –
- Inform Google about the fraud committed against them.
- Inform the victims of the fake DMCA about their websites.
- Inform relevant law enforcement agencies
- File counter-notices on Google to reinstate the ‘removed’ content
- 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 AAFX Trading 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 AAFX Trading made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and our original review of AAFX Trading, including but not limited to user contributions, remain a permanent record for anyone interested in AAFX Trading.
A case perfect for the Streisand effect…
Potential Consequences for AAFX Trading
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 AAFX Trading Committing a Cyber Crime?
Yes, it seems so. AAFX Trading 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. AAFX Trading 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 AAFX Trading 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. AAFX Trading 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 AAFX Trading purport this DMCA Fraud?
As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by AAFX Trading 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, AAFX Trading either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about AAFX Trading, 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. AAFX Trading is in great company ….
Ironically, the manipulation tactics used to remove public-interest information from the Internet are backfiring on AAFX Trading, which is now associated with the worst of this world.
Here are some of the specimens that share the internet space with AAFX Trading –
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
Did AAFX Trading commit a cyber crime?
Yes, filing a fake DMCA notice is illegal. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) allows copyright holders to issue takedown notices to protect their works from unauthorized use online. However, submitting a false DMCA notice can result in legal consequences.
Under the DMCA, a person knowingly submitting a false copyright claim can be subject to penalties, including damages. DMCA notices require the filer to certify, under penalty of perjury, that the content infringes their copyright. If the notice is found to be fraudulent or made in bad faith, the filer can face.
What are the potential consequences for AAFX Trading?
Civil lawsuits: The affected party can sue for damages, legal fees, and other costs.
Perjury charges: False certification in a DMCA notice can result in perjury-related penalties, which vary by jurisdiction.
Other legal penalties: Fines or other penalties depending on the case
Did AAFX Trading commit a Civil or a Criminal offense?
Perjury is a criminal offense, not a civil crime. It involves intentionally lying or making false statements under oath, typically in a court of law or other legal proceedings, such as affidavits or depositions.
Criminal charges: Perjury is prosecuted as a criminal act, and a conviction can lead to fines or imprisonment, depending on the severity of the false statement and its impact on the case.
Felony status: In many jurisdictions, perjury is classified as a felony, which carries more severe penalties than misdemeanour offences.
So, while it may affect civil cases, the crime of perjury itself is strictly criminal.
What is 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.
Can AAFX Trading purge its Digital past?
Once information is uploaded to the internet, it can be replicated, shared, archived, or stored across multiple servers. If AAFX Trading manage to delete the original post or file, copies may remain accessible in other places, such as web archives, screenshots, or other users’ devices.
In practice, completely erasing content from the internet can be extremely difficult due to how widely information can spread and be stored. Thus, the idea that “the Internet never forgets” reflects the challenge of entirely removing digital content once it has been shared.
What else is AAFX Trading hiding?
Click here to visit the Google Search page for ‘AAFX Trading’. 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 AAFX Trading 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 AAFX Trading censoring the internet and committing cyber crimes.”
- Our investigative report on AAFX Trading’s efforts to suppress online speech is significant, as it raises serious concerns about its integrity. The findings suggest that AAFX Trading 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 AAFX Trading 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.
