- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Investors' Losses Were Caused By Own Failures, Firm Says
by Gunnar Larson 18 Sep '24

18 Sep '24

Investors' Losses Were Caused By Own Failures, Firm Says <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1879075?nl_pk=a94fc…> By Ronan Barnard A Liverpool-based law firm has denied claims it was negligent when advising investors on a real estate investment deal alleged to be a Ponzi scheme, arguing that investors' losses were caused by their failure to follow legal advice. Read full article » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1879075?nl_pk=a94fc…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1879075?nl_pk=a94fc…>

1 0

Crypto-Scam Victim's Loss Hands Tracing Lessons To Experts
by Gunnar Larson 18 Sep '24

18 Sep '24

Crypto-Scam Victim's Loss Hands Tracing Lessons To Experts <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1879673?nl_pk=a94fc…> By Joanne Faulkner A recent decision that dismissed a claim brought by a victim of crypto-fraud against an exchange because of flaws in his expert evidence provides a warning for litigators that efforts to trace money will fail unless there is a clear digital trail. Read full article » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1879673?nl_pk=a94fc…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1879673?nl_pk=a94fc…>

1 0

Crypto-Fraud Victim Sues Lawyers Over 'Valueless Advice'
by Gunnar Larson 18 Sep '24

18 Sep '24

Crypto-Fraud Victim Sues Lawyers Over 'Valueless Advice' <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1879076?nl_pk=a94fc…> By Eddie Beaver An alleged victim of a cryptocurrency fraud has claimed that a specialist investment law firm owes her £635,000 ($839,000) for providing "valueless advice" on how to recover her lost money. Read full article » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1879076?nl_pk=a94fc…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1879076?nl_pk=a94fc…>

1 0

Four Delaware Men Charged with International “Sextortion” and Money Laundering Scheme
by Gunnar Larson 17 Sep '24

17 Sep '24

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/four-delaware-men-charged-international-sext… Between Aug. 20 and Sept. 5, four Delaware men were arrested and/or self-surrendered in Delaware on federal charges relating to an alleged international “sextortion” scheme that targeted thousands of victims throughout the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. According to a superseding indictment unsealed today, Sidi Diakite, 30; Almamy Diaby, 22; Abdul Aziz Sangare, 26; and Abdoul Aziz Traore, 31; all residents of Wilmington, and other co-conspirators allegedly operated an international, financially motivated “sextortion” and money laundering scheme in which the conspirators engaged in cyberstalking, interstate threats, extortion, money laundering, and wire fraud. As part of the scheme, the conspirators, utilizing multiple payment methods, attempted to extort approximately $6.9 million from thousands of potential victims, and they successfully extorted approximately $1.9 million from these victims through CashApp and Apple Pay alone. The superseding indictment also charges Hadja Kone, 28, of Wilmington, Delaware, who was previously arrested in April; and Siaka Ouattara, 22, of Abidjan, Cote d’Ivoire, whom the Ivorian authorities separately arrested in February in Abidjan, Cote d’Ivoire, on Ivorian charges stemming from the same scheme. As alleged in the superseding indictment, the conspirators posed as young females online and initiated communications with thousands of potential victims, who were primarily young men and included minors from the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. The conspirators allegedly offered to provide and/or provided victims with sexual photographs, video recordings, and/or “web cam” or “live video chat” sessions depicting what they falsely portrayed to be a young female, when in fact the conspirators were the ones operating the accounts. Unbeknownst to the victims, during the web cam/live video chats, the conspirators surreptitiously recorded the victims as they exposed their genitals and/or engaged in sexual activity. The conspirators thereafter sent the victims copies of the victims’ fraudulently obtained sexual images and threatened to distribute the victims’ sexual images to the victims’ friends, family members, significant others, employers, and co-workers, and to publish the victims’ sexual images widely online, unless the victims transferred funds to designated recipients. Ouattara, Kone, Diakite, Diaby, Sangare, Traore, and others also operated infrastructure to transfer the funds illegally obtained from the victims to conspirators located in Côte d’Ivoire and elsewhere overseas. Diakite, Diaby, Sangare, Traore, Kone, and Ouattara are each charged with conspiracy to commit cyberstalking and to send interstate threats, conspiracy to engage in money laundering, money laundering, and wire fraud. If convicted, the defendants each face a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison for each conspiracy count and money laundering count, and a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison for each wire fraud count. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Nicole M. Argentieri, head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney David C. Weiss for the District of Delaware, and Acting Assistant Director James C. Barnacle Jr. of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division made the announcement. The FBI is investigating the case, with assistance from the Justice Department's Office of International Affairs and the government of Cote d’Ivoire. Trial Attorney Austin M. Berry of the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Senior Trial Attorney Mona Sedky of the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Briana Knox for the District of Delaware are prosecuting the case. If you, your child, or someone you know is being exploited via sextortion, contact your local FBI field office, call 1-800-CALL-FBI (1-800-225-5324), or report it online at the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3). Additional resources can found at Financially Motivated Sextortion — FBI. For more information about this particular financially motivated sextortion case and if you believe you are a victim in this particular case, please also visit www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-vns/case/united-states-v-hadja-fanta-kone… . An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. Updated September 10, 2024 Components Criminal Division Criminal - Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section Criminal - Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section USAO - Delaware Press Release Number: 24-1116 Related Content Press Release Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada Garcia, Co-Founder of the Sinaloa Cartel, Arraigned in Brooklyn on International Drug Charges September 13, 2024 Press Release Colorado Man Sentenced for Cyberstalking Three Individuals in Hawaii and Obstructing Justice September 10, 2024 Press Release Foreign National Extradited from Colombia to the United States for Kidnapping and Assaulting Members of the U.S. Military September 9, 2024 Archived Press Releases Archived News Para Notícias en Español envelope icon Office of Public Affairs U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington DC 20530 smartphone icon Office of Public Affairs Direct Line 202-514-2007 Department of Justice Main Switchboard 202-514-2000 smartphone icon Signup for Email Updates Social Media twitter icon facebook icon youtube icon instagram icon linkedin icon U.S. Department of Justice logo About Archives FOIA Accessibility Legal Policies & Disclaimers Privacy For Employees Office of the Inspector General No FEAR Act Data Vulnerability Disclosure Español Vote.gov Have a question about Government Services? Contact USA.gov Return to the top of the page.

1 0

Update On The Return Of The Parthenon Marbles To Their Rightful Place - Management - Law Department Performance - Worldwide
by Gunnar Larson 17 Sep '24

17 Sep '24

https://www.mondaq.com/cyprus/management/1517680/update-on-the-return-of-th… From Cyprus to Australia, from Australia to London and from London to Greece, the struggle for the return of the Parthenon Marbles continues unabated. The impact that the initiative of the law firm, Michael Kyprianou & Co LLC, for the return of the Marbles is now unprecedented, with teams having been set up, both Cypriots and Greeks, who are now working tirelessly at the legal level to achieve the goal. The legal campaign at international level on the issue was initiated by Savvas Savvides, a Senior Partner of the Michael Kyprianou law firm, and the dedication and intensive work of these teams is commendable and truly impressive. Emails and messages of support are being received from every corner of the world, which is most heartwarming. Despite any differences in views on the solution that could be found, these are being put aside and the focus is on a common goal: the return of the Marbles to the Parthenon. The team working in Cyprus in particular has made it clear that it will not accept any compromise on the return of the Marbles to Athens. The present discussion on the loan of the Marbles to Greece in exchange for borrowing exhibits from the Acropolis Museum is not an acceptable solution. The British Museum's claim that the Marbles have not been stolen and that they cannot be accused of being stolen seems to be losing ground and is being completely taken apart through the hard-fought battles that have been waged. The statement by Turkey's representative to the 24th session of the UNESCO Intergovernmental Committee for the Return of Cultural Property to the Countries of Origin (ICPRCP) was pivotal. Ms Zeynep Boz, head of Turkey's antiquities, in the Anti-Trafficking Antiquities Department, said that they were not aware of any document legalising the purchase, and negating the British Museum's claim that the Marbles were acquired legally. In 1799, the then British ambassador, Lord Elgin, taking advantage of his position and asking for a decree, managed to remove the marbles from the Parthenon. The infamous decree did not have the Sultan's signature and therefore had no validity. Nevertheless, Elgin managed to grab hold of the sculptures and sent memos to the British government to buy them. The Marbles were eventually purchased by the British government for £35,000, but because Elgin owed £18,000 to the state, he was only given £17,000. This is a strong legal point showing that his ultimate aim was to write off his debt to the British Treasury by any means necessary. It is not possible for UNESCO to have the Parthenon as its emblem and for this monument to have pieces of it scattered everywhere. It is unacceptable to continue to accept this situation. It is every Citizen's national and universal duty to ensure that justice is done and to say a firm 'no' to any compromise that would lead, indirectly but clearly, to the recognition that the United Kingdom acquired the Marbles in a legal manner. The struggle continues and will continue until the Parthenon Marbles are returned to their natural habitat, ensuring justice and respect to Greece's cultural heritage. The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

1 0

Climate Change Litigation's Impact On Companies - Climate Change - Environment - Turkey
by Gunnar Larson 17 Sep '24

17 Sep '24

https://www.mondaq.com/turkey/climate-change/1517750/climate-change-litigat… Climate change is a phenomenon with globally significant economic and social implications. Climate change-related litigation poses a serious threat to companies. These cases can affect companies' reputations, operations and long-term strategies in addition to their significant financial burden. This article will address the impact of climate change litigation on companies. The Negative Impact of Climate Litigation on Companies Financial Costs: Compensation and Penalties: As a result of climate change-related litigation, companies may incur significant compensation and penalties, which could decrease their profit and threaten their financial stability. High Legal Costs: Lengthy and complex legal proceedings can result in significant legal costs for companies. These costs can be a serious burden, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises. Increase in Insurance Premiums: Companies may have to pay higher insurance premiums due to an increase in climate litigation since insurance companies may charge higher premiums for the relevant risks. Risks to Companies' Reputations: Brand Image and Trust: Climate change-related litigation can damage companies' brand image. Consumers and investors may assume a negative attitude towards companies that are not environmentally responsible. Media and Public Relations: Extensive media coverage of litigation can lead to negative publicity for companies, which may negatively affect their public relations strategies. Social Media: Today, negative coverage about a company may spread rapidly with the popularity of social media. Companies can face intense criticism on social media and further lose their reputation. Operational and Strategic Risks: Business Interruptions: The financial and managerial burdens of litigation and possible injunctions can disrupt companies' daily operations as well as production and service processes. Supply Chain Disruptions: Climate litigation can also harm supply chains. In particular, difficulties in the supply of raw materials and energy can disrupt production processes. The Positive Impact of Climate Litigation on Companies Improved Climate Strategies: Increased Awareness and Adaptation: Climate litigation can force companies to be more conscious and responsible about climate change risks, driving them to adopt more sustainable business models and adaptation strategies. Innovation and Technology: Companies can be encouraged to develop new technologies and innovative solutions to fight climate change, which may mean a competitive edge in the long run. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Use: Litigation can urge companies to improve their energy efficiency and to transition to renewable energy sources. Thus, they may achieve cost savings and environmental benefits. Improved Transparency and Reporting: Improved Reporting: Litigation could impel companies to report their climate risks and opportunities in more detail. This could lead to greater transparency for investors and other stakeholders. Setting and Monitoring Targets: Companies can become more proactive in setting and achieving climate targets. Thus, they might attain their long-term sustainability goals more easily. Carbon Footprint Monitoring and Reporting: Climate litigation can oblige companies to pay more attention to monitoring and reporting their carbon footprint. This is an important step in achieving sustainability goals. Investor Relations and Market Opportunities: Attracting Sustainable Investments: Companies adopting more sustainable business models can attract investors who care about environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria, which could facilitate long-term access to capital. New Market Opportunities: Companies addressing climate change may discover new market opportunities in various areas such as renewable energy, energy efficiency and other sustainable solutions. Competitive Edge: Companies that pioneer sustainable practices can achieve a competitive edge in the market. Thus, they might increase customer satisfaction and get new business opportunities. Climate change litigation presents both risks and opportunities for companies. While increasing companies' financial, operational and reputational risks, these cases can also urge them to adopt more sustainable and transparent business practices. To evade litigation risks, companies must follow the ongoing climate proceedings and comply with the ensuing decisions so that they could adapt to this dynamic landscape, become more competitive in the long term and achieve sustainable growth. The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

1 0

Favorable Pennsylvania Wiretap Decision - Privacy Protection - Privacy - United States
by Gunnar Larson 17 Sep '24

17 Sep '24

https://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/privacy-protection/1516394/favorable-pe… Frequent readers of this blog are aware of the surge in lawsuits alleging that companies illegally wiretap consumers when they utilize software which tracks consumers' interactions on their websites. The majority of these lawsuits are concentrated in jurisdictions that have enacted broad wiretapping statutes. One such jurisdiction is Pennsylvania, with a statute known as the Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act ("WESCA"). Recently, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ("Third Circuit") was tasked with determining whether Defendants' use of session replay code to record consumer communications constitutes wiretapping under WESCA. Lack of Personal Jurisdiction Over Pennsylvania Wiretapping Claims In Schnur v. Papa John's Int'l Inc., the Third Circuit reviewed the Western District Court of Pennsylvania's ("WDPA") dismissal of a class action in which Plaintiff alleged that Defendant deployed session replay code on its website to illegally wiretap Pennsylvania residents. Session replay technology, with which readers of this blog are familiar, is a tool that uses the data collected from a website visit to create a video-like reconstruction of same. Companies keep these records to prove that consumers visited their sites, and, among other things, consented to be called or receive email marketing communications. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant's use of session replay technology without notice and/or consumer consent constituted illegal wiretapping of Pennsylvania residents in violation of WESCA. In response, Defendant moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The WDPA granted Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, finding that Plaintiff failed to allege that Defendant expressly aimed the subject session replay code at Pennsylvania residents. The WDPA also held that Plaintiff's wiretapping claims did not arise out of or relate to Defendant's marketing and sale of pizza in Pennsylvania. Accordingly, the WDPA granted Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. On appeal, Plaintiff argued that the WDPA erred when it dismissed Plaintiff's claims for lack of jurisdiction because it failed to consider Defendant's extensive business contacts with the State of Pennsylvania. In its decision, the Third Circuit agreed with the WDPA's holding that Plaintiff failed to allege that Defendant expressly aimed its use of session replay code at Pennsylvania residents. In its holding, the Court stated that Plaintiff "did not allege that [Defendant's] website is accessible only in Pennsylvania; that the [Defendant] deploys Session Replay Code only to users who access the site in Pennsylvania, or that the website tailors its content in any meaningful way to Pennsylvanians." Citing a recent First Circuit decision, the Court held that for unlawful wiretapping to have occurred, Plaintiff, at a minimum, had to allege that Defendant knew that a given user was in Pennsylvania before it deployed the session replay code on the user's browser. Applying a different jurisdictional test, the Court then analyzed whether Plaintiff adequately alleged that: (1) Defendant "purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities" in Pennsylvania; and (2) his claims arise out of or relate to Defendant's contacts with Pennsylvania. By maintaining approximately 85 brick-and-mortar locations and regularly marketing and advertising in the State of Pennsylvania, the Court found that Papa John's purposely availed itself of the Pennsylvania market. However, because the Court determined that Defendant's in-State restaurant sales and marketing activities lacked a strong relationship to Plaintiff's Pennsylvania wiretapping claims, it affirmed the WDPA's dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction. Similarly, in Hasson v. FullStory, Inc., the Third Circuit reviewed the WDPA's dismissal of Plaintiff's Pennsylvania wiretapping claims for lack of personal jurisdiction. Although the Third Circuit agreed with the WDPA's conclusion that Defendant did not expressly aim its allegedly tortious conduct at Pennsylvania, the Third Circuit remanded to the WDPA to consider whether: (1) Defendant purposely availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities in the State of Pennsylvania; and (2) Plaintiff's claims arise out of or relate to Defendant's contacts with Pennsylvania. What is The Significance of These Decisions? It should be noted that the Schnur decision was not unanimous, as one judge on the three-judge tribunal dissented from the majority. The proliferation of e-commerce and corresponding technological advances continue to present challenges for courts nationwide. As a result, illegal wiretapping claims are unlikely to slow down anytime soon. If your company uses software to track consumers' interactions on its website and is named as a defendant in a wiretapping lawsuit, it is imperative that you evaluate whether you have viable jurisdictional defenses (such as those raised in Schnur and Hasson). Failing to do so may result in protracted and costly litigation that could easily have been avoided. In addition, your company should consider reviewing: (1) its data collection technology and practices; (2) when and how consent to collect and use such consumer data is obtained; and (3) with whom your company shares this information. The attorneys at Klein Moynihan Turco ("KMT") have been at the forefront of: (1) defending clients against federal and state consumer wiretapping claims; and (2) advising clients on how to comply with various federal and state wiretapping laws. KMT's attorneys are readily available to assess your company's current data collection practices and help protect against future wiretapping allegations. In addition, our outstanding litigation defense team will use its vast experience to zealously defend your company if it is named as a defendant in a wiretapping lawsuit. Similar Blog Posts: California Court Holds That Website Recording Is NOT Wiretapping Does The Use Of Chatbots Constitute Wiretapping? Help! I Was Served With A CIPA Lawsuit The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances

1 0

BREAKING: Sean 'Diddy' Combs Charged With Operating Label As Criminal Ring
by Gunnar Larson 17 Sep '24

17 Sep '24

BREAKING: Sean 'Diddy' Combs Charged With Operating Label As Criminal Ring <https://www.law360.com/newyork/articles/1820322?nl_pk=ac5a3855-e47c-4403-be…> By Law360 Staff Hip hop mogul Sean "Diddy" Combs was hit with racketeering charges in New York federal court Tuesday alleging he used his label Bad Boy Records to operate a criminal enterprise that engaged in sex trafficking, forced labor and other offenses. Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/newyork/articles/1820322?nl_pk=ac5a3855-e47c-4403-be…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/newyork/articles/1820322?nl_pk=ac5a3855-e47c-4403-be…>

1 0

BREAKING: Ghislaine Maxwell Loses 2nd Circ. Appeal
by Gunnar Larson 17 Sep '24

17 Sep '24

BREAKING: Ghislaine Maxwell Loses 2nd Circ. Appeal <https://www.law360.com/newyork/articles/1879661?nl_pk=ac5a3855-e47c-4403-be…> By Law360 Staff The Second Circuit on Tuesday rejected arguments by disgraced socialite and Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell that her sex trafficking charges violated Epstein's 2007 non-prosecution deal in Florida, upholding her conviction and 20-year prison sentence. Opinion attached | Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/newyork/articles/1879661?nl_pk=ac5a3855-e47c-4403-be…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/newyork/articles/1879661?nl_pk=ac5a3855-e47c-4403-be…>

1 0

Office of Public Affairs | Four Delaware Men Charged with International “Sextortion” and Money Laundering Scheme | United States Department of Justice
by Gunnar Larson 17 Sep '24

17 Sep '24

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/four-delaware-men-charged-international-sext…

1 0