Sunday, February 14, 2021

“Our First Amendment and Intellectual property counsel is Marc Randazza and the Randazza Legal Group,” OH THE DOUBLE STANDARD IRONY OF IT ALL. Marc Randazza the MOST Corrupt Attorney ANYWHERE. Still at Large.. Things that make you say Hmmm.

  

"*This is an opinion article and doesn't reflect the publication standings *

Dwight Schar accused in court documents of extortion and gangster-like conduct, is represented by corrupt attorney Marc Randazza who also represents neo-Nazi and the port industry. 

Dwight Schar, founder of Ryan Homes and the failed Bella Collina community in Florida. But he also represents PissedConsumer.com, a website that allows people to create fake reviews of a product or service and has been accused of unfairly ruining business reputations online while misusing the decency act (47 U.S.C. § 230, a Provision of the Communication Decency Act Tucked inside the Communications Decency Act)

“Our First Amendment and Intellectual property counsel is Marc Randazza and the Randazza Legal Group,” brags PissedConsumer.com. PissedConsumer is a platform meant for reviews, much like Yelp or reviews on Amazon. But unlike Yelp, Pissedconsumer allows anonymous users from anywhere in the world to assault businesses with fake reviews, alleging anything from fraud to malpractice. 

Pissed Consumer is a Russian/Ukrainian affiliated business owned by Americans who live in Las Vegas. It has been accused by small business owners of exploiting the protection behind Section 230 of the CDA in order to destroy small businesses. “It only wants negative consumer reviews of businesses (as signaled by its name), and its basic business model is to rank the negative consumer reviews highly in Google search results and then charge the businesses money to take the edge off that indexing,” writes one blog. 

This particular platform gives random people the power to defame small businesses, independent contractors, and people desperately trying to make a living by sabotaging their reputation. Pissed Consumer protects the identity of whoever chooses to be anonymous.

PissedConsumer Accused of Ruining Lives and Small Businesses

Business owners and contractors have told stories of how their online reputation sank after a few undeserved bad reviews. “Because if it is a small coffee shop, maybe it’s a new coffee shop, a couple of negative reviews can really impact that business,” said Nick McVey to ABC News. 

“Now it seems anyone can leave a review. Regardless, if they used your service or not,” wrote Robert Anspach. Unfortunately, that gives rise to another problem: the exploitation of small business owners. 

In 2018, security experts in The Hill warned that hackers were taking advantage of platforms like Yelp and Pissed Consumer in order to destroy reputations of small businesses. “It is definitely an increase that we see — that more and more hackers are misusing the whole brand reputation and any type of review process to blackmail and extort companies,” Candid Wueest, a Symantec threat researcher based in Europe, told The Hill.

Hackers held an airline at ransom, threatening to destroy its reputation if the business did not pay the hackers in bitcoin. 

PISSEDCONSUMER-Asking-10-60000-per-year-to-hide-information-from-Google-accused-of-EXTORTION-of-small-businesses-by-Michael-Podolsky-from-consumer-Opinion-
PISSEDCONSUMER-Asking-10-60000-per-year-to-hide-information-from-Google-accused-of-EXTORTION-of-small-businesses-by-Michael-Podolsky-from-consumer-Opinion

Corrupt Randazza At The Center of 5 State Bar Investigations

The State Bar of Nevada charged Randazza for violating Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct on nine counts. He broke the rules in regards to: 

  • Communication, 
  • Conflict of Interest: Current Clients, 
  • Conflict of Interest: Current Clients: Specific Rules, 
  • Imputation of Conflicts of Interest, 
  • Safekeeping Property, 
  • Declining or Terminating Representation, Advisor, 
  • Restrictions on Right to Practice, 
  • Misconduct. 

Dwight Schar has been accused by multiple people of unsavory business tactics. One of his companies, Ryan Homes, was investigated by USA Today and sent a letter from Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH). The senator pleaded with Ryan Homes to stop some of its practices that were harming consumers. 

The Merriam Webster definition of corrupt is “dishonest or illegal behavior.”

Not only was Randazza investigated by the Nevada State Bar, but also he was investigated by four other states: Massachusetts, Arizona, Florida, and California. He has also been suspended by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. 

Legal registry Avvo rated him 1 out 10 with “extreme caution” because he had received disciplinary action. Several five-star reviews boosted his profile, however, some of them were very long and very poorly written. They also talked about irrelevant points, including “love and respect.” 

Dwight Schar and Bella Collina have chosen this particular attorney to represent them. Schar is now associated with an attorney who has major ethical violations attached to his name, who tries to strike at the racial divide in America. 

Does Randazza Represent Free Speech? Or Just Porn, Extortion, Pedophilia, and Nazis?

Marc Randazza styles himself a free speech lawyer. However, he has no problem with creating false copyright notices to take down another’s free expression. 

But when it comes to Neo-Nazis, Randazza prefers to work with them. HuffPost writes that “outrageous” Randazza is “curiously chummy” with fascists and racists. Randazza has also represented several Neo-Nazis in court, including Andrew Anglin, who published the address of a Jewish realtor on the Nazi website The Daily Stormer. 

In some pieces written for humor/legal blog Popehat, Randazza made the argument for legalizing child pornography. “I am going to make the case for legalization of child pornography,” he wrote. He argued that photos of babies in bathtubs, pictures of girlfriends, and children in bathing suits could be classified as child pornography. Randazza even admitted, “I expect to have this very post used against me in the future.”

He also suggested in the blog that public masturbation could be considered freedom of speech. “I think that the Gatewood decision leaves the question open as to whether you might be able to beat off in public there because you ‘fucking hate Portland,’” he wrote. 

Why Google Permits Pissedconsumer To Hide Bad Reviews For Money? Is Google Part of Possible EXTORTION?

PISSEDCONSUMER Denied section 230 immunity and can’t shake extortion claim Asking $10-60,000 per year to hide information from Google accused of EXTORTION of small businesses by Michael Podolsky from consumer Opinion – Why Google permits this conduct?

PISSEDCONSUMER Denied section 230 immunity and can't shake extortion claim  Asking $10-60,000 per year to hide  information from Google accused of EXTORTION of small businesses by Michael Podolsky from consumer Opinion - Why Google permits
PISSEDCONSUMER Denied section 230 immunity and can’t shake extortion claim Asking $10-60,000 per year to hide information from Google accused of EXTORTION of small businesses by Michael Podolsky from consumer Opinion – Why Google permits
*This is an opinion, impression article presenting a point of view to be considered and there are other opinions regarding the individuals and entities mentioned in this article. You may search other information and find other opinions.*

Additional Resources Curated (not verified for truthfulness)

https://www.bbb.org/us/nv/las-vegas/profile/internet-service/consumer-opinion-llc-1086-90052400/complaints

https://unmasked-michael-podolsky.blogspot.com/2019/11/webactivismcom-owner-michael-podolsky.html

https://www.complaintsboard.com/vladimir-soyfer-and-fairfax-smiles-fake-negative-reviews-by-webactivismcom-owner-michael-podolsky-c1072884

https://www.trustpilot.com/review/www.pissedconsumer.com

https://www.sitejabber.com/reviews/pissedconsumer.com

https://www.dmlp.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2010-09-24-Ascentive%20Complaint.pdf

https://marketingland.com/increase-extortion-fueled-reputation-attacks-points-need-legal-change-228898

https://www.reviews.io/company-reviews/store/www-pissedconsumer-com


Source

https://www.smye-holland.com/2021/02/13/randazza-represents-pissedconsumer-a-company-with-russian-ties-accused-of-extorting-small-businesses/

OF COURSE GOOGLE IS IN ON IT. I REPORTED ON THIS AND SUED ON ALL THIS YEARS AGO. CORRUPT COURTS IN MARITIME LAW, THEIR REIGN IS COMING TO AN END

 "

Why Google Permits Pissedconsumer To Hide Bad Reviews For Money? Is Google Part of Possible EXTORTION?

PISSEDCONSUMER Denied section 230 immunity and can’t shake extortion claim Asking $10-60,000 per year to hide information from Google accused of EXTORTION of small businesses by Michael Podolsky from consumer Opinion – Why Google permits this conduct?

PISSEDCONSUMER Denied section 230 immunity and can't shake extortion claim  Asking $10-60,000 per year to hide  information from Google accused of EXTORTION of small businesses by Michael Podolsky from consumer Opinion - Why Google permits
PISSEDCONSUMER Denied section 230 immunity and can’t shake extortion claim Asking $10-60,000 per year to hide information from Google accused of EXTORTION of small businesses by Michael Podolsky from consumer Opinion – Why Google permits
*This is an opinion, impression article presenting a point of view to be considered and there are other opinions regarding the individuals and entities mentioned in this article. You may search other information and find other opinions.*

Additional Resources Curated (not verified for truthfulness)

https://www.bbb.org/us/nv/las-vegas/profile/internet-service/consumer-opinion-llc-1086-90052400/complaints

https://unmasked-michael-podolsky.blogspot.com/2019/11/webactivismcom-owner-michael-podolsky.html

https://www.complaintsboard.com/vladimir-soyfer-and-fairfax-smiles-fake-negative-reviews-by-webactivismcom-owner-michael-podolsky-c1072884

https://www.trustpilot.com/review/www.pissedconsumer.com

https://www.sitejabber.com/reviews/pissedconsumer.com

https://www.dmlp.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2010-09-24-Ascentive%20Complaint.pdf

https://marketingland.com/increase-extortion-fueled-reputation-attacks-points-need-legal-change-228898

https://www.reviews.io/company-reviews/store/www-pissedconsumer-com


Source

https://www.smye-holland.com/2021/02/13/randazza-represents-pissedconsumer-a-company-with-russian-ties-accused-of-extorting-small-businesses/

"Corrupt Randazza At The Center of 5 State Bar Investigations"

  "The State Bar of Nevada charged Randazza for violating Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct on nine counts. He broke the rules in regards to: 


Communication, 

Conflict of Interest: Current Clients, 

Conflict of Interest: Current Clients: Specific Rules, 

Imputation of Conflicts of Interest, 

Safekeeping Property, 

Declining or Terminating Representation, Advisor, 

Restrictions on Right to Practice, 

Misconduct. 


Dwight Schar has been accused by multiple people of unsavory business tactics. One of his companies, Ryan Homes, was investigated by USA Today and sent a letter from Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH). The senator pleaded with Ryan Homes to stop some of its practices that were harming consumers. 


The Merriam Webster definition of corrupt is “dishonest or illegal behavior.”


Not only was Randazza investigated by the Nevada State Bar, but also he was investigated by four other states: Massachusetts, Arizona, Florida, and California. He has also been suspended by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. 


Legal registry Avvo rated him 1 out 10 with “extreme caution” because he had received disciplinary action. Several five-star reviews boosted his profile, however, some of them were very long and very poorly written. They also talked about irrelevant points, including “love and respect.” 


Dwight Schar and Bella Collina have chosen this particular attorney to represent them. Schar is now associated with an attorney who has major ethical violations attached to his name, who tries to strike at the racial divide in America. "

Source

https://www.smye-holland.com/2021/02/13/randazza-represents-pissedconsumer-a-company-with-russian-ties-accused-of-extorting-small-businesses/

Saturday, February 10, 2018

Zirzow and Larson Las Vegas Attorneys for Pedophile Rights Porn lawyer, White Supremacy Rights Lawyer Marc Randazza Randazza Legal Group. Marc Randazza attorney for Dennis Hof Las Vegas Virgin Auctions.

Pedophile Rights Porn lawyer, White Supremacy Rights Lawyers of Randazza Legal Group. Supported by Las Vegas Attorney Matt Zirzow, Zacharia Larson and Shara Larson.

Virgin auction promoter & PIMP Dennis Hof hires pedophile rights porn lawyer of Randazza Legal Group. Nevada Brothel Owner Dennis Hof.



Marc Randazza, Randazza Legal Group.



#StopHof  #RandazzaLegalGroup #MattZirzow #FirstAmendment #RandazzaQuotes #ZachariaLarson

Thursday, November 2, 2017

Embattled copyright lawyer uses DMCA to remove article about himself. Marc Randazza has Abused our Justice System OVER and OVER to remove online content that did not "flatter him", exposed him or flat out criticized him.

"Marc Randazza tells Wordpress that the unflattering story "is not fair use.

Well-known copyright lawyer Marc Randazza used the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to delete an online article about a dispute between his former employer and himself.

Click Below to Read the FULL document, So many Lies. Marc Randazza is the world's most hypocritical lawyer and violates First Amendment Rights in mass. 
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/02/embattled-copyright-lawyer-uses-dmca-to-remove-article-about-himself/

When I First Spoke to Marc Randazza he said that the Big Media had a Monopoly on Free Speech and there was Not Much I Could Do about it. Guess I Proved First Amendment Attorney Marc Randazza VERY Wrong.


Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox was the FIRST to gain Equal Free Speech Rights for ALL Bloggers to that of Institutional Press Journalists.

It was ruled for the first time that a blogger is entitled to the same free speech protection as a journalist.
On 2014, blogger Crystal Cox accused Obsidian and Kevin D. Padrick of corrupt and fraudulent conduct. Although the court dismissed most of Cox's blog posts as opinion, it found one post to be more factual in its assertions (and, therefore, defamatory).
It was ruled for the first time,[17][18] by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit,[19] that a blogger is entitled to the same free speech protection as a journalist and cannot be liable for defamation unless the blogger acted negligently.[20] In the decision, journalists and bloggers are equally protected under the First Amendment[17] because the "protections of the First Amendment do not turn on whether the defendant was a trained journalist, formally affiliated with traditional news entities, engaged in conflict-of-interest disclosure, went beyond just assembling others' writings, or tried to get both sides of a story."[19]:11–12[21]


I, Crystal Cox was the FIRST, because I refused Settlements over and over. I wanted a precedent to FREE all Citizen Journalists, Investigative Bloggers and Whistleblowers

#DefamationCase #FreeSpeech #ConstitutionalLaw #CrystalCoxCase #Whistleblower #InvestigativeBlogger #Ant-Slapp #CitizenJournalist #FirstAmendment #Defamation #DefamationLawsuit 

When I First Spoke to Marc Randazza he said that the Big Media had a Monopoly on Free Speech and there was Not Much I Could Do about it. Guess I Proved First Amendment Attorney Marc Randazza VERY Wrong.

Sunday, October 29, 2017

In Randazza v. Cox, Nevada Judge Gloria Navarro issued an unconstitutional TRO against Blogger Crystal Cox and Gave Marc Randazza massive online content and intellectual property. Thereby shutting down Cox's speech and flat out stealing blogs, online content and redirecting MY WORK and PROPERTY to Randazza's Legal Blog SLAMMING me and Promoting him and his law firm. In that Case it was OK and seemingly Lawful for a Federal Judge to go ahead and take my Constitutional Rights. Check Out this case below where WORLDS Most Hypocritical Lawyer Marc Randazza Makes the OPPOSITE CASE AGAIN.

"In the motion to dissolve the order, attorney Marc Randazza points out that fashioning a libel lawsuit as a tortious interference lawsuit doesn't change the ultimate goal of the litigation: to silence criticism."


"Judge Decides Free Speech Is Still A Right; 
Dumps Prior Restraint Order Against Mattress Review Site

A couple of weeks ago, a federal judge in Utah decided prior restraint was the best way to handle a recently-filed defamation suit against Honest Mattress Reviews by Purple Innovations, makers of the Purple Mattress.
Purple's lengthy filing contained numerous allegations of harm caused by Honest Mattress Reviews' extended commentary on the white plastic powder covering every mattress Purple ships. It also alleged HMR was just a front for site owner Ryan Monahan's brand management work with Purple's competitor, Ghostbed. Rather than give HMR a chance to respond, the judge decided the review site could publish nothing further about Purple or the lawsuit. It wasn't even allowed to refer to its previous rating of Purple's mattress.
Honest Mattress Review didn't care much for this decision -- one it had been given no chance to contest. It immediately posted an article about the case and offered to comply with the letter of the order, but perhaps not its spirit.
This temporary order commands that we take down all reviews, and even cease rating this company with a rating of “Poor.” Yes, indeed, we are no longer even permitted to rate this company as Poor. I guess we will change its rating to “💩.”
[...]
Do you trust a company that, rather than compete in the marketplace, decides that it will just try and sue negative reviews out of existence?
Purple Innovations immediately returned to court, demanding it find HMR in contempt of its order, in particular pointing to the poo emoji and HMR's claims about the unconstitutionality of the order and Purple's alleged disingenuousness in filing the libel suit.
That review has since been reinstated and given this header image.
And HMR has published a long list of court documents it has filed in this case. This includes a motion to dissolve the restraining order and a preliminary examination of the powdery substance Purple claims is harmless and that HMR claims could be hazardous to purchasers' health.
The action is a quintessential SLAPP suit designed to suppress negative consumer journalism. Plaintiffs have cleverly attempted to disguise this defamation claim as a Lanham Act claim – presumably to ensure the availability of Federal Court jurisdiction and to try to side-step the clear case law that cuts against them in defamation actions. But, no matter how eloquently someone may call a “dog” a “chicken,” it will never lay eggs. And styling a specious defamation claim as a Lanham Act claim does not remove the underlying speech from the protections afforded by the First Amendment.
He also points out that Purple's claims that the plastic packing dust is harmless haven't been supported by anything Purple's willing to let customers and competitors view. Instead, it's only made vague assertions about its safety. And those statements are ultimately meaningless when examined closely.
Plaintiff sells mattresses that are made of a rubber honeycomb, which they then dust with a powder that they claim is made of plastic and has been shown to be polyethylene microspheres. In other words, someone who sleeps on these mattresses would be expected to inhale these microspheres. The Plaintiff claims that it is “non toxic” and “food grade” plastic – but this does not assuage the concerns. After all, a plastic fork is “food grade” and “non toxic” but you most certainly would not want to actually eat it. The same goes for what a person wants to put in their lungs. It was reasonable to be concerned about this “plastic powder” since (a) if the particles that make up this plastic “powder” are of a certain size, they will pass through the alveoli into the bloodstream; or (b) if they are a bit larger, they will simply lodge themselves inside the lungs.
To support its claims, HMR put a Harvard Professor of Pathology to work. Dr. John Godleski's report[PDF] is far from complete at this point, but what's contained in his preliminary examination of the powder doesn't appear to agree with Purple's assertions of harmlessness.
By Fourier Transformed Infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), the white powder particles were shown to be polyethylene, and the purple frame was found to be polyethylene-polypropylene copolymer. The foam portion of the mattress is still understudy, but has characteristics of butadiene, and may be a form of butadiene polymer.
Polyethylene is a common plastic formed into many structures. As inhalable microspheres, these have the potential to cause respiratory irritation especially when inhaled in large numbers as shown in my laboratory (1- 4). In addition, polyethylene has been associated with allergy in the form of either asthma or contact dermatitis in sensitized individuals (5-7). Based on this assessment, it is important for consumers to be aware of the composition of this fine particulate matter in the mattress which may be released into the air and has the potential for the development of respiratory or dermal hypersensitivity in some individuals.
Also included in the filed documents is an affidavit that undercuts Purple's claims about HMR's site owner being a competitor's "brand manager." This is central to Purple's Lanham Act claims -- the claims it's using to sidestep anti-SLAPP motions. The affidavit from the competitor (Ghostbed) notes HMR's site owner has never been directly employed by Ghostbed and that Ghostbed told him to stop referring to himself as its "brand manager" after noticing that statement on his Twitter profile.
The judge presiding over the case appears to have been overwhelmed by the pile of documents landing on his desk. A short order [PDF] issued on the 15th shows what can happen when a normally adversarial process is allowed to be, you know, adversarial.
For the reasons set forth in the parties’ briefing and at oral argument, the court finds a lack of “clear and unequivocal” support for a right to relief that is necessary for the entry of the “extraordinary remedy” of a preliminary injunction. Greater Yellowstone Coal v. Flowers, 321 F.3d 1250, 1256 (10th Cir. 2003). As such, the court hereby grants Defendants’ motions to dissolve the Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. No. 36), and denies Plaintiff’s oral Motion to convert the Temporary Restraining Order into a Preliminary Injunction. The court similarly denies Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Conduct Expedited Discovery (Dkt. No. 39) and Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Defendants Should not be Held in Contempt (Dkt. No. 17). The court further denies Defendants’ request for sanctions, finding that such sanctions are not warranted here.
The restraining order is lifted and HMR's turd-laced post isn't in danger of being found contemptuous. The lawsuit should continue in a more constitutional fashion from this point forward.

Source

"Conclusion and Relief Sought
Because Defendants are likely to succeed on a motion to vacate the TRO, before this Court or on appeal, a stay of the TRO is warranted. Defendants’ fundamental First Amendment rights must not be stymied by the speculations of a Plaintiff who wishes to shut down discussion rather than answer legitimate questions, no matter how hyperbolically raised. Plaintiff has no likelihood of success on its underlying claims and was not entitled to the TRO.

Case 2:17-cv-00138-DB Document 28 Filed 03/09/17 Page 23 of 25
- 24 -
The exigency and urgency of dissolving this temporary restraining order can not be
overstated. Even a temporary suppression of First Amendment rights is itself irreparable harm.
However, given that this is information consumers need to make an informed decision about the health risks inherent in use of the Purple Mattress, even a temporary suppression of this information could be the proximate cause of actual illness or injury."

" Plaintiff is clearly aggressively intent on suppressing this information. At this point, the reporting has been shored up by the expert report of Dr. Godleski. The Purple Mattress, as currently manufactured, appears to be a public health hazard. This Court should abide no further censorship. "

Source of Above and Full Hypocritical Filing

Judge Grants Randazza's Order. To bad I did not have this judge when Randazza got a TRO against me in Randazza v. Cox

"Before the court are Plaintiff’s Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Defendants Should
not be Held in Contempt (Dkt. No. 17), Defendants Ryan Monahan and Honest Reviews, LLC’s
Emergency Motion to Stay and Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order (Amended) (Dkt. No. 28), Defendant Ghostbed Inc.’s Motion to Dissolve the Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. No. 36),

"For the reasons set forth in the parties’ briefing and at oral argument, the court finds a
lack of “clear and unequivocal” support for a right to relief that is necessary for the entry of the “extraordinary remedy” of a preliminary injunction. Greater Yellowstone Coal v. Flowers, 321 F.3d 1250, 1256 (10th Cir. 2003). As such, the court hereby grants Defendants’ motions to dissolve the Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. No. 36), and denies Plaintiff’s oral Motion to convert the Temporary Restraining Order into a Preliminary Injunction. "

"For the foregoing reasons, and for those expressed in the parties’ briefing and oral
arguments, Docket Numbers 17 and 39, as well as Plaintiff’s oral Motion to convert the
Temporary Restraining Order into a Preliminary Injunction, are hereby DENIED. Docket
Number 28 and the portion of Docket Number 36 requesting dissolution of the Temporary
Restraining Order are GRANTED. Defendants’ request for sanctions is DENIED."

Source of Above and Full Judicial Order

Check out Randazza v. Cox Docket and See how to REALLY use prior restraint to suppress speech and flat out steal online content AND top search engine placement. 

Lot's More Coming SOON on how to us a TRO effectively to Steal Content, Steal Search Engine Placement, Steal Intellectual Property and More. As inspired by Randazza Legal Group, Marc Randazza, J. DeVoy and Ronald Green. 

Questions or Tips??? eMail me at ReverendCrystalCox@Gmail.com

#MarcRandazza #RandazzaQuotes #RandazzaLegalGroup #FreeSpeech