Dr. Duane F. Austin

What Happened?

Dr. Duane F. Austin has faced significant scrutiny over his attempts to hide a questionable past, marred by allegations of misconduct. Reports suggest that Dr. Austin has actively worked to suppress negative information, including damaging news articles, reviews, and professional criticisms. These efforts appear to be aimed at maintaining his reputation, yet they have only led to heightened public suspicion and greater media interest. Critics accuse him of using legal threats, public relations tactics, and other means to censor unfavorable reports.

Despite these attempts, damaging details of his past continue to surface, with some of his former patients and colleagues reportedly raising concerns about unethical behavior and malpractice. These accusations have fueled debates about accountability and transparency in his field, particularly as the efforts to silence dissenting voices are seen as undermining trust.

The growing wave of criticism has sparked further investigations into Dr. Austin’s career, leading to heightened scrutiny over how such professionals navigate controversies and manage their public image. Ultimately, these actions seem to have backfired, drawing even more attention to the very issues he sought to hide, which could potentially have lasting effects on his reputation and career.

Dr. Duane F. Austin

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 Dr. Duane F. Austin

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 Dr. Duane F. Austin trying to hide?

Dr. Duane F. Austin, a prominent eye doctor based in West Hartford, Connecticut, has garnered attention for several adverse incidents related to his professional conduct, with various reports indicating attempts to conceal or downplay these issues. These controversies involve regulatory fines, patient complaints, and allegations of substandard medical practices. Here’s an in-depth look into who Dr. Austin is and what allegations and documents he is allegedly trying to hide online.

1. Background on Dr. Duane F. Austin

Dr. Duane F. Austin is an ophthalmologist who specializes in eye surgeries, including procedures like cataract surgeries and LASIK. He has practiced in West Hartford, Connecticut, for several years and built a reputation as a skilled eye surgeon. However, over time, his reputation has been overshadowed by a series of incidents that have raised serious concerns about his medical practices.

2. Fines and Penalties for Poor Surgical Procedures

One of the most significant issues Dr. Austin has faced is a fine imposed by the Connecticut Department of Public Health. Reports, such as those from Patch, indicate that Dr. Austin was fined due to the performance of substandard surgical procedures that led to patient complications. The regulatory authorities cited his lack of adherence to standard medical protocols during surgeries. This fine and the underlying issues have severely impacted his credibility, leading to regulatory scrutiny.

The fine was part of a broader investigation into his practices, which revealed multiple instances where his surgical techniques did not meet the acceptable medical standards. These lapses in care not only put patients at risk but also raised concerns about the oversight of his practice. Regulatory bodies imposed the fine to hold him accountable and ensure that his medical practice met safety and professional standards.

3. Patient Complaints and Negative Reviews

Patient feedback has also played a pivotal role in highlighting the issues within Dr. Austin’s practice. Many patients have come forward to express dissatisfaction with the outcomes of their surgeries. These complaints range from dissatisfaction with the results of eye surgeries to serious medical complications that some patients experienced following procedures performed by Dr. Austin.

According to numerous online reviews, particularly on platforms like Trustpilot, patients have complained about delayed recovery times, post-surgical complications, and inadequate follow-up care. Some patients allege that Dr. Austin was unresponsive when issues arose post-surgery, which further damaged his reputation. These reviews point to a pattern of dissatisfaction that reflects poorly on his professional conduct.

4. Allegations of Medical Malpractice

In addition to the patient complaints, there have been allegations of medical malpractice against Dr. Austin. These allegations involve accusations of failing to follow standard medical procedures, which have led to poor surgical outcomes and complications. Several patients have reportedly filed lawsuits, citing negligence and improper care.

The malpractice claims against Dr. Austin suggest that the issues in his practice are not isolated incidents but may indicate a broader problem with the quality of care provided. These claims not only impact his credibility but could also lead to legal consequences if proven true. Malpractice suits are particularly damaging in the medical field, as they can lead to severe penalties, loss of medical licenses, and a permanent tarnishing of one’s professional reputation.

5. Efforts to Suppress Negative Information

In light of these adverse incidents, allegations have emerged that Dr. Austin has attempted to suppress negative information online. Reports suggest that he has actively sought to minimize or censor negative reviews, critical news articles, and complaints to protect his professional reputation. This includes potentially utilizing legal threats, public relations strategies, and other means to reduce the visibility of damaging content.

While it is not uncommon for professionals to engage in reputation management, the alleged efforts by Dr. Austin have raised questions about transparency and accountability. His critics argue that by attempting to hide this information, he is preventing potential patients from making informed decisions about his services. Suppression of negative information can damage public trust and raise concerns about ethical standards in the medical field.

6. Regulatory Scrutiny and Investigations

The fines and patient complaints have not gone unnoticed by regulatory bodies. The Connecticut Department of Public Health, in particular, has taken an active role in investigating Dr. Austin’s practice, imposing fines, and ensuring compliance with medical standards. The ongoing scrutiny indicates that authorities are closely monitoring his practice to ensure that no further violations occur.

Investigations into Dr. Austin’s conduct may also extend beyond state-level bodies, as federal regulators and medical licensing boards could become involved if allegations continue to mount. For now, his medical license remains active, but regulatory bodies are keeping a close eye on his practice to prevent future incidents.

7. Impact on Professional Reputation

Dr. Austin’s attempts to suppress negative information have not only failed to eliminate the controversy surrounding his practice but have also backfired by drawing more attention to the issues. Public perception of a medical professional is critical, and in today’s digital age, attempts to hide negative feedback can often lead to greater exposure. As patients increasingly rely on online reviews and public records to choose their healthcare providers, the negative news surrounding Dr. Austin has become difficult to ignore.

The growing number of complaints and negative reviews, coupled with the regulatory action taken against him, has eroded his standing within the medical community. His professional reputation, once bolstered by years of practice, now faces a significant challenge as more people become aware of these adverse incidents.

Dr. Duane F. Austin’s career has become the focus of significant controversy, marked by fines for substandard surgical practices, patient complaints, and allegations of medical malpractice. His attempts to suppress negative reviews and censor damaging news have only intensified scrutiny of his practice. As regulatory bodies continue to monitor his work, Dr. Austin faces an uphill battle in restoring his reputation and regaining the trust of patients.

The ongoing regulatory actions and public scrutiny raise critical questions about transparency, accountability, and professional ethics in the medical field. Dr. Austin’s case serves as a cautionary tale for medical professionals about the importance of maintaining ethical standards and openly addressing concerns rather than attempting to conceal them.

For more information on these issues, you can visit the Patch article on the fines and investigations into Dr. Duane F. Austin’s practice.

Only Dr. Duane F. Austin benefits from this crime.

Since the fake copyright takedown notices were designed to remove negative content for Dr. Duane F. Austin from Google, we assume Dr. Duane F. Austin or someone associated with Dr. Duane F. Austin is behind this scam. It is often a fly-by-night Online Reputation agency working on behalf of Dr. Duane F. Austin. In this case, Dr. Duane F. Austin, 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 Dr. Duane F. Austin (or actors working on behalf of Dr. Duane F. Austin), we will inform Dr. Duane F. Austin of our findings via Electronic Mail.

Our preliminary assessment suggests that Dr. Duane F. Austin may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Dr. Duane F. Austin, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Dr. Duane F. Austin 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 Dr. Duane F. Austin 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 Dr. Duane F. Austin made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and our original review of Dr. Duane F. Austin, including but not limited to user contributions, remain a permanent record for anyone interested in Dr. Duane F. Austin.

A case perfect for the Streisand effect

Potential Consequences for Dr. Duane F. Austin

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.

Dr. Duane F. Austin Complaints

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 Dr. Duane F. Austin Committing a Cyber Crime?

Faced with these limitations, some companies like Dr. Duane F. Austin 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. Dr. Duane F. Austin is certainly keeping interesting company here….

Dr. Duane F. Austins Fake DMCA

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 Dr. Duane F. Austin purport this DMCA Fraud?

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Dr. Duane F. Austin 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.

Dr. Duane F. Austin Fake DMCA

In committing numerous offences, Dr. Duane F. Austin either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Dr. Duane F. Austin, 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.

Dr. Duane F. Austin

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. Dr. Duane F. Austin is in great company ….

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

Here are some of the specimens that share the internet space with Dr. Duane F. Austin –

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 Dr. Duane F. Austin 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 Dr. Duane F. Austin?

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 Dr. Duane F. Austin 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 Dr. Duane F. Austin purge its Digital past?

Once information is uploaded to the internet, it can be replicated, shared, archived, or stored across multiple servers. If Dr. Duane F. Austin 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 Dr. Duane F. Austin hiding?

Click here to visit the Google Search page for ‘Dr. Duane F. Austin’. 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 Dr. Duane F. Austin 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 Dr. Duane F. Austin censoring the internet and committing cyber crimes.”

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

error: Content is protected !!