I received this e-mail from my web host http://servint.com/, with the attached Mastercard e-mail accusing me of running a credit card fraud site.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

09:08 PM 2/3/2005:

Christine,

We have been speaking with our legal counsel, who has agreed that the points made by the Mastercard company are valid. We must ask that you take immediate efforts to cover the account numbers listed in posts on the below mentioned site, or discontinue hosting it. We ask that you comply with this request within 48 hours, so that we may continue to host your VPS.

Thank you,

Network Abuse ServInt Internet Services


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 13:31:15 -0500
From: Tiffany Robinson <tiffany_robinson@mastercard.com>
To: noc@servint.com, abuse@servint.com
Subject: Credit Card Sites (3rd Request)***********

Dear ServInt Corporation Security Administrator:


Re: Credit Card sites detected

As you may be aware, the financial services industry continues to face
increasing levels of internet related fraud. The wave of cyber crime has
reached epidemic proportions. Identity Theft has become one of the largest
cyber crimes utilized throughout the Internet. Consumers who fall victim to
Identity Theft, usually suffer a tremendous personal toll as well as trying
to rectify their good name.

MasterCard International has taken proactive measures to combat Identity
Theft by partnering with NameProtect, Inc. (a leading Digital Asset
Protection Company), to detect such web sites that potentially encourage
Identity Theft by posting credit card numbers.

However, once we detect such sites, the only way of ensuring that the
fraudsters cannot perpetrate such fraud, is through the cooperation of
organizations such as yours to facilitate taking the site down or by
removing or covering the credit card number(s) displayed. We trust that
you will not tolerate such fraud schemes as well.

Towards, this effort, listed below are sites that have been detected
through our Identity Theft program initiated by NameProtect Incorporated.
These sites are displaying information that could be damaging to not only
MasterCard and ServInt Corporation , but the customers as well.

The domain names are listed as follows:

http://creditforum.org/showthread.p...=1&threadid=527

Could you please advise on the following in regard to the above listed
site(s):

Is ServInt Corporation aware of this site?

If so, has any action been taken by ServInt Corporation to remove or cover
the numbers displayed on this site?

On behalf of MasterCard International, in order to prevent possible
fraudulent activity on this ServInt Corporation site, we request that
ServInt Corporation immediately, and permanently remove the numbers from
the above mentioned site which potentially promotes identity theft and
trade of credit card data.

Please confirm that these numbers have been removed and please advise us
with any questions and/or concerns.

You may reach me via phone at the number listed below or through our
Identity Theft hotline email address at: stopIT@mastercard.com

Thank you very much in advance for your assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

Tiffany Robinson
Fraud Analyst, Security and Risk Services
MasterCard International Inc.
2000 Purchase St.
Purchase, NY 10577
Tel. (914)249-6312
Fax. (914)249-4603
email: stopIT@mastercard.com

-----------------------------------------

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail message and any attachments are only
for the use of the intended recipient and may contain information that is
privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, distribution or
other use of this e-mail message or attachments is prohibited. If you have
received this e-mail message in error, please delete and notify the sender
immediately. Thank you.

I was FURIOUS! My response:

---------------------------------------

Who is your legal counsel? Did that dimwit even LOOK at the thread?

People have the right to post at a forum whatever they want - last time I checked.

Anyone with an IQ above 40 can read these postings and determine that there is no chance of ID theft. From the thread:

"A review of our records indicates that account number xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx was opened in March 1994 with Michael R. Dennis as the primary cardholder and Elizabeth A. Dennis as an authorized user. THe account was converted to xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx. The account reached charge off status on or about March 1, 1995 due to severe delinquency. The account purged from our system on or about July 24, 1997."

Who could possibly be so incredibly stupid and think that charges could be made to charged off accounts?

Because my websites are extremely anti corporate and I'm suing a number of credit bureaus, creditors, mortgage lenders etc., in part over ID theft issues, I will pursue this matter and publicize it through my web sites and press releases.

I'm especially interested in finding out why Capital One refused to provide me with the information related to fraudulent charges to my M/C when I was an ID theft victim in 3/04, preventing me from filing a police report. I just received the Capital One motion to dismiss, because they apparently don't need to assist consumers in tracking down the criminals and since the charges were made to my M/C, I sure want to know why those idiots at M/C have nothing better to do than harassing me.

Why doesn't M/C tell Capital One to assist with the prosecution of criminals?

Could it be that this is an attack on my websites and to protect my defendants, the M/C clients such as Capital One?

While I can understand shutting down sites that list ACTIVE credit card #s along with the OTHER information required to use the cards, especially the sites who sell this info, this is not what I do nor is it what the poster did.

What gives Servint the right to require that I respond within 48 hours?

I go on vacation for a few days to come back and find my sites gone? THAT is how you operate?

I have *temporarily* deleted this thread because I'm in no position to get another host on such short notice, HOWEVER - I will litigate this matter if necessary. More important though, your customers will know what they get BEFORE they sign up if they do a quick search for Servint.

It is enlightening to find out that the Servint people don't have enough of a functioning brain to be able to tell the difference between a fraud scheme and a consumer rights site.

Also, please be advised that NO communications are confidential and I will publish whatever happens.

Christine

To: ServInt Admin <admin@[deleted]servint.com>
From: Christine Baker christine@[deleted]
Subject: Re: Credit Card Sites (3rd Request)*********** (fwd)
Cc: stopIT@mastercard.com
Bcc:
X-TransWinRQD: <2505.0002>

I sent e-mail last night, but haven't received a reply. I called Servint to discuss this matter and was advised that it's not possible. Nice!!!!!!

Now YOU have 48 hours to respond - Monday I'll start publishing.

Apparently Servint hosting is only suitable for knitting sites and other 200% non controversial sites and your customers need to know that.

Christine

At 05:29 PM 2/5/2005:

Christine,

ServInt never asked that you keep our correspondences confidential. As far as we are concerned, you can feel free to publish anything you receive from us. As far as not being allowed to discuss admin related issues over the phone, this is true. After ten years in business, we have learned that it is best to have a record of all correspondences regarding legal issues. By confining administrative abuse-related correspondences to e-mail and postal mail, it saves us from having to tape phone conversations. You seem like the type of person that would understand that.

As far as your ability to run controversial sites goes, we are big advocates of free speech here at ServInt, so bring on the controversy. Not to demean knitting sites, but we're happy to host controversial sites. The problem isn't in hosting something controversial, it is in hosting something illegal. People do not have the rights to post anything they want in a forum if what they are posting is illegal. They cannot, for example, threaten the life of the President in a forum.

Let me take a moment to explain how web-based infringement works in the hosting field. As per the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, hosting providers like ServInt are not under any obligation to monitor the content of its clients. In fact, for the most part a host cannot monitor the content of its clients, as it sets a precedent which puts it in a bad legal position.

However, a host must act if something is brought to its attention and purported to be illegal. At that point, the host is effectively 'on notice' and must endeavor to deal with that complaint to the best of its ability, in a reasonable amount of time. Legal precedent has set 48 hours as an acceptable timeframe for response.

In some cases, it is true that accounts can be shut off relatively quickly if illegal (not simply controversial) material is found. Let's say we found child pornography on our website. Would you want us leaving it online for more than 48 hours while we patiently wait for the webmaster to get back from a vacation so we can speak with him about it? Mind you, I am certainly not putting you in this category - I am simply explaining protocol.

Though these policies are in place, we do have some flexibility, particularly in areas where the legal issues involved are a bit more 'grey'. This is where I believe your situation lies. Had you not gotten back to us within 48 hours, would your account have been turned off? Most likely it would not have been. And yet, policy dictated that we let you know that we did require a quick response. Of course, we are also willing to provide that same type of quick response back. I hope that this shows that we are willing to work with you.

In this particular circumstance, our lawyers did feel as though Mastercard had a potential case against you. This stemmed from their interpretation of the user agreement that they require their cardholders to obey. There is a potential that you may be facilitating the sharing of confidential information, deemed to be the private property of Mastercard.

As I said before, this is a 'grey' area, and not something we will shut you off for immediately. We cannot, however, put ourselves in a position where we can be held legally responsible for your violations. Therefore, if you wish to continue the practices of allowing posters to include their account information, I will need a written response from you which states that you are not knowingly violating any U.S. law on your websites, and that you are willing to provide ServInt such assurances, and exonerate them from any legal liability which may result from your activities.

At that point, we will be able to contact Mastercard and alert them that we will not be terminating or forcing you to alter any aspect of your website. We will alert them that we have received the proper assurances from you, and that our only involvement in their claims from that point on
will be to fully comply with any court order which is presented to us.

Otherwise, please confirm that you are going to keep those numbers covered. I know that they may be old and no longer active, but there are still apparently legal issues with the practice of posting them. It is these legal issues, not the controversial nature of the site, which we wish to address. I hope that you see that we are willing to work with you to address this in as helpful and as flexible a way as possible.


I hope this helps.

Thank you,

Christian J. Dawson
Network Abuse ServInt Internet Services

2/5/05:


Christian,

You wrote "ServInt never asked that you keep our correspondences confidential."

The first e-mail I received from Servint regarding this matter included this confidentiality notice:

-----------------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail message and any attachments are only
for the use of the intended recipient and may contain information that is
privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, distribution or
other use of this e-mail message or attachments is prohibited. If you have
received this e-mail message in error, please delete and notify the sender
immediately. Thank you.
--------------------------------------------

I *will* be posting the M/C gestapo mail in its entirety.

You wrote:

"However, a host must act if something is brought to its attention and purported to be illegal. At that point, the host is effectively 'on notice' and must endeavor to deal with that complaint to the best of its ability, in a reasonable amount of time. Legal precedent has set 48 hours as an acceptable time frame for response."

Please provide me with the "illegal" content of my sites.

"Otherwise, please confirm that you are going to keep those numbers covered. I know that they may be old and no longer active, but there are still apparently legal issues with the practice of posting them."

And exactly what are those legal issues?

For your information, there are hundreds and maybe thousands of closed account numbers at my sites, including scans of entire credit reports.

"In this particular circumstance, our lawyers did feel as though Mastercard had a potential case against you."

I've asked in my last mail who that dimwitted lawyer is. I would really like that NAME.

Servint is acting on behalf of private industry for no legitimate reason whatsoever. Are you going to help M/C collect delinquent bills next?

Why didn't Servint tell M/C to get a court order?

Why didn't Servint AT LEAST ask M/C for evidence of their attempt to resolve the matter with me directly?

Why is Servint treating M/C like a law enforcement agency?

Can I start filing complaints with you about other sites the have someone's name and address, because that information could be used to commit ID theft?

"I will need a written response from you which states that you are not knowingly violating any U.S. law on your websites, and that you are willing to provide ServInt such assurances, and exonerate them from any legal liability which may result from your activities."

Don't the terms already contain an indemnity clause?

Here's a sample of what I do: Consumer Sues Ameriquest Mortgage Company for Spamming, False Promises, Misrepresentation and Incompetence http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/9/prweb156653.php

In this press release I'm extremely nice, compared to what I say about Ameriquest at my sites.

Interestingly, they have yet to sue me despite the fact that they are aware that my INTENT is to inflict many MILLIONS of dollars in damages and I know I am inflicting significant damages from the responses I get to the press releases.

Many of my defendants are regular readers of my sites and when they see that all they need to do is complain with you and you'll send me the 48 hr notice, what do you think how many complaints you'll get?

I am sick as a dog and this aggravation and having to move AGAIN is about the last thing I need. This is so incredible, after 10 years of webhosting, enough legal threats to wallpaper a bathroom and one court action (I didn't even have to attend and prevailed), Servint has to pull this crap.

I'm sure it's not the first time Servint is acting as judge and jury, I did my research on Servint before I opened the account and found NOTHING at all to indicate this outrageous conduct. I'm hoping you will provide me with some answers because I *will* send out a press release about these gestapo tactics.

Christian, you don't even know which law I'm supposedly violating. You can't be concerned with fraud since nobody can be stupid enough to think that you can charge to a closed account. You better come up with *something* to justify the Servint ridiculous demands.

I haven't heard yet from Tiffany Robinson and can't wait to see what she has to say.

Christine

3/15/05 - I think this is all of our correspondence.

Despite my notice of numerous credit card numbers on scanned credit reports, I haven't received anything further.

I was sick the flu when this happend, then one of my eyes was so swollen I could hardly see and of course I had to take my contact lense out.

And since then I've been so busy my head is spinning.

I left the page offline, was in no position of dealing with it.

But then the subject of defamation recently came up in a different context and I decided to have a look around at WebHostingTalk because I really want to move.

Hate sites have no problem staying on line, even with a MAJOR host like EV1.

So I posted at http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showt...threadid=384403

Need VPS or server host requiring court order in response to complaints [censorship]

The best recommendation was a host charging THOUSANDS of dollars per MONTH.

So I wrote to EFF.org and to my surprise, I got a response this evening from Allison with a lead to Marc Perkel's Computer Tyme Web Hosting:

http://www.ctyme.com/hosting/

I like Marc's site a lot and I hope his policy hasn't changed.

Allison also mentioned that EFF might want to put up a list of free speech hosting companies. It looks like it might be difficult to assemble a list, I guess you can have a list of one. It would be nice to have a list with several free speech hosts and I will also be glad to add others here and at the blog and at Fight Back.

And here's the thread Mastercard and Servint objected to:

http://creditforum.org/showthread.p...=1&threadid=527

Obviously I had to bring it back online so you can decide:

Is this a credit card fraud site?

Forgot to mention, posting here is disabled except for already registered users, don't want you to waste your time trying.

Also, Mastercard was copied on all my e-mails.

And it's odd, I thought I had taken the "credit card fraud" page offline. I thought I moved it to a private forum since I don't think you can take a thread offline in VB. I run 3 different forums and rarely used this verison of vB, the forum was already closed when I upgraded to ver. 3. I remember getting very frustrated trying to figure out how to temporarily take the page offline.

And now the thread was right where it always was, maybe it was always there? I was pretty sick, but I didn't think I was hallucinating.

I recently figured out what happened with the "moved" thread - I copied it instead of moving, that's why it was still visible.

I also finally started some research on Free Speech hosting and supporting organizations at the Fight Back!!! forum:

FREE speech on the web?

Marc Perkel at http://www.ctyme.com/hosting/ did offer to host my sites, but I realized that I can't go back to "hosting" after having my own VPS.

This forum is now hosted at http://www.eurovps.com/vps/ and the low prices as well as outstanding customer service just blow me away.

I've been wondering how they can survive and finally realized that maybe it's because they're not spending a lot of money on advertising and affiliate fees.