BLOCKCHAIN.COM IS TRYING TO TAKE NEGATIVE REVIEWS DOWN BY ISSUING LEGAL THREATS

[ico-services]

I, like many others has lost cryptocurrency funds due to malfunction or breach of Blockchain.com 2FA safety feature.

I recently wrote an article about it, which was published here:
https://honestproscons.com/blockchain-com-is-losing-customers-funds/

Today I received a legal threat from Blockchain.com where they try to force me to take down this review. You can see the document they sent me below.

https://imgur.com/a/8Cekc8u
https://imgur.com/a/P1bkHsH
https://imgur.com/a/8YBV0ND

This is a rude and disgusting attempt to cover up the massive security breach their wallets have!

The funniest part it that, their legal team never replied to me, when I contacted them about the compensation of the funds their lost, but now suddenly they chose to wake up.

[1715069267]

1715069267

[1715069267]

1715069267

[1715069267]

1715069267

[1715069267]

1715069267

[1715069267]

1715069267

[jackg]

I'm not sure you can claim their employees are stealing the funds


However, 2fa by a code is quite insecure as it means the company can't e crypt data using that second factor and I assume that means there's likely a way around it (like most places have). So only your password would be used to encrypt the wallet stored on their server.

[Jawhead999]

You don't have any evidence to claiming Blockchain.com has malfunction on 2FA features and also about employees steal user funds in their wallet. All you talking on your article is only about your "presuming or guessing" as you want to blame their employee about your case. As you not bring any evidence in your article, so it's not surprised if Blockchain.com gave a legal threat to you.

However, when you're create that article you're also gave a "threat" to people for not using their service.

[ico-services]

You don't have any evidence to claiming Blockchain.com has malfunction on 2FA features and also about employees steal user funds in their wallet. All you talking on your article is only about your "presuming or guessing" as you want to blame their employee about your case. As you not bring any evidence in your article, so it's not surprised if Blockchain.com gave a legal threat to you.

I'm pretty sure I can express a theory of what happened? Especially when I have been the victim. If this wasn't legal, then everyone who sued someone but was not able to prove it in court, would face defamation charges.

However, when you're create that article you're also gave a "threat" to people for not using their service.

What you mean by this?

[Lucius]

ico-services, I have no doubt that some things are not right when it comes to this service, because too many weird hacking cases have happened over the years to blame only the users for everything. If you set 2FA as additional protection, and that protection as we see doesn't work, then we need to ask ourselves what exactly is that protection for - maybe it provides a false sense of security for users?

I think you have presented your case quite well, but I am not sure what legal position you are in as far as their threat is concerned, because they are obviously very bothered by what you have written. Personally, I don’t remember ever seeing them threaten anyone with a lawsuit, and there are hundreds of accusations against them here on the forum.

If you haven't already, I suggest you take a look at this board -> Web Wallets, and if you use the search option in that board you will find a lot of similar cases like yours. This one is particularly interesting, it would be interesting to find out what happened in connection with the lawsuit that was announced.

[Theb]

Since they brought up the word "defamation" in their email to you I think they are mostly referring to "Libel" against you which for me will be a very weak case against you. The elements of Libel is as follow

1. statement is defamatory - which in you case will really defame blockchain.com since it is a negative review
2. it must be written and the identity of the person/entity is named - which it is

but the one thing that won't make it libelous is the last element
3. existence of malice

Basically the last element is trying to tell you that you have written that as a revenge against Blockchain.com which in how you right things that have provided dozens of similar cases and other information makes it clear that you are writing a review/scam report that has happened. I'm not sure if they are serious about their case against you but definitely it will be a bad press for them if they pursue such thing. What the people will see is instead of spending money and giving time on finding out what had happened to your 2fa email is they just spend their money on one of their customers who lost their account.

[yhiaali3]

This is really a shameful behavior from the Blockchain wallet, instead of admitting their mistake and weakness in their wallet and trying to compensate for your loss they do this foolish behavior.
For me personally, I stopped using the Blockchain wallet long ago due to poor security, I said many times before that Internet wallets are not safe at all, any wallet that does not give you your private keys is insecure and you have to give it to another wallet.

[dkbit98]

Oh Mr. Poutinstev is back again with one more of his complains after he previously wrote bad review about Bitcointalk forum in his website
He is slowly becoming expert for writing bad reviews so he can switch job after ICO scam season is dead in this year.

We can see that Mr. Poutinstev, now indirectly and clearly admits that ico-services is his altacount, so I can't trust anything he say and writes.

This is his other account poutintsev full of negative feedback.

You can read more about him in this topic:

Earlier today ico-services shared an article in which author claims that blockchain employee is changing 2FA and stealing funds etc. What caught my attention is the creator of the article, who recently wrote pretty shitty article about bitcointalk. Dunno why but I decided to check his posting history which made me believe that this is an alt account of poutintsev, author of the article.

First of all, lets start with poutintsev who has an interesting bitcointalk history, to say the least:

• Promoting ANN bumping group
• Buying high ranking accounts
• Advisor on various scam ICOs

PS
That doesn't mean that I support or use Blockchain.com in any way, just that I don't trust anything coming from mr. Poutinstev

https://imgur.com/a/8Cekc8u
https://imgur.com/a/P1bkHsH
https://imgur.com/a/8YBV0ND

[FatFork]

@Poutinstev, when you write and publish an article titled "Unknown Blockchain.com employee is stealing customers funds" (subsequently changed to "Blockchain.com is losing customers funds") without a shred of evidence or logic, how do you expect the company to react? You know that there are laws for protection against libel and published defamatory statements?

So if you think you're right, stop bitching about everything, prepare your case with a lawyer and buckle up, 'cause you're going for a hell of a ride!

By the way, what happened with this: Reasons to avoid Bitcointalk.org? Haven't you already abandoned the bitcointalk community?

It’s better to avoid Bitcointalk. There are a lot other Bitcoin and cryptocurrency forums as well as other platforms where you can write and discuss about cryptocurrencies. Thus there’s no need to go to Bitcointalk.org when you are obviously not welcome there.