Marc Cohen

October 1, 2006

Last Friday, we filed a civil action against Marc Cohen. We did so because substantial evidence shows his involvement with fraudulent software, or simply “fraudware.”

Unlike criminal cases—which often involve prison time and require the familiar “proof beyond reasonable doubt”—in civil disputes a plaintiff need only prove liability by a “preponderance of the evidence.” In other words, to obtain a judgment against Mr. Cohen, we have to show that his involvement with fraudware is “more likely than not.”

With that in mind, I invite of Mr. Cohen’s attorneys (or him if unrepresented): Answer our concerns. Provide innocent explanations. You can post them yourself as comments; alternatively, if you give me the URL, I’ll provide a link here. Furthermore, if you can prove that Mr. Cohen wasn’t involved, we’ll dismiss this lawsuit. (Ethical lawyers do so as a matter of course when it’s warranted.) I’ll publish a retraction and a personal apology to Mr. Cohen. My offer is genuine and stands for as long as this lawsuit takes.

Some of our concerns about Mr. Cohen’s business:

1. Mr. Cohen owns, a travel site. VipFares provides false contact information (in the case of “whois”), or no information at all (on its own website). No honest merchant conceals or falsifies his whereabouts or identity.

2. Complaints about VipFares are now rife on the Internet. If there’s authentic praise for VipFares, we haven’t seen it.

3. VipFares both permits and benefits from popups and traffic hijacked into its website via fraudware. Logically, the existence of a financial relationship between the two follows.

4. For years, VipFares has had many specific and provable associations with fraudware: developers, call centers, web designers, IP addresses, credit card processing and more.

Soon I’ll write about each of these in greater detail.