Aims, tasks and assistance to the project Active position: What to do? Chronology of fighting the fraud of Binance
Soon: Guangying Chen (Heina Chen) About, questions-answers, plans, events (2021-2023)

News from hell: Binance is trying to shut down

Some interesting and strange things are happening in our world, who remembers the timeline of the fight against Binance noticed that most of the conflicts last for years. I want to add right away, "fighting Binance" sounds proud and beautiful, but literally by February 2021 we were just collecting material, talking to people, conducting our own investigations and collecting data, there was no fight as such.

On our conflicts, that is Fraud with the agreement NDA (funny, but the amount of conflict there was 1000 USDT) and Zero Liability: Loss caused by Binance in the amount of 86,000 USDT we certainly tried to find a common language with Binance, to conduct some negotiations (to be more exact - monologues, no dialogue or negotiations, there was always silence in response), but globally there were no activities.

The first event, which was published from 2018 (almost 3 years have passed) in the material Zero Liability: Loss because of Binance was 1.236.952 TUSD, only in 2018 appeared our project ( There were no special attacks from Binance, although they received both letters and Tickets - but just did not respond to them, a convenient position, especially after all the conflicts are solely the fault of Binance, if not more - of malice and purposeful intent.

In February, we started publishing some pretty interesting data, and participated in a Forbes investigation (material available at Forbes: Binance makes money on US investors by defrauding regulators (Operation Tai Chi):
- For investigation and inquiries: Malta, Guangying Chen (Heina Chen) and Alexandre Dreyfus
- For investigations and inquiries: Guangying Chen (Heina Chen), BitDJ (do) and Binance domain analysis 
- For Investigation and inquiries: Guangying Chen, Binance, Bijie Tech and Changpeng Zhao
- For Investigations and inquiries: Data on Changpeng Zhao, Binance in Switzerland, Guangying Chen, and Pascal Schmid

Among others, there was a material on illegal financial operations of Binance with fiat money where we wondered how "Binance casino" deals with fiat money (banks, credit cards) without having a license for any type of services they provide to their customers - banking and forex (brokerage), financial services. Just brazenly working in countries illegally and unlawfully - without any licenses, and sometimes without legal companies at all).

There was an article from a long time ago, found in the web archives of 2017 - which showed what problems Binance had in China, who owned Binance at that time (Shanghai Bijie Network Technology Co., Ltd. and Ms. Chen Guangying), why Binance fled from China to Japan and how it all relates to unregistered securities on Binance itself and the BNB token.

The reaction literally came right away, not exactly what we expected, but it came - a DDoS attack on which was monitored almost around the clock from China (Beijing) and attempts to disable the domain.

Complaints to Binance fiat partners 

On February 23, 2021 we started sending complaints to Binance fiat partners - these are payment gateways, billings, merchants in the US, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, New Zealand, Australia and other countries. The process is underway, many have not yet been sent from the list, for many we are preparing a more comprehensive facts and evidence, with VISA and MasterCard companies - have not even had time to contact, there is a lot of work, most likely we will finish this until the weekend. But Binance apparently received the first complaints and immediately made itself known, a complaint came to the domain of this order (we can consider it an official complaint):

C&D Letter Binance's complaint about by on Scribd

What is interesting, literally after receiving a complaint - DDoS attack on stopped, for the whole day the project no one has ddos requests and we at first even wondered why everything suddenly became calm. The reason for the calmness and stopping the attack - we realized in a couple of hours, came the above complaint from the domain.

Binance's response to the complaint

So, let's review the complaint and give a public response to Binance on each point. After all, the underground casino Binance turns out to have its legal rights (unlike those that Binance ripped off and cheated), and of course there is a position and demands, namely:

We enjoy the exclusive rights on the use of “Binance” and the Binance logo as our trademark,brand and business name and are registered trademarks in the European Union under EU RegNo. 017874662 and EU Reg No. 017874663 respectively (“ Our Marks ”). We noticed that OurMarks have been inappropriately used on the Infringing Website. Furthermore, in using OurMarks, the Infringing Website does not include the trademark notice of ® and also did not adda statement that the trademark is a registered mark by us. We did not, and do not, authorisethe use of Our Marks on the Infringing Website. In the circumstances, the Infringing Website isviolating our exclusive rights to use Our Marks.

With this point, in principle, everything is clear. Copyright (exclusive rights) to use Binance and its logo. Trademark numbers 017874662 and 017874663 are specified. If you look at the official website of the European Union under EU specified numbers are correct, and Binance (pay your attention - the owner of the rights of Binance Holdings Limited) has 4 registered trademarks in the EU:


The black name Binance on a white background. Beautiful, stylish, expensive. Only on the site no similar logo (banner) with similar style, the header of the site is the logo of Binance - it's a diamond of orange, in the above trademarks, this element is absent. All other images and photos are absolutely public, available by profile queries in the Google search engine. On the one hand, the complaint seems to have grounds, on the other hand - the issue is extremely and extremely controversial (in our opinion). But if Binance will be too angry, we will have to change the logo and the faikon of the site - I think you and I will survive it, am I right?

Trademarks (all 4) are issued under Class 35 and Class 36, their description is as follows:

Administration of consumer loyalty programs; auctioneering; book-keeping / accounting; business information; business intermediary services relating to the matching of potential private investors with entrepreneurs needing funding; business management and organization consultancy; business research; commercial information and advice for consumers in the choice of products and services; competitive intelligence services; drawing up of statements of accounts; market intelligence services; negotiation and conclusion of commercial transactions for third parties; opinion polling; organization of exhibitions for commercial or advertising purposes; organization of trade fairs for commercial or advertising purposes; providing business information via a web site; provision of an on-line marketplace for buyers and sellers of goods and services; public relations; tax preparation.

Banking; brokerage; capital investment; clearing, financial / clearing-houses, financial; deposits of valuables; electronic funds transfer; exchanging money; financial analysis; financial consultancy; financial information; financing services; issuance of tokens of value; online banking; processing of credit card payments; processing of debit card payments; providing financial information via a web site; providing rebates at participating establishments of others through use of a membership card; safe deposit services; securities brokerage; stock brokerage services; stock exchange quotations. project does not provide services in the listed spheres - thus, it does not violate the exclusive rights of Binance Holdings Limited in this class of trademarks. We will return to the question about the chosen classes in more detail later. The material will be available in an article Banking and Brokerage Illegal Binance Services.

Of course, the fact that Binance trademarks belong to Binance Holdings Limited is mentioned in our current article or in the article For Investigations and inquiries: Malta, Guangying Chen (Heina Chen) and Alexandre Dreyfus - there are references to who owns Binance trademarks. Apparently we need to put this in the basement of the website, let's do that. With this point, I think that's all.

Additionally, the general nature of the contents on the Infringing Website, inclusive of itsdomain name is highly degorratory and malicious. There are also extremely seriousallegations made against Binance, including but not limited to, fraud, theft and other allegedlyillegal conduct that are unfounded and not proven in any court of law. Needless to say, suchallegations are highly damaging (and continue to cause damage) to Binance and we reserveall legal rights to defend our position and claim compensation for losses arising out of theInfringing Website hosted on your platform.

That's right, the name of the community ScamBinance - immediately makes it clear what the project is about, who the project is about and what goals, objectives pursued. Goals, objectives and assistance to the project has long been outlined, any attempts by Binance to resolve conflicts have not been seen, we as the victims have every right to defend their views and seek justice, this right is given to us by the universe, nature and the Lord God. The accusations against Binance are really serious and backed up (argued) with facts. Not backed up in court? There was a great Forbes article: Binance makes money off US investors by defrauding regulators (Operation Tai Chi) and ... Binance sued Forbes (and the journalist), but withdrew the claim on February 4. Fact proving the rightness of the story.

We really like it when Binance claims its legal rights and damages, forgetting that it operates and provides services (financial, banking, forex) all over the world illegally. And the damage of traders who were cheated by Binance by manipulating the rates, quotes, fictitious trading volumes, algorithms of the system - he is not interested at all. Yes, we as Binance have all legal rights to defend our position, our stolen money and demand compensation for losses, which we have been doing for 3 years in a row.

Additionally, we also note that various documents, including non-disclosure agreements, havebeen uploaded on the Infringing Website. Needless to say, by the nature of non-disclosureagreements, uploading of such documents (whether verified or not) is clearly malicious andcertainly a breach of the said agreement.

Oh, this is our favorite part. Do you remember the story with the Binance fraud with FTX BULL / BEAR tokens? When Binance hired Ukrainian lawyers to compensate their losses (not even completely, partially) and it turned out... as usual not all traders got compensation, some concluded NDA agreement, signed it, sent their documents and that's all. They forgot to send them the money, and Binance Support Center did not notice (and to this day does not notice) these NDAs. There is a lot of material, we advise to read the section Fraud with the Agreement NDA.

The funniest thing in this story is not that by signing the NDA Agreement a trader has not received anything, but the funniest thing is that the offshore company Binance Holdings Limited from the Cayman Islands to resolve the conflict (cheating traders) from Russia, hires lawyers from Ukraine, but in the NDA Agreement prescribes jurisdiction in Singapore. At the same time there is not even a mention of the company in the agreement itself, the legal Agreement ... of the highest quality from Ukrainian lawyers.

But let's go back to Binance's discontent, they are unhappy that our site has published the NDA Agreement, allegedly it is confidential - although, they have not fulfilled this Agreement. At the same time, they point out the point, and I quote "regardless of whether it is checked or not" - that is, dissatisfied with the publication of the NDA Agreement and at the same time still do not recognize it (de facto). But indicate - that it is a violation of the Agreement, although on their part - the terms of the Agreement have not been fulfilled. And more importantly, the injured party in the Agreement on NDA and is the owner of the website (domain). Epic, isn't it?

Furthermore, at the homepage of the Infringing Website, we noticed a photoshopped portraitof Mr. Changpeng Zhao, the CEO of Binance behind bars (presumably to imply criminality).Such portrait is definitely a misappropriation and violation of the rights of Mr. Zhao and isclearly intended to defame Mr Zhao’s reputation. We are authorized by Mr. Zhao to take allnecessary actions against any and all violations of the right of his portrait and claim for anylosses arising therefrom

On this point, the guys in general are good. The handling of Changpeng Zhao's portrait and some assumptions, apparently - everyone assumes to the extent of their promiscuity or view of the world. The Binance employees understand what they are writing about, where they are working and what they are doing, don't they? Apparently, they clearly understand. Of course, this picture is not a misappropriation and violation of Changpeng Zhao's rights. His reputation is spoiled by Binance's illegal and illegitimate business and business methods. Due to this criminal business he has to flee from China to Japan, from Japan to Malta and from Malta to an unknown place (the Cayman Islands) and hide the location of his official headquarters. Hide the actual location and the legal details, although the legal details are no longer a secret. Authorized? Demand? I would like to see a document that gives such authority, but it's a mauvais ton and a joke of humor. Return the money stolen, compensate the costs and 3 years of waiting - then demand, are there powers for such actions?

In light of the points made above, we hereby demand that you act expeditiously, and in anyevent within 14 days, to unconditionally take down, cancel the Infringing Website, and provideus with the contact information of the registrant of the Infringing Website.

The details of the owner of the Binance website are known, it is with him they signed an NDA Agreement - which apparently was thrown in the trash immediately after the signing. Site delete ... Sorry, we have, and Binance has, and I quote:

All legal rights to defend our position and demand compensation for losses incurred as a result of Binance's disruption or trivial fraud by Binance.

It is a sad picture, a sad sight - when a company from offshore (legally), and from China (actually) has no right to work in the financial market, no license - when you point this out to them and demand a refund, in response ... They send some bullshit, not forgetting to put it in:

We look forward to your confirmation. If you have any questions, please contact us via email ([email protected]).

What is interesting, e-mail [email protected] and before worked as if it did not exist, and now the same thing - the letters do not reach him, and so we live:


The screenshot that the email [email protected] is "dead" or "inaccessible" for mere mortals was taken from a document on the conflict of tokens FTX BULL / BEAR. Users complained that [email protected] does not receive emails, as a consequence no one ever received any responses from it.


шаблоны для dle 11.2

Search by keyword: