If they are, Reputation Defender did not do a good job. I would have to say they had an opposite effect.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=795218&forum_id=2#9587473)

"So far, all the known clients of Reputation Defender still have true, publically available information available on the internet. Moreover, all of them have been mentioned in public ways, despite being unknown before. So far, it seems that Reputation Defender sucks at their job, because simple Google searches would lead people to factual information about their clients that people have refused to remove because (duh) it's factual and Reputation Defender has only helped make these issues more of a public record."

http://onlinereputation.googlepages.com/consumerprotection

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=795218&forum_id=2#9587526)

http://www.positiveliberty.com/2007/01/irony-at-cada-vez.html

Ladies and gentlemen, the Positive Liberty staff cordially asks you to disengage your irony meters before continuing. Further use may result in irreparable damage.

Oh, and the setup for this one is long, but the payoff is exquisite.

Two days ago I received the following e-mail. I’ve bolded the relevant part:

ReputationDefender, Inc.

2023 Cherokee Parkway

Suite #18

Louisville, KY 40204

January 23, 2007

Dear Mr. Kuznicki,

We are writing to you in behalf of Christine Parascandola. She has asked us to contact you and see if you will consider removing the content about her at:

http://positiveliberty.com/2005/12/cada-vez.html

Please allow us to introduce ourselves. We are ReputationDefender, Inc., a company dedicated to helping our clients preserve their good name on the Internet. Our founders and employees are all regular Internet users. Like our clients, and perhaps like you, we think the Internet is sometimes unnecessarily hurtful to the privacy and reputations of everyday people. Even content that is meant to be informative can sometimes have a significant and negative impact on someone’s job prospects, student applications, and personal life. We invite you to learn more about who we are, at www.reputationdefender.com.

When our clients sign up with our service, we undertake deep research about them on the Internet to see what the Web is saying about them. We find sites where they are discussed, and we ask our clients how they feel about those sites. Sometimes our clients express strong reservations about the content on particular websites. They may feel hurt, ashamed, or “invaded” by the content about them on those sites.

As you may know, more and more prospective employers, universities, and newfound friends and romantic interests undertake Internet research, and the material they find can strongly impact their impressions of the people they are getting to know. When people apply for jobs, apply for college or graduate school, apply for loans, begin dating, or seek to do any number of other things with their lives, hurtful content about them on the Internet can have a negative impact on their opportunities. At some point or another, most of us say things about ourselves or our friends and acquaintances we later regret. We’re all human, and we all do it!

We are writing to you today because our client, Christine Parascandola, has told us that she would like the content about her on your website to be removed as it is outdated and invasive. Would you be willing to remove or alter the content? Simply removing mention of Ms. Parascandola’s name would protect her privacy while preserving the impact of your thoughtful article. It would mean so much to Ms. Parascandola, and to us. Considerate actions such as these will go a long way to help make the Internet a more civil place.

Thank you very much for your consideration. We are mindful that matters like these can be sensitive. We appreciate your time.

Please let us know if you have removed or changed the content on this site by sending an e-mail to: daves@reputationdefender.com.

Yours sincerely,

Dave S.

Reputation Defender Service Team

Blog neighbors Hubbard and Amber recently posted a few things about the firm and its CEO; it seems he can’t even defend his own online reputation. Quoth Amber:

I know Michael Fertik, the CEO of this absurd company. He sat in front of me in one of my 1L classes. He was a pretentious gunner who wore lots of Armani. The last time I saw him, he was standing in the D.C. Metro bitching about how haaard it is to be summer associate because he had firm events practically every night. I think my response was something along the lines of “yeah, it sure sucks to be massively overpaid for a summer sinecure and expensively entertained non-stop.” I don’t think this was the reaction he was expecting. He’s ridiculous and I hope his company tanks.

…If anyone wants me to take down this or any other post because it hurts their wittle feelings, they can bite me.

So for just $29.95, you can pay this guy to clean up your Internet reputation. Which Mrs. Parascandola apparently did.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=795218&forum_id=2#9587543)

Anyone know what brittan looks like? Links? TY

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=795218&forum_id=2#9587582)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TZg3F678xk

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=795218&forum_id=2#9587670)

aren't they the ones being sued for libel and slander?

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/IravaniComplaint.pdf

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-paedce/case_no-2:2008cv02601/case_id-271766

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/1080628/Iravani-Complaint-Yale-Law-Student-AutoAdmitcom-Lawsuit

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=795218&forum_id=2#10099039)