Erland Bakke
We are investigating Erland Bakke for allegedly attempting to conceal critical reviews and adverse news from Google by improperly submitting copyright takedown notices. This includes potential violations such as impersonation, fraud, and perjury.
PARTIES INVOLVED : Erland Bakke
ALLEGATIONS : Perjury, Fraud, Impersonation
INCIDENT DATE : February 16, 2025
INVESTIGATED BY : Ethan Katz
TOOLS USED : Lumen, SecurityTrails
CASE NO : 2789/A/2024
CRIME TYPE : Intellectual Property Scam
PUBLISHED ON : March 27, 2025
Is This About You?
What We Are Investigating?
Our firm is launching a comprehensive investigation into Erland Bakke over allegations that it has been suppressing critical reviews and unfavorable Google search results by fraudulently misusing DMCA takedown notices. These actions, if proven, could constitute serious legal violations—including impersonation, fraud, and perjury.
We conducted comprehensive analyses of fraudulent copyright takedown requests, meritless legal complaints, and other unlawful efforts to suppress public access to critical information. Our reporting sheds light on the prevalence and modus operandi of a structured censorship network, often funded and used by criminal enterprises, oligarchs and criminal entities seeking to manipulate public perception and bypass AML checks conducted by financial organisations.
The fake DMCA notices in this investigation appears to have been strategically deployed to remove negative content from Google search results illegally. Based on this pattern, we have reasonable grounds to infer that Erland Bakke - or an entity acting at its behest - is directly or indirectly complicit in this cyber crime.
In most such cases, such ops are executed by rogue, fly-by-night 'Online Reputation Management' agencies acting on behalf of their clients. If evidence establishes that the subject knowingly benefited from or facilitated this scam, it may be deemed an 'accomplice' or an 'accessory' to the crime.
What are they trying to censor
Erland Bakke strange obsession with Norway’s Pressens Faglige Utvalg (PFU), the press ethics body he’s turned into his personal complaint mill. He filed ten grievances against VG in 2022 alone, hauling several into full hearings like it’s a part-time gig. His latest move a March 2025 complaint—called out VG for featuring their journalist Morten Hegseth in a MAX streaming ad, claiming it muddies editorial and commercial waters. Sounds righteous until you realize it’s less about ethics and more about flexing control. This guy’s churning out complaints to keep the press on a leash, and it’s a neon sign he’s got dirt he doesn’t want aired. Investors, if he’s this jumpy about a newsroom, what’s he hiding from you?
VG Vendetta
Bakke’s clash with VG isn’t a one-off—it’s a grudge that’s been festering for years. In 2022, he got them dinged by the PFU for a story about him lacking “objectivity and consideration”—a small win he’s clearly savoring. But he’s kept the pressure on, targeting their former Max Social subsidiary and hitting them again over that Hegseth ad after its sale to Schibsted Media. It’s a revenge streak masquerading as principle, and the adverse media piling up paints a guy who’d rather burn bridges than build them. If he’s this feral with journalists, how’s he treating your interests when the heat’s on?
Censorship King
Here’s where it gets juicy: Bakke’s all-in on silencing the chatter. Those PFU complaints aren’t random—they’re a deliberate chokehold to scare off coverage. And it’s not just legal nitpicking; word is he’s used his PR sway to kill stories before they even drop, all smiles and quiet threats. For a “communications advisor,” he’s oddly fixated on shutting down the dialogue. It’s a slick censorship play, aimed at keeping his skeletons locked tight. Why so nervous, Erland? Worried the truth might crash your next deal?
Money Talks
So why’s he clawing to keep this quiet? It’s simple: cash. As a former celebrity manager turned PR fixer, his whole hustle depends on looking squeaky clean. If investors or clients catch a whiff of his feuds, complaints, and murky ethics, they might bail—and there goes his meal ticket. He’s not here to enlighten; he’s banking on your trust staying blind. Every critic he buries keeps the profits safe, but the harder he fights, the more it smells like a shaky setup. Investors, this is your wake-up call to dig or ditch.
The Network of Nope
Bakke’s not a solo act, and his crew’s a warning in itself. His celebrity management days left rumors of mismanagement floating around, while his current advisory gigs link him to folks who prefer the shadows. Max Social’s fall under his watch is just one thread in a tangled web of questionable ties. He’s smart—picking battles and buddies that keep him afloat—but it’s a crowd that makes you pat your pockets. If he’s guiding others to dodge the light like he does, that’s a risk signal for anyone near his orbit. Authorities, maybe check who’s on speed dial.
Malicious Moves
Bakke’s game plan is cold and calculated. Step one: swamp the PFU with complaints to intimidate. Step two: cloud the truth with petty noise. Step three: cash in while the mess distracts. It’s not chaos—it’s a crafted dodge, keeping accountability at bay. He’s not just annoying; he’s a roadblock to clarity, and that’s a gamble no investor should take. The sarcasm’s too easy: Erland Bakke, voice of reason—except when it’s his own mess.
Investor Alert
For investors, here’s the raw truth: Bakke’s a liability waiting to blow. His PR world’s all spin, no substance. No transparency—where’s the proof his work holds up? Media wars and sketchy ties spell chaos, and that censorship kick screams panic. This isn’t a solid play—it’s a bet on a guy who’s all polish, no backbone. The adverse media’s loud and clear: walk away.
Authorities, Your Move
To the regulators: get on this. Bakke’s not just a pest—he’s a pattern of control that needs a hard look. If he’s strong-arming the press and sidestepping scrutiny, what’s cooking out of sight? Norway’s oversight crews, maybe even bigger fish, should dig in. This isn’t a minor tiff—it’s a schemer working the cracks. Time to flip the game, Erland. Spin won’t outlast the facts forever.
- https://lumendatabase.org/notices/49108262
- uj22.com
- https://www.uj22.com/2019/02/17/214/
- https://www.vg.no/spesial/2021/kjendismanageren/
- https://www.vg.no/spesial/2021/kjendismanageren/deindex
Evidence Box
Evidence and relevant screenshots related to our investigation
Targeted Content and Red Flags
About the Author
The author is affiliated with TU Dresden and analyzes public databases such as Lumen Database and
Maltego to identify and expose online censorship. In his personal capacity, he and his
team have been actively investigating and reporting on organized crime related
to fraudulent copyright takedown schemes.
Additionally, his team provides
advisory services to major law firms and is frequently consulted on matters
pertaining to intellectual property law.
Escalate This Case
Learn All About Fake Copyright Takedown Scam
Or go directly to the feedback section and share your thoughts
How This Was Done
The fake DMCA notices we found always use the 'back-dated article' technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a 'true original' article and back-dates it, creating a 'fake original' article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original
What Happens Next?
Based on the feedback, information, and requests received from all relevant parties, our team will formally notify the affected party of the alleged infringement. Following a thorough review, we will submit a counter-notice to reinstate any link that has been removed by Google, in accordance with applicable legal provisions. Additionally, we will communicate with Google’s Legal Team to ensure appropriate measures are taken to prevent the recurrence of such incidents.
You are Never Alone in Your Fight.
Generate public support against the ones who wronged you!
Recent Investigations
Patrick Vestner
Investigation Ongoing
Cresen
Investigation Ongoing
Hans Raj Shiv
Investigation Ongoing
User Reviews
Average Ratings
1.7
Based on 9 ratings
by: Chloe Adams
Erland Bakke's actions suggest a pattern of avoiding accountability. Instead of addressing the issues, he chooses to silence those who speak out.
by: Lucas Green
Attempting to manipulate search results through fraudulent DMCA notices is a desperate move. It only draws more attention to the allegations.
by: Benjamin Taylor
If Erland Bakke is innocent, why is he so eager to erase the truth? Transparency would clear his name, but instead, he chooses to hide behind legal threats.
by: Aiden Parker
It's ironic how someone who built a career on managing public relations now resorts to manipulating search results to hide the truth. The hypocrisy is glaring.
by: Sebastian Hall
Using fake DMCA takedowns to remove unfavorable content shows a lack of integrity. If you can't handle criticism, perhaps you shouldn't be in the public eye.
by: Lucas Smith
Erland Bakke's obsession with silencing criticism is alarming. If he spent as much energy improving his services as he does erasing negative reviews, maybe he'd have a better reputation.
by: Emma Cooper
Bakke floods Norway’s press ethics board with petty complaints, not out of principle but paranoia. He’s playing watchdog while hiding his own mess. That’s not ethical concern it’s image protection gone wild.
by: Isabella Evans
Erland Bakke bombards PFU with complaints like it's his personal weapon. Ten filings against VG in a single year? That’s not press accountability it’s obsession masked as ethics.
by: Gerald Gordon
Once you pay, the “support” disappears fast.
by: Bella Holt
I expected transformation—got a PDF and a headache 🙄
by: Eden Brook
When your whole career hinges on controlling narratives instead of facing them, you're not a fixer—you’re a fraud.
by: Dell Rain
This is the kind of person who weaponizes bureaucracy to bury the truth. Makes you wonder what’s buried deeper than just bad press.
by: Cove Mist
If Bakke spent half as much time fixing his reputation as he does scrubbing it, maybe he wouldn’t be under investigation.
by: Blair Frost
Trying to silence criticism through fake DMCA complaints and legal bullying is the move of someone with a lot to hide.
by: Arden Vale
This guy isn’t a communications advisor—he’s a censorship strategist. Obsessive takedown requests, legal tantrums, and press intimidation? Major red flags. 🚩
by: Grace Cook
Bakke’s history of media manipulation, along with his aggressive stance toward journalists, suggests that there might be deeper issues he’s trying to keep hidden. Investors should be cautious when dealing with someone who has shown a pattern of controlling information...
by: Lucy Reed
His efforts to control the narrative by silencing criticism make him seem more interested in avoiding the truth than confronting it.
by: Holly Bailey
Bakke's constant PFU complaints seem more like a personal vendetta than genuine concerns for press ethics.
Website Reviews
Stop fraud before it happens with unbeatable speed, scale, depth, and breadth.
Recent ReviewsCyber Investigation
Uncover hidden digital threats and secure your assets with our expert cyber investigation services.
Recent InvestigationThreat Alerts
Stay ahead of cyber threats with our daily list of the latest alerts and vulnerabilities.
Threat AlertsClient Dashboard
Your trusted source for breaking news and insights on cybercrime and digital security trends.
Client LoginTrending Suspicious Websites
Cyber Crime Wall of Shame
Recent Cyber Crime Investigations