3 ms·

You can clearly see that TG include stuff about Nord that aint related to the lawsuit, nor to the court itself, and thats clearly why - to make Nord look bad gu

You can clearly see that TG include stuff about Nord that aint related to the lawsuit, nor to the court itself, and thats clearly why - to make Nord look bad guys in this scenario, while all the claims sounds like bs. Torguard hasn’t even filled in the correct company name when they filed the suit first, which speaks for itself on how professional they are. Anyhow, how is that Nord the bad guy now and everyone forgets the fact that they just wanted to let torguard know about their own vulnerability to fix?

robertthebruce 7y ago
And how do you know the Micfo IP fraud is not related to NordVPN? They were using them extensively. Collective Seven (C7) is related to a very long list of VPNs, including Nord, yet NordVPN has denied knowing them. > Anyhow, how is that Nord the bad guy now and everyone forgets the fact that they just wanted to let torguard know about their own vulnerability to fix? It looks bad because they tried to force censorship in exchange for a non vulnerability. Torguard has a bounty program but instead Nord sent someone to the Torguard employee's house and tried to intimidate them into silencing a Youtuber. It appears Nord knew what they had was not a vulnerability but still wanted use it as leverage for taking down the Youtuber's videos. This is censorship at it's worst.