Operators of the WeFi Ponzi scheme have sent Danny de Hek a defamation cease and desist.

Put together by Paul Kulikov of PLL Legal & CBP, a “Swiss boutique law firm”, the notice is riddled with errors and misrepresentations.

While Kulikov’s WeFi cease and desist was sent to de Hek, it does reference BehindMLM’s own independent research into WeFi.

De Hek was kind enough to forward Kulikov’s notice. So today, as a matter of public interest, BehindMLM is addressing it.

WeFi operates through Canadian, Costa Rica, Hong Kong, St Vincent and Grenadines and Saint Kitts and Nevis shell companies. None of these jurisdictions are reputable with respect to MLM regulation.

All or most of WeFi’s known executives are based out of Dubai, the MLM crime capital of the world:

WeFi as an MLM company pitches consumers on passive returns through an unregistered ITO node investment scheme.

Pursuant to solicitation of investment from consumers into an unregistered scheme, Germany issued a WeFi securities fraud warning in February 2026.

I’ll be upfront in noting Kulikov’s cease and desist does not address WeFi’s unregistered securities offering, or BaFin’s WeFi securities fraud warning. This is probably all that really matters with respect to claims of defamation, but even what Kulikov does address is comically bad.

It’s the kind of nonsense I’d expect from a hack Ponzi promoter on social media, not an actual lawyer – but I digress.

Kulikov’s WeFi cease and desist is dated April 13th and, confusingly, is also styled as a DMCA notice:

A Cease and Desist Letter under 17 U.S.C. §512(b)-(d), (h) and (j)) and 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) (misrepresentation of a trademark) — Defamation – Internet Libel – Violation of section 43(a) of the Lanham Act — DMCA notice — Copyright Infringement

The article WeFi has taken issue with is “WEFI Exposed: The “World’s First Decentralized Bank” That Isn’t a Bank“, published by de Hek on August 19th, 2025.

Kulikov (right) explicitly states he is representing Reeve Collins and Yusuf Mirakhmedov, WeFi’s Chairman and a Board Member respectively.

The Website insists that our Client who is a registered business officially authorised to render the services of: Foreign Exchange, Money Transferring, Virtual Currency, and that of PSP in accordance to the Canada’s FINTRAC authorisation No.:
M23563590 is inherently an illegal business.

Again noting WeFi’s securities fraud, which defacto makes its MLM offering illegal in any country with a regulated financial market, we’ll start by further pointing out that, with respect to securities regulation, registration with FINTRAC is meaningless.

Any clown, especially scammers hiding out in Dubai, can register a shell company and register that shell company with FINTRAC. It provides paperwork for authorities to follow up on in the event of an investigation by actual regulators (subject to accuracy of information submitted at time of registration), but is otherwise meaningless.

Our Client’s business has been duly authorised by the Bank of Canada to render the services of fiat transactions and also that of fiat-to-crypto and crypto-to-fiat conversion services under the registered Money Service Business (MSB) authorisation from 2023-12-01, MSB registration number: M23563590.

Same story with an MSB registration – completely meaningless. What actually matters is WeFi registering with financial regulators in jurisdictions they solicit investment in.

WeFi is not registered to offer securities in any jurisdiction. Why should be obvious.

Next up we have Yusuf Mirakhmedov’s wanted fugitive status;

Taking into account the over-inclusion of meanings of the Defamatory Statements, the extent of accusing our Client of financial fraud and its BoD member Mr. Mr.Yusuf Mirakhmedov an international figutive [sic] is sufficed enough to create a defamation claim implying criminal and civil liability for you as for the website actual Owner and Operator.

The Defamatory Statements published on the Website are therefore clearly damaging our Client’s reputation.

These statements constitute an internet libel as were not confirmed by any facts, nor by legal and other official documents.

What is more, the Defamatory Statements in question are a part of a larger internet libel campaign against our Client.

Simply stating on the Website that the publication in question is a reprint from another source, e.g. BehindMLM will not be considered a valid defence where a civil action for libel is brought against you in the courts of law in US, England or Australia.

Quoting from reputable news sources is absolutely a valid defense against defamation. Things are obviously different in Dubai (and perhaps Switzerland), but in the US quoting the press is protected under the First Amendment.

Mirakhmedov is of course free to pursue legal action against news outlets that reported his fugitive status and associated criminal activity prior to WeFi, which brings us to Kulikov’s next point;

The paid defamatory publication in Albania featuring one of our client’s board members, Mr Yusuf Mirakhmedov, cited by your Website and BehindMLM has already been taken down following the law enforcement action request against that website’s criminal defamatory activities.

I have no idea what “paid defamatory publication in Albania” Kulikov is referencing here. Maybe he or someone at WeFi created one and then pulled it themselves?

In BehindMLM’s WeFi review, published in September 2025, we cited two primary news sources, Insajderi and MK News (the latter features Mirakhmedov’s mugshot and arrest warrant details).

Insajderi’s report was published in 2017. MK News’ report was published in 2019. Both reports were accessible at time of publication.

Kulikov making up fiction about an Albanian publication and denying Mirakhmedov’s criminal past and wanted fugitive status seems silly. But here we are.

 What is more, according to the official correspondence received from the International Criminal Police Organisation (INTERPOL), Mr Yusuf Mirakhmedov has never been the subject of any notice or diffusion by INTERPOL:

Here Kulikov offers up a grainy document purportedly from Interpol, representing Mirakhmedov is “not subject to an Interpol notice or diffusion”.

The document dates back to 2020 and is not notarized, meaning its authenticity isn’t verified. This isn’t something I’d attach to a legal document.

Also, even if taken at face value, the purported Interpol document doesn’t dispute Mirakhmedov’s fugitive status.

Criminal case details are provided in the MK News article – Mirakhmedov not being wanted by Interpol in 2020 doesn’t mean he isn’t still a fugitive wanted by Macedonian authorities. And it certainly doesn’t clear him of documented criminal activity.

The defamatory statements published on the website are clearly damaging our client’s reputation by distributing false information. This information is still available today, suggesting that he is still a criminal fugitive hunted by Interpol worldwide.

This in turn negatively affects the businesses managed by our Client. This internet libel by the Website is not confirmed by any facts, nor by legal or any other official documents.

This is a common tactic used by lawyers, wherein they frame reporting of a client’s misconduct as being damaging, as opposed to the actual conduct itself.

It’s hardly surprising Mirakhmedov committing crime, stealing millions and fleeing Macedonia is “damaging his reputation”. But that’s not anyone’s fault other than Mirakhmedov’s.

As for “facts” and “legal documents”, MK News do cite  an order number from the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which Kulikov is free to verify.

Seems kind of odd that Mirakhmedov has taken objection to reporting on his criminal past in 2026 but has had no problem with news reports citing the same conduct that have been online for almost a decade. Probably not a good look in court.

I should point out Kulikov cites multiple websites related to legal action that has nothing to do with criminal proceedings against Mirakhmedov.

Kulikov also claims Mirakhmedov “never had a criminal record in the Republic of North Macedonia, see Exhibit C.”

Here’s “Exhibit C”;

Presumably Kulikov is referencing this sentence;

Jusuf Mirakhmedov … are [sic] not recorded any financial criminal convictions.

Well yeah, if Mirakhmedov fled Macedonia in 2017 and has remained a wanted fugitive since, obviously he’s not going to have a criminal conviction.

Ultimately what Mirakhmedov’s status as a wanted fugitive comes down to is he’s had just under a decade to address reporting of his crime from within Macedonia itself. He hasn’t.

I mean if Kulikov really wanted to prove a point, why not provide a notarized document from Macedonian Public Prosecutors (GOKK), stating order KO No. 28/19 never existed? Also the arrest warrant and mug shot:

But instead we’ve got a lawyer in Switzerland running around misrepresenting defamation laws for securities fraud scammers hiding in Dubai.

Kulikov goes on to take issue with de Hek investigating whether WeFi is a bank or not. This appears based on communication between de Hek and a WeFi promoter, explicitly stating We Fi is “the first decentralized bank”.

If that communication is legitimate and happened, and I have no reason to believe it didn’t, then again discussion of the claim is protected under the First Amendment. Alternatively outside of the US, claiming the conversation didn’t happen when it did isn’t going to get you anywhere in court.

A reasonable response from WeFi would be, “Hey, we saw one of our promoters claimed we’re a bank. We’re not and never claimed to be. We’ve taken action against that promoter – would you mind updating your article to reflect this?”

Of course WeFi can’t do that, because this is the first thing visitors to WeFi’s website see (accessed April 16th, 2026):

With the above in mind and just so we’re clear, this is what Kulikov claims;

The infringing, defamatory statements declare that our Client legal entity is advertising itself as a commercial bank. However, quite the contrary, the information published by our Client clearly indicates that WeFi Payments Limited does not hold a banking licence.

WeFi is clearly marketing itself as a bank and unregistered banking is illegal the world over. So um, how is de Hek correctly pointing out WeFi is not a bank but is advertising itself as one defamatory?

Finally, Kulikov takes a swipe at de Hek’s credentials;

We note that your website is not officially recognized as a consortium of journalists and is not registered as such anywhere in the world.

It has not been registered as a mass media outlet, newspaper, or online media outlet in New Zealand, the USA, or anywhere else.

There is no ‘mass media registry” in the US or New Zealand.

Kulikov closes by threatening de Hek with legal action in Australia, the United Kingdom or the US (de Hek is based out of New Zealand).

Should we not receive a response from you within fourteen (14) days, we will have no alternative but to initiate the takedown procedures, regulatory complaints, and court proceedings, which — even at this preliminary stage — are likely to produce significant and material consequences for your media standing and reputation.

Seeing as WeFi isn’t registered to offer securities in Australia, the UK or US, we’d love to know what “regulatory complaints” Kulikov intends to follow up with.

De Hek has published a response to Kulikov’s WeFi cease and desist on his website.

BehindMLM has not received any correspondence from WeFi or Kulikov at time of publication.