The Superior Court of New Jersey entered a default judgment transferring flagship domain radaris.com and 13 sister sites to Atlas Data Privacy Corp. Filed under New Jersey’s Daniel’s Law, the privacy lawsuit penalizes commercial data brokers for publishing personal information on state law enforcement officials.
Default Judgment Transfers Radaris Domains
For more than a decade, the consumer data search engine Radaris operated on a strategy of attrition. Whenever targeted individuals or legal representatives submitted removal requests or filed lawsuits, the platform typically ignored them. That decade-long stonewalling fractured in a New Jersey courtroom, according to reporting by KrebsOnSecurity. Because Radaris repeatedly failed to mount a substantive legal defense or comply with judicial discovery, the presiding judge ordered a court-sanctioned domain forfeiture.
Origins of Daniel’s Law and Massive Litigation
The legal battle traces back to February 2024, when Atlas Data Privacy Corp initiated legal action against Radaris. Daniel’s Law mandates that commercial data brokers entirely remove information of judges, government personnel, law enforcement officials, and their families. The statute enforces compliance by levying fines of $1,000 per violation.
Atlas leveraged this statutory framework to sue on behalf of New Jersey residents, turning individual removal failures into consolidated litigation.
Corporate Shell Games and Hidden Leadership
Throughout the proceedings, Radaris leaned on an intricate corporate shell game. Matt Adkisson, president and CEO of Atlas, described the evasion tactics as an “island-hopping phase.” Privacy policies morphed continuously, while corporate paperwork cycled through jurisdictions including the Marshall Islands, the British Virgin Islands, and Seychelles. When defense attorneys argued that specific shell entities merely operated domains while separate entities owned them, investigators in the Marshall Islands discovered that corporations cited by Radaris did not even legally exist.
Investigative reporting by KrebsOnSecurity unmasked the true masterminds behind the sprawling network: Igor and Dmitry Lubarsky, Russian-born brothers residing in Massachusetts. The siblings operated dozens of people-search engines alongside Russian-language dating services. Early legal pushback from the brothers included direct threats of defamation lawsuits and assertions by attorney Val Gurvits that the company’s true leadership consisted of Ukrainians living in Ukraine. However, subsequent court disclosures forced Gurvits to concede that the corporate executive “Gary Norden”—widely quoted in investment press releases—was a completely fictitious pseudonym.
Subpoenas Expose Financial Networks
Subpoenaed documents and internal emails secured across 10,000 records reveal that nominal corporate vehicles—including Radaris America, Inc., Bitseller Expert Limited, Digital Orbit Corp, Core Solutions Group Inc., and Veripages Inc.—shared centralized administrative management, common bank cards, and a unified virtual office. Financial tracing demonstrated that radaris.com generated roughly $42,000 monthly, while sister site Veripages.com pulled in about $45,000 monthly via marketing partnerships with firms like the Lifetime Value Company.
Additional revenue streams emerged from commercial partnerships. According to Atlas filings, the Radaris ecosystem pulled in up to $25,000 per month from Onerep, a privacy service that promises to help people remove their information from search sites. Investigative reporting previously exposed how Onerep’s founder simultaneously operated people-search platforms like Nuwber, effectively profiting from both the exposure and the removal of personal data.
With 14 domains successfully transferred under the default judgment, radaris.com no longer indexes personal dossiers. Instead, visitors encounter an official notice detailing the court-ordered forfeiture.
Legal Pushback and National Regulatory Spread
Legal defense strategies have shifted under newly assigned counsel. Victor Worms, representing Radaris, filed a motion to vacate the default judgment. Worms argued that radaris.com lacks legal capacity to be sued directly as a non-entity, and characterized the domain transfer as an unconstitutional asset forfeiture.
Meanwhile, the broader regulatory framework remains contested. The data broker industry has mobilized challenges against Daniel’s Law in federal courts, arguing the statute violates First Amendment protections. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is currently weighing the constitutional questions, with legal experts anticipating an eventual appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Despite federal resistance, at least 14 additional states have introduced parallel legislation modeled after New Jersey’s privacy framework, signaling a widening regulatory squeeze on the commercial data broker ecosystem.
