Update (Oct. 20, 2025): ZivZo doubled down with a “supplement” to its TRO bid, seeking takedowns, pre-approval of my future posts, and a domain grab. I filed my opposition explaining why prior restraint isn’t allowed and why their theories fail. Read the response here: https://dennisyu.com/zivzos-gag-attempt-round-two-my-response-to-their-supplement-for-a-tro/

Update (Oct. 7, 2025): Even after multiple cease requests, Benson Fischer and his attorney Richard Schimel continue to send harassing emails. I’ve published a new post documenting the latest email and the pattern of harassment. Read it here: Documenting Fischer’s Continued Harassment: Another Email After Repeated Cease Requests (https://dennisyu.com/documenting-fischers-continued-harassment-another-email-after-repeated-cease-requests/).

Update (Oct. 3, 2025) – The peace order described below has been dismissed because the petitioner failed to appear. See the proof in the court docket below and read my latest post here: Peace Order Dismissed: Another Lawfare Loss for Benson Fisher & Richard Schimel.

For a comprehensive archive of Benson J. Fischer’s lawsuits, court records, and forensic audits, see Benson-Fischer.com.

Benson Fischer, through his attorney Richard Schimel, has issued explicit threats of legal and criminal action against me, alleging “extortion and slander.”

In a recent communication sent directly by Fischer, he stated:

“Dennis… You and Bryant know full well that I will not allow you to let this extortion and slander continue. BTW—extortion carries a penalty of up to 15 years in jail… Have you no honor? Wouldn’t you and Bryant rather end this, or would you both rather engage in a criminal matter that will affect your lives in ways you could never imagine?”

Further documentation provided by Fischer’s attorney, Richard Schimel, outlined additional threats to pursue both civil claims and criminal charges against me for allegedly orchestrating a “smear campaign” against Fischer’s company, ZivZo. Schimel referenced potential charges under Maryland law, citing:

• Online Harassment (Criminal Law Article § 3-802)
• Coercion (Criminal Law Article § 3-706)
• Misuse of electronic communication (Criminal Law Article § 3-803 and § 3-805)

I maintain that I’m transparently sharing publicly available search engine results and other openly accessible information. These threats appear rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of modern digital tools and SEO practices.

As I stated in reply:

“I’m demonstrating what Google’s tools show when you search his name. You can sue Google for their AI-generated search results if you’d like.”

My intent is educational and transparent—showing how digital content appears online through search engines and publicly accessible resources.

This post shares Fischer’s and Schimel’s threats verbatim, allowing you to independently evaluate the nature and appropriateness of their statements.