Royal Dutch Shell Plc  .com Rotating Header Image

Shell’s failed blundering attempt to kill my

Shell’s failed blundering attempt to kill my

By John Donovan (last updated 5 Sept 2021)

Last week, a CYBERSECURITY INTELLIGENCE outfit acting for Shell issued a 5-day ultimatum on behalf of Shell to the company hosting my

I would not have had a clue about the ultimatum letter if the hosting company had not tipped me off about what was going on behind my back at Shell’s direction.

For 26 years, I have used the Internet as a medium to criticise and expose Shell’s unscrupulous dishonest activities, including, for example, the Shell securities fraud that ruined Shell’s reputation.


Shell first took issue with my Shell-focused Internet activity in March 1995. Shell’s rabid false allegations about my late father and me resulted in a libel action. We received a £125,000 consideration from Shell paid to us partly to cease the libel action.

On 23 September 1998, Shell put up posters at The Shell Centre about our activities. The following day, we distributed leaflets outside the Shell Centre threatening libel proceedings. Shell removed the posters.

Shell’s repeated covert efforts through the years to suppress my rights to criticize Shell using the Internet as a medium have all failed. My Shell focussed websites have expanded and multiplied in number.

The latest ultimatum letter claims that the allegedly IP infringing website causes damage to Shell’s business and reputation.

In fact, it is Shell’s past actions, for example in Nazi Germany (fuelling the Nazi war machine), Nigeria (plunder and pollution) and South Africa (devious moves in supporting apartheid) that are responsible for the damage.

Add to that list Shell’s climate change machinations, Shell’s failed Arctic drilling plans that turned into a dangerous tax-dodging farce and Shell sponsoring bribery and corruption in Ireland. Shell has a black belt in tax avoidance. 

Last example: Shell settled four high court actions with me for IP theft.

Litigation is currently underway in the Netherlands against Shell alleging Shell complicity in the murder of the Ogoni 9.

No wonder Royal Dutch Shell Plc is categorised as a sin stock.

Now that Shell has admitted the negative impact on its business and reputation, allegedly as a consequence of my activities, Shell investors and employees will likely be bemused if Shell does not sue me for alleged libel?

A libel action would be a more honourable way to resolve these matters once and for all, instead of mounting a blundering strong-arm covert operation based on fundamentally inaccurate information.

Shell will not do so because Shell knows that what I say is true and can be proven in court with ample evidence.

Immediately after I was informed of the ultimatum, I notified Mr Ben van Beurden (Shell CEO) and Mr Donny Ching (Shell Legal Director) of what was going on. I did this just in case they were unaware of the intimidation being used on behalf of Shell.


Shell presented its objections to the website based on it being a commercial website selling products. Something that it has never been. It has not generated any income, not a single penny, from the day it was launched. There are no subscription, or other charges, of any kind. We do not solicit or accept donations. The fact that is non-commercial has important legal implications, including that contrary to assertion, any alleged Shell trademarks were not being used for commercial gain.

The ultimatum has expired. The website remains.

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Comments are closed.

Comment Rules

  • Please show respect to the opinions of others no matter how seemingly far-fetched.
  • Abusive, foul language, and/or divisive comments may be deleted without notice.
  • Each blog member is allowed limited comments, as displayed above the comment box.
  • Comments must be limited to the number of words displayed above the comment box.
  • Please limit one comment after any comment posted per post.