Techrights Will Never Capitulate to Threats From Microsofters
Yesterday we received inappropriate communications (in the post) on behalf of American Microsofters who attempt to whiten their reputation using some very poor law firm (desperate for money; it has less money in the bank than what it received from the Microsofters). I thought it's a good time to bring up what motivates them and who might be sponsoring the SLAPPs.
Set aside violence against women and all sorts of other things; it's not about personal issues but business issues. In short, Mr. Graveley is a former Microsoft employee with a "best friend" (according to him) who is in the C suite/executive level at Microsoft. More to the point though, he is strangling/choking and then gagging the victims talking about it. As for the lawyer chosen by MJG (and then Mr. Graveley), this lawyer shows ongoing eagerness to attack women, maybe because of his religion (that's just my personal opinion anyway). Attacking a person for merely reporting crimes against women is a low blow. Mr. Graveley used the exact same lawyer as Garrett less than a week before MJG (Garrett) had to serve his defense in response to legal action my wife took against MJG (Garrett) [1, 2] and another one I took against Garrett (for he had harassed me for well over a decade and defamed me a lot publicly because of my stance on tech, e.g. on UEFI). This seems to me like a legal hack, which is insincere and maybe in breach of some protocol (pulling in some third party to influence from the outside or interfere; he jumped in with what became yet another pre-action letter with scary sums drafted into a draft form; probably bluffing). That's after literally begging and sending threats ("legally" making threats has its limits). Seems like a form of intimidation instead of due process; in 2015 the EPO, Europe's second-largest organisation, hired several litigious firms to spy on me and try to scare me, deterring me from further reporting on the EPO's corruption. Pre-action letters were clearly misused to scare me into self-censorship regarding utter corruption that even Private Eye credited us for (several times that year). A lot of the press reported on our findings, which were in no way defamatory.
This is similar, except it's not the EPO.
I'll probably write more about this tomorrow, which happens to be an important deadline for the Defendant, MJG (Garrett). █