Taking a Moral Stand Against Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) and the Worst Offenders/Facilitators
Any other stance would sidle with moral depravity or moral hazard
Not every media lawyer is a bully. Not every paralegal would work for bullies. It takes a special type of mindset for women to work for men who attack women. Sometimes money comes before principles. Apparently that's a common problem. There's no moral imperative to be a good person when morality and wealth get wrongly conflated/intertwined with one another.
Some people become rich by doing the immoral things no other person would do.
What we're dealing with these days is almost out of the ordinary. We're dealing with bullies. Their "guns for hire" are also bullies. Americans who can find a bully in the UK can bully other people in the UK. Apparently "lawyering up" can also extend to bullying, or exporting misogyny from the US to the UK. We will not tolerate this. We don't live under the governance of MElon and the convicted felon, who think women are merely sexual toys.
Over the years I've dealt with all sorts of law firms. But this one is the worst, internationally (worse than the American and German ones).
This year the firm gets almost no business except businesses going out of business ("Winding Up Petitions"), based on public databases. The data speaks for itself:
Those aren't really profitable. So the remaining staff can have more time available to lobbying or fronting for violent men from Microsoft. How noble.
For context, this firm emerged as a specialising in censoring publishers. Nowadays it loses a lot of staff (maybe a quarter of staff this past year, based on the Wayback Machine and public pages, i.e. quite likely a skeleton crew) and drifts away to remote areas while standards are considerably lowered. What next? Conveyance?
"A winding up petition is a serious statement of intent by a creditor in shutting down your company due to unpaid debts. It is the strongest action a creditor can take against your business and is often the natural next step in the debt chasing process after a statutory demand for payment has gone unheeded. If you ignore a winding up petition against your company, the courts will issue a winding up order which will see your company forced into compulsory liquidation," explains this page.
Given its own debt issues, maybe the next one to wind up (or down) will be the 'executor'.
If I became "their project", then so be it. But if they all along decided that it would be a good strategy to attack women, they would not be shocked to see a "pushback" from the judiciary. It's a losing strategy [1, 2].
SLAPPs may seem like a good business model, but just like patent trolling, it only works as long as one can keep it secret. See what happened to Discreet Law; it didn't last long.
Law firms live or die (or thrive/perish) based on their reputations. Attacking women is a losing strategy, which is why they tried threats instead of a lawsuit and prior to that there was even begging. █
Related: Brett Wilson LLP Does Not Deny Microsoft or Another "Third Party" Secretly Funds the SLAPPs Against Techrights, Bankrolling Despicable People Who Deserve Criticism | Matthew J. Garrett is "Former Microsoft Researcher", According to Microsoft's Serial Strangler
