How the SLAPPs From Microsoft Staff Are Connected to the Corrupt OSI, Whose Majority of Money Comes From Microsoft for Openwashing, LLM Hype, and Whitewashing GPL Violations During Class Action Trial
"We'll resume the OSI series later this weekend," we said yesterday. There's so much left to be said and "OSI coverage in Techrights might go on and on till August" (modest estimate).
Let's explain how some of these things are connected.
OSI promotes the same thing
So the Serial Strangler from Microsoft, Alex Graveley, apparently received a subpoena for his role in Microsoft's GPL-violating code blender. Years ago he repeatedly begged me and months ago he repeatedly tried to extort me - a matter that was escalated to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) because prominent lawyers say what they did was clearly illegal. His solicitor (or facilitator of this extortion) is apparently leaving the firm now, perhaps fearing he or the firm might lose the licence to operate and thus be out of business. They did all sorts of other dodgy things, but that's a subject for much later articles.
The OSI series resumes today, so it's worth reminding readers of the relation/s between all those things. As we repeatedly explained (about two dozen times) in the past, the OSI actively promotes the very same practices Microsoft is in court for. If one traces back the money, most of it is from Microsoft - another similarity to the above. It's also connected to GNOME and the Microsofter Nat Friedman, who 'left' GitHub shortly after we had exposed the likely embezzlement/fraud planned with Alex Graveley. We covered this in 2021 and 2022 - around the very same time the first SLAPP came. It looks like they certainly try really hard to hide something - as there's a lot of money (perhaps tens of billions) at stake.
Much more to come
We intend to cover all this in great depth. A lot of these things are connected because of the overlap - they involve many of the same people, groups, and companies. As it turns out, 'former' GNOME people also show up now in Wikipedia, trying to suppress embarrassing information about OSI scandals. We'll probably get to that next month or in July (if the OSI is still around by the end of summer).
When one SLAPP wasn't enough for the Microsofters they strategically added another [1, 2], seeing they had gotten themselves in serious trouble [1, 2] and saw no way out. Right now it seems like, at least for the solicitor, the way out is literally out (running away from the firm).
Microsoft paid for it; it'll need to pay more
We intend to seek full reparation and transparency, then reform, even if that means moving up the chain and demanding money from the facilitator; a lot of the money for the SLAPPs was Microsoft salaries (to the tune of almost $200,000 a year, based on the strangler's arrest record).
Microsoft or the Microsofters will have to pay for what they did and we'll do our best to fix UK libel law to curtail future SLAPPs, especially from Americans looking for "cheap" attacks inside the UK [ 1, 2], facilitated by a flailing firm on its last foot, whose staff is barely qualified, demonstrably unscrupulous, and shameless about picking cases no other firm would.
It's about more than strangling women; it's about stealing from millions of people
The upside of all this (when it's over), more people will know just how vicious Microsoft and its staff is (they want go to the grave without people knowing who they really are). The people who facilitates copyright violations against Free (copylefted) code are no better than raiders, they just focus on selling tools. Like those who help create image ripoffs and LLM slop. Here's a day-old example of LLM slop and slop image from a notorious slopfarm which Google News presents as a news source about "Linux":
As we explained before, there's no positive, constructive use for LLMs. The "use cases" are typically fake and falsely-marketed. They allow people to take other people's work without knowing it and thus without worrying about it too much (no guilt). They can still get sued, but typically the facilitators get sued. This is why Microsoft is still in court for what Alex Graveley and Nat Friedman did. They're too busy attacking the messenger and meanwhile it seems like the attack dog, who refers to my wife using a name she has not had since 2012, is running away. Is the barrister ("Junior") next? Can another "cheap" one be found and put in his place?
Justice demands widespread knowledge
These people can run, but they cannot hide. What they did to me and my family will be fully exposed for years to come. █