8f9188d624d55af7e719947712f71818
Self-Contradicting SLAPP
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0
ONLY a few days after this explosive series had begun and we had received takedown threats (which we discussed many times before) the letter that we never mentioned before got sent to our host, threatening that legal action would taken over truly factual claims (that some aggressive and apparently military- or spy-connected firm is being very aggressive). The messages are laughable and inherently self-contradicting for many different reasons. The video above only scratches the surface; a specialised lawyer would likely be able to come up with dozens of different reasons why those letters are legally invalid. Yes, dozens. I've made no efforts to enumerate the reasons, but I can come up with almost a dozen myself.
"Don't they realise that each time they fire off these sorts of threats they only make things even worse for themselves?"So they tried copyright first (same thing patent trolls had tried before against us) and then some other clumsy angle. Also, they clearly disprove themselves on SLAPP by doing exactly that. They've done that to multiple people. They're like a "repeat offender".
Notice how they're getting all aggressive very quickly, like the GCHQ destroying hard drives and computers of journalists who study the GCHQ's abuses at home and abroad. Why are such managers so tactless if not outright foolish? Don't they realise that each time they fire off these sorts of threats they only make things even worse for themselves? One of the reasons or the motivations for covering EPO corruption so routinely is
Benoît Battistelli's addiction or obsession with hiring British law firms, looking to intimidate his critics. ⬆