Justice for Victims of Online Abuse
Last night we explained why we'll fight back against baseless claims [1, 2] that amount to SLAPP "for the lols".
The claims asserted or pushed forth by the harasser are categorically denied. The entirety of the assertions in the claims is clearly not backed by any actual evidence (contrary to the articles cited) and therefore the claims can be denied outright, pending any actual substantiation by the challenger. Put another way, the harasser who challenges the stories (about the harassment) is put to strict, detailed proof of claims. Just throwing laws' chapters/sections (basically numbers) with reference to some paragraphs/sentences is insufficient. The paper-filling in the particulars is mostly self-promotional language and dross, neither any substantial refutation nor any evidence presented to dispute what was shown by us.
All articles, memes, commentary (a lot of opinion pieces) published throughout the years was, without exception, fair and - where stated clearly - an expression of an opinion, typically from the recipient of online abuse including cyberstalking and cyberbullying. This goes more than a decade back.
All written material, including the humourous bits (like caricatures or comparisons/metaphors), was based on open-source, freely-accessible and publicly visible material. Nothing involved intrusion into private lives, impersonation, contact made to family, cracking/misuse of computers/sites/networks. Even material in the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine is of a public-facing, openly-accessible personal site. The material was put in the public domain by the person it is about, so this is wilful and voluntary disclosure, even if that turns out to be embarrassing later.
It's rather shocking that in 2024 we need to explain such fundamental tenets that freedom of speech is built upon. █