Extortion is a Crime, Even If You're Based in Another Continent and Work for Microsoft
British law cited at the bottom of this post*.
Yesterday: Nat Friedman Had Left Microsoft GitHub Exactly One Week Before Matthew Garrett Sent His First SLAPP (Which Was an Empty Threat, He Was Abusing the Legal System of Another Continent to Terrorise Critics Who Had Just Unearthed Major Microsoft Scandals) | Older: Signing Off Serious Lies With a Statement of Truth is No Joking Matter
Matthew Garrett's American litigation buddy [1, 2] got arrested whilst on Microsoft's payroll for strangulation of women. He later sent me many threats and similarly sent to threats to a lawyer who wasn't on file** - a move which is professionally inappropriate and this (among other unprofessional conduct) was reported to British authorities. Also see Weaponisation of For-Profit Dockets - Part II: Hiding Behind Lawyers and Barristers Who Lack Standards so as to Engage in Classic Corporate Extortion (part 1 gave some background and part 3 dealt with consequences)
This wasn't the first time he made empty threats: Before Trying Censorship by Extortion the Serial Strangler From Microsoft Literally Begged Us to Delete Pages
He sent me threats for 3 years. I have all the proof.
The Microsofters very well know that doing it from another continent has advantages. It can complicate matters and add more bureaucratic layers. We cannot have cops dispatched to their home and they can hide in various states, so enforcing British law against them is harder (it's asymmetric!). We had a CEO like this in Sirius Open Source. He ran away to the US and his flunkies in the UK refused to answer very simple questions (later we found out he had defrauded the staff). Sirius Open Source is now in court.
Here's the letter I received early this year from a rogue lawyer who had also sent threats to other people who had merely reported crimes [1, 2]. He has since then handed in his notice (it would make it harder for authorities to question/investigate them), or so it would seem, based on the silence from that firm.
They even admitted themselves that they're making a threat (see above, it's explicit). They had already made similar threats since October 2024, so they're in effect sending many threats for 4 months because they really need the money. Their client is a close friend of Miguel de Icaza with history in Mono and Xamarin (he did Tomboy) and his lawyers did something against the rules - or put another way - illegal, according to legal professionals we spoke to. We know who to hold responsible for this and covered this matters before [1, 2, 3].
The day before yesterday, for the third and fourth time already, the law firm refused to deny that Matthew Garrett is coordinating with the serial strangler from Microsoft or even comment (after being repeatedly asked) who funds the SLAPPs. To make matters worse, only 3 business hours after receiving a letter about Matthew Garrett they decided to act for the serial strangler from Microsoft. Are they even keeping track of who's who?
One need not be a rocket scientist to see what's going on here. Having sent me a 500+ (!) page PDF a few days ago, they clearly aim to compensate with quantity for a ludicrous and obvious lack of quality (or valid arguments).
It's rather revealing, based on public databases, that they have little business left other than shamelessly harassing me and my family (spouse, parents, siblings etc.) like it's some personal little project of theirs, reading the sites all day long to try to somehow suck in more Microsoft dollars from their American clients implicated in class-action lawsuits [1, 2]. Apparently I did something really naughty by correctly reporting that women got strangled and Microsoft did all sorts of illegal things. They attack real, independent journalists in Britain (for American people who have no credibility) while boasting about the most notorious tabloid in Britain citing their brat - the tabloid which keeps libeling people, including their client (their very last client for a libel/media lawsuit; that was last year!).
Why is the violent Microsofter not still in prison? Follow the money***. █
Related: Brett Wilson LLP [Repeatedly] Does Not Deny Microsoft or Another "Third Party" Secretly Funds the SLAPPs Against Techrights, Bankrolling Despicable People Who Deserve Criticism | Why We're Reporting Brett Wilson LLP for Apparently Misusing Their Licence to Protect American Microsofters Who Attack Women | The Significance of the Timing of the Ridiculous Letters From Brett Wilson LLP, Acting on Behalf of People From Microsoft | My Motion Disbarring or “Striking Off” Brett Wilson LLP for Enabling Violent Americans Who Try to Crush Microsoft Critics in the United Kingdom by Multiple SLAPPs
___________
* We know the law and speak to people who also know the law and are professionally qualified to assess it.
2022: "Section 21 TA 1968 creates the offence of blackmail. The offence is committed when a person with a view to gain for themselves or another or intending to cause loss to another makes an unwarranted demand with menaces."
"Neither extortion nor blackmail requires a threat of a criminal act, such as violence, merely a threat used to elicit actions, money, or property from the object of the extortion." -Wikipedia
Legal experts say "the main differences between extortion and blackmail are that blackmail tends to be about revealing confidential info about a person unless payment is provided. Whereas extortion is about getting money or property via coercion such as violence, or threats."
** Our lawyer, who was on PBS, "took the first “Twibel” case to trial," he says (other sites agree), i.e. he pioneered this:
“Twibel” is the term now used by the Microsofters' lawyer in his very latest blog post (yesterday). They (Brett Wilson LLP) engage in extortion, according to law professionals.
It's like that time FSFE copied the term we had coined, "openwashing". “Twibel” says the firm while sending improper communication (and threats) to the person who pioneered “Twibel” litigation.
As a side note, our lawyer also knows a lot about people who think that breaking into devices is merely "fun" or a "joke". They think similarly of courts.
*** The Microsofter's lawyer paid $10,000 to the person in charge: (in the US people commonly refer to that as a bribe, perfumed as "contributions")
From this PDF.
$10,000 is an obscene amount of money. Compare it to all the rest. Some people gave $5 (lots of $5 contributions). Rick Cofer, as an individual, gave a sum several times higher than some entire law firms gave.