Microsoft Attack Dogs Against Watchdogs and Guard Dogs in Software
"A guard dog or watchdog is a dog used to watch for and guard people or property against unwanted human or animal intruders," Wikipedia says. "A dog trained to attack intruders is known as an attack dog."
Last year Microsofters hired attack dogs or "guns for hire" because we write about topics like UEFI 'secure boot' (securing Microsoft monopoly) and against slop code, as we just have. The extortion came from these very people! One kept promoting Microsoft monopoly and the latter helped Microsoft build the biggest GPL violation tool ever. Now they're in cohoots, facilitated by the same "guns for hire", which the UK High Court threw the books at last week.
We and others wrote about this subject before [1, 2, 3, 4].
The SRA is closely watching the SLAPPs against us. Every move against us can and will be used against the SLAPPers.
Seeing that some people deem the UK High Court "funny" and think it's "funny" to use it for harassment by process or abuse of process, we can envision it'll end up like the Vince case. Throwing a large bunch of Microsoft money at the problem [1, 2] (about $500,000 to lawyer up against me and my wife) will only ever backfire, even on the "guns for hire".
To repeat what we wrote yesterday: "We generally do not comment on ongoing or impending proceedings (such as legal papers and inter partes communications) because it's common courtesy and good practice to keep separate what's said to the public and what's said to the Court. When we write about this in public it is because prominent journalists, who respect this site, read this site, and have been in good terms with me for decades urged me to make some information public. Mainly because: 1) it helps the general public understand what is happening; 2) it's common sense to oppose attacks on the media and do so also in the media (not just in courtrooms, where dockets can and sometimes do get misused; 3) this problem is common, so it's important for other reporters to understand what's at stake and also for us to generally describe the blueprint of these attacks, how to defend against them, etc."
Abusive behaviour deserves transparency (for scrutiny). Without transparency, abuse tends to worsen or replicate [1, 2]. █