Adding the Voice of Writers to UK SLAPP Reform
In 2023, 3 months before my wife got her first SLAPP, Dan Neidle explained why "the UK’s worst libel lawyers shouldn’t be involved in libel law reform." He said: "Brett Wilson LLP acting for a tax avoidance boutique called Property118, accused me of defamation for stating opinions on tax law which are shared by the majority of the profession. A libel action on that basis never had any prospect of success, and the Brett Wilson letter was therefore a SLAPP. Brett Wilson abused the law of copyright and confidence in an attempt to keep their correspondence from being published. Another characteristic of a SLAPP."
A few days ago we showed that the EPO's top-level management is still upset that this site publishes information about the EPO. Remember that the EPO already took several law firms to threaten and stalk me 10 years ago. It's not that I published something false. It's just that the EPO does not want its staff to speak, and this site did enable staff to speak.
At the moment (as recently as Friday) I am in touch with authorities on the matter. They deal with SLAPPs and investigate what constitute SLAPPs. Unlike lawyers, I don't stand to financially gain from SLAPPs. It is important to engage with those who don't have such a stake in the outcome. That means NGOs, too.
The journey to repair antiquated (monarchy era) laws will likely be long, but with enough determination and energy [1, 2] we can strike off offending firms (that routinely profit from SLAPPs) and rationalise reforms. So far we have made good progress on it. █
