Techrights
The Loyalty to Microsoft and the Salaries From Microsoft (Funding SLAPPs Against Techrights and Tux Machines)
Posted by Roy Schestowitz on Jun 03, 2025
A year ago Julian Assange was released and permitted to go back home as "a free man" (after pausing at a US colony to plead guilty to something ahead of his birthday). He got his "bargain". He recognised he had to sacrifice something for his own freedom's sake and his wife still naively thinks that Trump, who blackmailed her husband, would ever pardon him.
The Assange analogy seems relevant here for a lot of reasons. One should not have to apologise or plead guilty when publishing true information. In the case of Assange, however, his life (or what's left of it) depended on it. He had already suffered a minor stroke in prison and he was only about 50 at the time. He looked a lot better prior to his stress-inducing ordeals circa 2011.
It is a scientific fact that stress ruins things and even kills. So what motivates a person to destroy his own life just trying to ruin someone else's (and his wife's; she merely wrote about abuses and hate crimes she had been subjected to from across the Atlantic)?
That's basically what Matthew J. Garrett did. He accomplished nothing. I told him this would happen. Garrett knows better. Garrett always knows better. He knows everything best.
I'm not a religious person (neither is he), but if there was some angel out there he'd whisper in his ear: Dude, listen up! It's almost like "God" is trying to send you a message when you lose the lawyer (it's really chaotic*), dog, spouse, 'home', job, money, and health. But you refuse to listen because the mind too (mental state) isn't working and you're desperate to blame everyone else - even the people who actually created GNU/Linux [1, 2] - for your own misery. Then you also attack people who merely report the facts, e.g. "secure boot" being an actual attack on computer users and their security. When it does not work, then you start to attack family members of theirs as well. Maybe the problem is you, not others. You may be projecting like your ilk.
That's what an angel might tell him, but he does not believe in angels and in "God", so he's driving himself to ruin, more so since resorting to a lifeline from Microsoft staff (at the time of the arrest). There's no point trying to crowdfund and fill the pot for a strangler of women who tells women to kill themselves and does even worse things on the business side inside Microsoft [1, 2]. That just serves to reaffirm what we sued him for [1, 2] and reported the law firm for more than 2 months ago (it's progressing as the complaint has merit and the law firm disintegrates naturally; they know what they did and why that's extremely abusive). A Law Degree does not get granted for reputation laundering operations. The licence should be used ethically and responsibly.
Last month we showed they were sending all the data to Microsoft - the former employer of the brute who says Garrett too used to work for Microsoft:
Right...
What next?
Whether they pay him or not, he's already working for Microsoft by spending years harassing Microsoft critics and even lodging SLAPPs funded by Microsoft money (whilst laughing about it with Microsofters, even in public sometimes). We'll come back to this point some time soon. █
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
The first nastygram came on the same week or month that Friedman apparently received his "marching orders" (Miguel de Icaza followed soon afterwards).
_____
- It's not only us who reported them to the SRA. On the same month Labour Pains wrote: "Accordingly, I have submitted a complaint about the crowdfunder to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA ref: A25-1287392). I also believe that Brett Wilson LLP’s involvement in – and financial benefit from – this evidently misleading solicitation of significant funds may breach the firm’s regulatory obligations, so have submitted a complaint to the Solicitors Regulation Authority."