Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Strategic lawsuits against public participation (also known as SLAPP suits or intimidation lawsuits), [1] or strategic litigation against public participation, [2] are lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.
During the lawsuit, the American Civil Liberties Union filed an amicus brief that was widely covered due to its sarcastic humor. In "SLAPP Suits", Oliver discussed the outcome of the lawsuit and the damaging effects of similar lawsuits, giving an overview of Murray's other SLAPPs and their potential harm to independent journalism. Oliver ended ...
The Foundation's post ends with a call for anti-SLAPP reform (about which, according to Techdirt, "Some progress has already been made" in the EU and UK). However, it reiterates that insufficient anti-SLAPP protection is only part of the legal challenges affecting Wikimedia projects, briefly noting other concerning developments:
While most states have laws designed to make it easier to dismiss strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) lawsuits, Idaho doesn't have an anti-SLAPP law. SLAPP suits are meritless ...
The legal team for Camacho filed a motion last week alleging that the litigation is a so-called SLAPP lawsuit, an improper lawsuit used by public officials to censor or intimidate someone from ...
SLAPP suits are lawsuits used to silence criticism and prevent people from exercising their First Amendment rights through the threat, or actual application of, baseless and expensive legal ...
Correspondingly, food libel cases have been alleged to be strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs). [27] In general, a SLAPP is a defamation or libel suit whose primary purpose is to silence the speaker and intimidate others from engaging in similar speech. [28]
Anti-Slapp motion filed by journalist to get LA lawsuit against him seeking to claw back cop photos dismissed