4 ms·
Hacked firm demanded journalist 'take down' breach reporting, citing UK court
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ChrisArchitect 2y agoAnother TechCrunch [dupe] Actual article: https://databreaches.net/2025/03/05/hcrg-cares-lawyers-claimed-an-injunction-issued-in-a-private-hearing-required-us-to-remove-two-posts-we-didnt-comply/ https://databreaches.net/2025/03/05/hcrg-cares-lawyers-claim... (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43285101 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43285101)
- duxup 2y ago>Dissent also noted that the text of the court order does not specifically name DataBreaches.net nor reference the specific articles in question. What did the court order even say? The law firm managed to get a non specific order and the firm misrepresented it?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- drivingmenuts 2y agoAre these law firms ever sanctioned for filing these types of non-specific claims or is it all "just part of the game"? If they are, maybe it's time to increase the penalty, because this has happened before and hasn't stopped.
- fmajid 2y agoThere is a whole UK industry of law firms shielding oligarchs and other scum from accountability for their crimes, the most notorious being Carter Ruck. Politicians talk about sanctions but do nothing. https://archive.is/hjmCS https://archive.is/hjmCS
- fmajid 2y agoThe UK has egregious libel laws where the burden of proof is on the defendant, and their reactionary judiciary is all too happy to issue “super injunctions” where the existence of an injunction is itself gagged. This is used by shady corporations and oligarchs to shield themselves from scrutiny, like the well-known Trafigura case (they were dumping toxic waste in the seas off the Ivory Coast). It’s long past time the adopted a SLAPP statute.