| Blog | https://codon.org.uk/~mjg59/blog |
| Signal | @mjg.59 |
| Blog | https://codon.org.uk/~mjg59/blog |
| Signal | @mjg.59 |
A key part of a SLAPP is that it's used against speech that is entirely legal. The defendant can simply not afford to get to the point where they're able to defend themselves, or is sufficiently afraid of the potential for losing that they'd rather settle first.
If a lawsuit goes to trial and the court concludes the speech was illegal, then that's by definition not a SLAPP.
SLAPPs are a genuine problem and some jurisdictions have enacted laws against them. California allows defamation cases to be examined early in the process and thrown out if a judge concludes there's no realistic chance of success - and in turn, the defendant is then allowed to sue whoever filed the SLAPP. This is good. There should be more laws like that.
But, again, if a court ends up deciding that you engaged in illegal defamation, that case wasn't a SLAPP