In and around 2023, Roy and Rianne Schestowitz were subject to a horrific campaign of online harassment. Unfortunately they blamed me for it, and in turn wrote and published an astonishing array of articles making false accusations against me. Last year, I sued them in the high court in London. In turn, they countersued me for harassment. The case was heard last month and I'm pleased to say that the counterclaim was dismissed and I prevailed in my case. The court awarded me £70,000 in damages.

@mjg59 Congratulations; or well, I guess something closer to relief!

@mjg59 great news!

@mjg59 Are they also paying your legal expenses - which, I imagine, could be higher than £70,000 ?

@elronxenu The order hasn't been issued yet but I'd expect it to include costs

@mjg59 Congratulations on a win for the light side.

@ruben hope so!

The judgement is now publicly available: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/kb/2025/3063

@mjg59 I'm really glad you did this. Articles like https://techrights.org/o/2023/09/18/downsides-of-lvfs/index.shtml are just crazy.

@hughsie @mjg59 yeah, I would pay exactly zero attention to what our friend Roy writes on that site.

@hughsie @mjg59 oh, I should have read the full thread of discussion first, eh? :)

@mjg59 It's very detailed and simply explained isn't it. Now, you can relax and get on and write that book...

Abuse was not only targeted at me - during the course of the case my solicitor was attacked on the basis of his perceived religion, and baseless accusations of antisemitism were made against the firm. I appreciate the professionalism that they displayed throughout.

@mjg59 Of course it’s fucking techrights. Total scum.

@mjg59 congratulations, and hope this is the last time we all have to hear from Roy

@mjg59

Well that's an extremely annoying read. I'd have preferred the defendants to be properly resourced so you could have defeated them without the possibility of a narrative that you crushed an under-resourced couple who couldn't mount a legal case. Though perhaps that's on them for suing first.

Though props to the introduction that says "[he] challenges the dominance of ‘big tech’ software and systems" vs. "he holds a senior position at NVIDIA" with a strait face.

Congratulations Dr.

@mjg59 I didn't follow the "data retention" part of the judgement. What was that about?

@mjg59 Having dealt with abuse from them for years myself, I'm pleased to see you took them to court and won.

@kees handling and processing data related to criminal activities falls under data protection law and should be removed on request unless it's for the purposes of a valid exception such as journalism, or something vaguely like that

@doctormo this comes after exploring every alternative approach to having the material removed

@sjvn @mjg59 @mjg59 Hopefully that will discourage him from his tendency to insult anyone who writes things that he disagrees with, as he has been doing to Mary and me for years.

@mjg59 The money doesn't help to undo these bad accusations, but at least it feels good to have won. Probably still not recommended to replicate.

@http would strongly encourage not being in this position to start with

@mjg59 For those who don't have the background, are there links to the original libellous articles?

I also didn't understand the backstory about drug/cocaine use.

In reading the judgment it claims (AIUI) that the defendant continues to publish on his blog, and it mentions possible contempt of court and remedies? Does it mean he has to take the articles down? Is it sufficient for him to post some sort of "apology" as was possibly implied? I found the whole decision a bit complicated to read.

@purpleidea this is the judgement, there'll be a separate order that implements it

@mjg59 Congratulations!!!