From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

A new word for me: 'lawfare' (cf warfare) meaning "the use of legal
system to overwhelm an opponent, such as to stop or destroy them."

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Lawfare

I heard it used in a news report as an accusation by Meta against
European legislators to stifle/suffocate their AI ambitions.

Well, I never...
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On 9/21/2026 6:44 PM, occam wrote:

A new word for me: 'lawfare' (cf warfare) meaning "the use of legal
system to overwhelm an opponent, such as to stop or destroy them."

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Lawfare

I heard it used in a news report as an accusation by Meta against
European legislators to stifle/suffocate their AI ambitions.

Well, I never...

It's O.K. It's O.K. to be naive about the real world. I mean, /law-
fare/ is a real phenomenon. The actual phenomenon is probably hundreds
of years older than the term, but I'm not a legal historian.

I cannot say about the E.U. vs. Meta, as I have no clue what their A.I.
is even doing, nor do I know anything about E.U. legislators and what
they might be up to.
--
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via XS News https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On 21/09/26 20:44, occam wrote:

A new word for me: 'lawfare' (cf warfare) meaning "the use of legal
system to overwhelm an opponent, such as to stop or destroy them."

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Lawfare

I heard it used in a news report as an accusation by Meta against
European legislators to stifle/suffocate their AI ambitions.

Well, I never...

How is this different from barratry?
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On 21 Sep 2026, occam wrote

A new word for me: 'lawfare' (cf warfare) meaning "the use of
legal system to overwhelm an opponent, such as to stop or destroy
them."

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Lawfare

I heard it used in a news report as an accusation by Meta against
European legislators to stifle/suffocate their AI ambitions.

Well, I never..

It's similar to "SLAPPs" -- Strategic Legal Actions Against Pulic Participation, a recognised term defined as

oan abuse of the legal process, where the primary objective is to
harass, intimidate and financially and psychologically exhaust oneAs
opponent via improper meanso.

(Very popular with sanctioned Russian oligarchs, apparently.)

There's a useful explanation (from April 2025) which also discusses
"lawfare" and the reputational risk to law firms who represent such
people:

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/business-management/slapps-and-r eputational-risks


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On 21/09/2026 13:40, Peter Moylan wrote:

On 21/09/26 20:44, occam wrote:

A new word for me:-a 'lawfare' (cf warfare) meaning "the use of legal
system to overwhelm an opponent, such as to stop or destroy them."

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Lawfare

I heard it used in a news report as an accusation by Meta against
European legislators to stifle/suffocate their AI ambitions.

Well, I never...

How is this different from barratry?

Barratry appears to have a touch of illegality and / or bribery? (one definition: The crime of a judge whose judgment is influenced by bribery.)

What the EU is doing above board, as I understand it. They are putting
in place measures to block whatever Meta (and others) are doing.

The situation is more akin to 'working to rule' that the coal unions
used to use in the 70s, instead of strikes. By taking all their entitled
toilet breaks, lunch breaks, and rests between sessions, working to rule normally made production ground to a halt.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

In article <nhcg3mFkjb5U1@mid.individual.net>,
occam <occam@nowhere.nix> wrote:

A new word for me: 'lawfare' (cf warfare) meaning "the use of legal
system to overwhelm an opponent, such as to stop or destroy them."

"Lawfare" is also the title of a rather slick online publication
(originally a group blog) which reports on US national security issues
from a legal perspective. Quoting <https://www.lawfaremedia.org/about/our-story>:

At the time we launched this blog, rCLlawfarerCY in some quarters
carried solely negative connotations. That is, for many people
the terms signified, for better or worse, only the misuse or
distortion of legal forms, as distinct from the broader,
value-neutral sense involved in General DunlaprCOs expanded
definition. We do not regard the term as having only negative
connotations. For one thing, it seemed to us that the term
also resonated on a symbolic levelrCoas BenrCOs initial post
suggestedrCowith the simple fact that in the post-9/11 era,
there have been innumerable sharply-contested legal debates
relating to national securityrCoa rCLwarrCY over the content of
national security law, as it were.

The blog was initially established under the auspices of the Brookings Institution, a think tank where Lawfare editor-in-chief Ben Wittes
still works, but seems to be at least formally separate now.

-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | "Act to avoid constraining the future; if you can, wollman@bimajority.org| act to remove constraint from the future. This is Opinions not shared by| a thing you can do, are able to do, to do together."
my employers. | - Graydon Saunders, _A Succession of Bad Days_ (2015) --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On Mon, 21 Sep 2026 17:54:45 -0000 (UTC),
wollman@hergotha.csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) wrote:

In article <nhcg3mFkjb5U1@mid.individual.net>,
occam <occam@nowhere.nix> wrote:

A new word for me: 'lawfare' (cf warfare) meaning "the use of legal
system to overwhelm an opponent, such as to stop or destroy them."

That's my general imipression, too.

But I think I've seen the term used more in abstract discussions,
than pointing to particular (offensive) examples.

"Lawfare" is also the title of a rather slick online publication
(originally a group blog) which reports on US national security issues
from a legal perspective. Quoting ><https://www.lawfaremedia.org/about/our-story>:

At the time we launched this blog, rCLlawfarerCY in some quarters
carried solely negative connotations. That is, for many people
the terms signified, for better or worse, only the misuse or
distortion of legal forms, as distinct from the broader,
value-neutral sense involved in General DunlaprCOs expanded
definition. We do not regard the term as having only negative
connotations. For one thing, it seemed to us that the term
also resonated on a symbolic levelrCoas BenrCOs initial post
suggestedrCowith the simple fact that in the post-9/11 era,
there have been innumerable sharply-contested legal debates
relating to national securityrCoa rCLwarrCY over the content of
national security law, as it were.

The blog was initially established under the auspices of the Brookings >Institution, a think tank where Lawfare editor-in-chief Ben Wittes
still works, but seems to be at least formally separate now.

Thanks for that info. I will be more alert in the future to who is
using the term, for what.
--
Rich Ulrich
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On 21/09/2026 12:49, HVS wrote:

On 21 Sep 2026, occam wrote

A new word for me: 'lawfare' (cf warfare) meaning "the use of
legal system to overwhelm an opponent, such as to stop or destroy
them."

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Lawfare

I heard it used in a news report as an accusation by Meta against
European legislators to stifle/suffocate their AI ambitions.

Well, I never..

It's similar to "SLAPPs" -- Strategic Legal Actions Against Pulic Participation, a recognised term defined as

rCLan abuse of the legal process, where the primary objective is to
harass, intimidate and financially and psychologically exhaust onerCOs opponent via improper meansrCY.

(Very popular with sanctioned Russian oligarchs, apparently.)

There's a useful explanation (from April 2025) which also discusses
"lawfare" and the reputational risk to law firms who represent such
people:

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/business-management/slapps-and-r eputational-risks

Far from reputational damage, some law firms revel in this type of
'work'. The name of "Carter-Ruck" comes up frequently here in the UK in
such matters.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carter-Ruck
--
Sam Plusnet
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On Mon, 21 Sep 2026 21:40:58 +1000, Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org>
wrote:

On 21/09/26 20:44, occam wrote:

A new word for me: 'lawfare' (cf warfare) meaning "the use of legal
system to overwhelm an opponent, such as to stop or destroy them."

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Lawfare

I heard it used in a news report as an accusation by Meta against
European legislators to stifle/suffocate their AI ambitions.

Well, I never...

How is this different from barratry?

One of the uses of "lawfare" appears to be to sue an opponent in a
flimsy case that you might have little hope of winn ing, in the hope
that the legal costs would themselves destroy the opponent before that
case was dealt with.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On 22/09/26 10:33, Steve Hayes wrote:

On Mon, 21 Sep 2026 21:40:58 +1000, Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org>
wrote:

On 21/09/26 20:44, occam wrote:

A new word for me: 'lawfare' (cf warfare) meaning "the use of
legal system to overwhelm an opponent, such as to stop or
destroy them."

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Lawfare

I heard it used in a news report as an accusation by Meta against
European legislators to stifle/suffocate their AI ambitions.

Well, I never...

How is this different from barratry?

One of the uses of "lawfare" appears to be to sue an opponent in a
flimsy case that you might have little hope of winn ing, in the hope
that the legal costs would themselves destroy the opponent before
that case was dealt with.

Which is pretty much the definition of barratry in Australia and,
apparently, in many other places apart from Scotland. (Scotland has a
different definition.) However, a web search suggests that many
jurisdictions consider the crime to be obsolete. Here's a quote from
Wikipedia.

<quote>
Although it remains a crime in some jurisdictions, barratry has
frequently been abolished as being anachronistic and obsolete.

If barratrous litigation is deemed to be for the purpose of silencing
critics, it is known as a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP). Jurisdictions that otherwise have no barratry laws may have
SLAPP laws.
</quote>

It seems that in the USA it is a crime in some states but not in others.
I assume that Donald Trump tries to get his barratry cases handled in
states where it's legal. He loses the case, but being President of the
USA is such a profitable occupation that he can outspend his victims.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2