The worst SLAPP we’ve ever seen has spawned a counterclaim

Last month, we reported that a charity called Rapid Relief Team had filed a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) in California, which is so conspicuously petty that Marc Randazza, lead lawyer for the “defendant” Canadian podcaster Cheryl Bawtinheimer, describes it as bogus.  Ostensibly the claim was for a technical copyright infringement.

The link to our blog is here: The worst SLAPP we’ve ever seen (23 February 2026)

We have not contacted Randazza because his firm’s brief statement about the case is already on its website.  Given that Rapid Relief Team’s counsel Michael Graif is a co-defendant in Bawtinheimer’s counterclaim, we reached out to him for comment on the claim against him, but did not receive a response.

We have also found the answer to a second question elsewhere; given that California is one of approximately 40 States that has anti-SLAPP legislation, why did Rapid Relief Team not file in one of the States that doesn’t?  We understand that the alleged copyright infringement was on YouTube, which is headquartered in California.  YouTube’s complaints process appears to have functioned as normal and its role is unremarkable.

The countersuit is for abuse of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act 1998 (DMCA), “including holding the attorneys responsible accountable for their bogus DMCA campaign.”

Let’s see if this matter spawns a new legal term, “BLAPP” (bogus SLAPP).  We tried applying the term to a New Zealand employment case Bay of Plenty District Health Board v Shaw, but it didn’t really take off.

Randazza’s full statement follows:

“This lawsuit is a censorship campaign masquerading as a copyright case over a clip-art cartoon bird logo. Its true and transparent purpose is to try and shut down criticism of the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church (“PBCC”). The PBCC, also known as the “Exclusive Brethren,” is an extremely wealthy cult that doesn’t like criticism.  

Bawtinheimer is a former PBCC member who was sexually abused while a child in the group. After leaving, she started the Get-a-Life Podcast (“GAL”) on YouTube, in collaboration with other former members. The podcast’s purpose is to show solidarity with other former PBCC members, to try and create a community that can act as a support network for those who leave, to provide information about the PBCC, and to comment upon the PBCC to warn the public about this organization.

PBCC has a “Charitable” arm called the Rapid Response Team, or RRT.  Bawtinheimer had a series of videos on YouTube that pointed out hypocrisy in the RRT’s communications, contrasting them with how she saw the PBCC act toward members and those who left.  The PBCC/RRT then called up the mega firm Brown & Rudnick to censor these videos.  

The tactic was to use DMCA notices, which YouTube honored.  

And then they sued Bawtinheimer for copyright infringement.  What was the “infringement?”  In her videos, she showed the RRT’s logo on its website, and Brown & Rudnick attorneys argued that this was copyright infringement.

Even a moron in a hurry would know that this is not copyright infringement.  

So we defended the case and countersued for abuse of the DMCA, including holding the attorneys responsible accountable for their bogus DMCA campaign.  

The case is ongoing.”

Tristam Price, Editor

Lower Hutt, New Zealand