The foundation revealed 30 similar attacks in the first seven day stretch of November, and said it had documented complaints with law enforcement authorities, also including with the US Lawyer's Office in Maryland, where the group's headquarters are situated. It was very indistinct what number of users tapped on the videos and animated images known as GIFs.
In that attack, a Marine Corps veteran from Maryland, John Rayne Rivello, was accused for utilizing Twitter to send a GIF with a blinding strobe light to an epileptic author, Kurt Eichenwald, who had expressed his views through his writings fundamentally on Donald J. Trump and his supporters during the 2016 presidential campaign.
 |
| The journalist Kurt Eichenwald was sent a strobing image over Twitter that caused him to have an epileptic seizure |
Mr. Eichenwald, who was a correspondent for The New York Times from 1986 to 2006, had composed an opinion piece in Newsweek featured as "How Donald Trump Supporters Attack Journalists." and in his writing he portrayed the death threats he had received on the grounds that he had 'written critically' on Mr. Trump.
In December 2016, after production of the Newsweek piece, Mr. Eichenwald told the investigators that he once came across such a message from somebody distinguished as @jew_goldstein, which contained a strobe light GIF and an assertion in capital letters: "You deserve a seizure for your posts."
Looking at the strobe caused an immediate seizure that kept going around eight minutes.
Investigators discovered several digital clues which drove them to Mr. Rivello, including a message he had sent to some other Twitter users that read, "I hope this sends him into a seizure." They likewise found a screenshot on Mr. Rivello's iCloud account demonstrating Mr. Eichenwald's Wikipedia page with a 'fake' date of death just as a screenshot of a list of epilepsy seizure triggers that had been duplicated from an epilepsy data site.
Nonetheless Mr. Eichenwald filed a lawsuit against Mr. Rivello in the federal court in Maryland for battery and various other claims. The defense moved to reject it, contending to some degree that the battery claim couldn't be bolstered on the grounds that Mr. Eichenwald didn't claim that any physical contact had happened.
Be that as it may, Chief Judge James K. Bredar of the United States District Court in the District of Maryland allowed the lawsuit to continue, further writing that the “novelty of the mechanism by which the harm was achieved" didn't make the supposed activities any lesser degree of an unjust act.
