It’s interesting to compare the similarities between the behavior and censorious thuggery of Ayyadurai (SA) and Brett Kimberlin (BK)

Both have filed frivolous lawsuits for the sole purpose of “punishing” victims who wrote either provable fact or protected opinions about them. The main purpose is not always to win in court, but subject the lawsuits’ victims to hardship, through lost money and time.

Both plaintiffs’ lawsuits are entirely devoid of supporting facts or law.

Both plaintiffs try to ignore inconvenient laws and court rules to avoid having their lawsuits thrown out expeditiously.

Both lawsuits are meant to protect the plaintiffs’ false narratives about themselves.
SA’s exaggerates the achievements of his past. (Claiming that a little program that in no way led to the already-in-progress development of e-mail makes him its inventor.)
BK’s downplays his extensive criminal or suspicious past and present.(Claiming that setting off bombs in his hometown doesn’t make him a “Terrorist”; claiming that he’s not a pedophile despite the long and documented history of his lusting after underage girls, and allegedly forging his wife’s birth certificate so he could marry her at 16; running “chariries” that some are of the opinion exist to shield his assets from an unpaid judgment against him.)

Both have some mentally incompetent toadies supporting them.
AS apparently has Janice Duffy.
BK has Bill Schmalfeldt (Described by Popehat’s Ken White as a “deranged cyberstalker”)

Both blame negative press about them on wholly imaginary conspiracies to defame them.

Both have claimed criticism of them is racially motivated.
SA says people can’t stand the idea of a “dark-skinned Indian” inventing email, ignoring that people have mentioned RFCs that name “dark-skinned Indians” who, unlike Ayyadurai, actually contributed to the development of Email.
BK says that critics like that nutjob Stacy McCain were being racist to BK… despite that both of them are white.

Both blame defendants for the actions of third parties.
SA claims Leigh Beadon responsible for an anonymous comment.
BK claims his various defendents are responsible for various supposed harms that unidentified readers must somehow be responsible for.

Both have had trouble with service.
SA mis-served one of the defendants at first.
BK has forged service-related documents on multiple occasions to claim he’d properly served parties he had not.

BK, when one of his lawsuits inevitably fails, will either appeal his deserved loss, or file a duplicative lawsuit to continue the attack against his perceived enemies.
SA only has one lawsuit against Techdirt so far, but it seems to be Charles Harder’s M.O. to throw frivolous lawsuits onto the courts and hope something eventually sticks.