David Kastrup wrote:
Alan Mackenzie <[email protected]> writes:
In gnu.misc.discuss David Kastrup <[email protected]> wrote:
Alan Mackenzie <[email protected]> writes:
In gnu.misc.discuss Andrew Halliwell <[email protected]> wrote:
It'd stop a lot of fishing for out of court settlements if the
accused was no longer terrified of being bankrupted for being found
not guilty. Where's the justice in that? The innocent should face
absolutely no consequences for being willing to defend themselves and
winning.
And, let's be honest, the losing party shouldn't have to face
bankruptcy either.
Depends. I don't like the "don't do any legal risk assessment,
government has to bail us out anyway" mentality. People should take
responsibility for their actions.
I think you've misunderstood me. I meant that the whole legal palaver
should be streamlined so that the costs a losing bona-fide litigant is
faced with are moderate, not that somebody else should bail the loser
out. (See: I've learnt how to spell "loser" ;-).
The problem is how to deal with people that make litigation a pastime.
First and foremost in the litigation problem area is the SFLC. After
five consecutive frivolous lawsuits they are gaining quite the
reputation as a pain in the ass to the capitalist system.
Now the legal system is important enough that people without the
personal means to ask for justice get provided with state lawyers and
similar. Being bankrupt does not mean that you have lost your obvious
rights or ways to get them.
But for companies, legal expenses are part of the standard running
expenses. Once this gets turned into a sport without proper risk
management, it becomes hard to desire everybody to pay for it. After
all, we usually don't get broadcasts for our entertainment.
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
