3 ms·

And lose... If they have to pay the other side if they lose, there would be a lot less lawsuits, so in the end it probably evens out in terms of strain on the

• arethuza 11y ago
  This claims that the percentage of turnover paid on litigation costs for UK companies is actually higher than it is for US ones: http://www.lawdepartmentmanagementblog.com/law_department_management/2005/05/disadvantages_o-2.html http://www.lawdepartmentmanagementblog.com/law_department_ma... NB My wife is a specialist commercial litigation lawyer in the UK and I had discussed this issue with her after seeing it mentioned on HN and she pointed out a lot of issues with "loser pays".
  • TeMPOraL 11y ago
    Would you mind sharing those issues your wife pointed out?
    • arethuza 11y ago
      Well, it was a while ago and was probably over a shared bottle of wine... :-) It was one of those occasions where I probably made some comment about how daft the US legal situation sounded to me and she lectured me with a long list of issues with "loser pays" - as she is far brighter than I am I probably didn't quite appreciate the subtleties other than not to remind myself not to make sweeping statements about the legal system around her...
    • lukasm 11y ago
      In the land of lawsuits it's worse for the poor, but that doesn't apply for patents. It's more expensive to go to court.