3 ms·
Anti-SLAPP laws have the same problem as "regulation via judiciary" -- by the time the law becomes useful, the damage is already done. If you go bankrupt defend
by throwawayjava 9y ago
Anti-SLAPP laws have the same problem as "regulation via judiciary" -- by the time the law becomes useful, the damage is already done. If you go bankrupt defending yourself, suing under a SLAPP law doesn't help. Also, the barrier for proving you shouldn't be SLAPPed is far lower than the already low barrier for civil damages, so there's some question as to whether this even solves the problem.
Our civil justice system needs to be cheaper and more accessible. It shouldn't be possible to wage economic war on a company or individual via the judiciary.
- ikeboy 9y agoAttorneys can take your case pro bono and then sue for wages later with anti-SLAPP, iirc. And it's much cheaper to file the anti-SLAPP than to defend against the suit.
- throwawayjava 9y agoWell, sure, and a billionaire can donate billions of dollars to help defend you. Or you could crowd-fund $5 million. Or... But designing a justice system around "maybe you'll find a charitable person willing to help" seems like a bad idea.
- ikeboy 9y agoSounds like the Nirvana fallacy in action. Unless you have a better proposal, complaining about how some improvement isn't perfect doesn't do anything.
- throwawayjava 9y ago> Sounds like the Nirvana fallacy in action. Unless you have a better proposal Pointing out problems with the current system is not a logical fallacy, and having a working solution in-hand is not a pre-requisite to observing the existence of problems. Also, accusing me of using the Nirvana fallacy while also accusing me of not providing an alternative policy is literally a contradiction...
- ikeboy 9y agoYou're critiquing my proposal for a new federal law.
- throwawayjava 9y agoI haven't claimed there's a perfect solution. I haven't even claimed there is a solution. I'm just pointing out that your proposal is not a solution.