4 ms·
I dont get why people elsewhere on this thread are so up in arms about it - it seems like a perfectly reasonable interpretation of federal law, consistent with
by Aloha 2y ago
I dont get why people elsewhere on this thread are so up in arms about it - it seems like a perfectly reasonable interpretation of federal law, consistent with other kinds of civil claims.
Tying the ability to recover damages not to the date of the action that caused the loss, but rather to when you discovered the loss seems more reasonable.
- ameister14 2y agoThe problem I can see is the extension of the period of damages. There is an argument to be made that there should probably be a statutory cap on years for damages accrual rather than just 'as long as you infringed,' but that's for the legislature to do.
- Aloha 2y agoI agree generally that there needs to be a cap on damages.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- snapplebobapple 2y agoIn general, tying statute of limitations to discovery rather than date of occurence is a bad idea because it extends liability infinitely and rewards incompetence on the victim side, which is egregious in general, but especially egregious in civil matters.