I don't think that would be considered an alternative. I agree that the losing side should be made to pay litigation costs in many cases, and in many they do.

I don't think that would be considered an alternative. I agree that the losing side should be made to pay litigation costs in many cases, and in many they do. To help mitigate the huge risk bringing a lawsuit in that situation, if the losing side was suppose to bear all costs, there could be an insurance to cover that. I'm not sure who oversees judges in the east Texas situation but maybe there should be more oversight and punishment of judges and court systems that participate in corrupt activities, such as being paid in some way to rule in favor of patent trolls. It's probably not easy to get sufficient evidence to bring a case against a judge, but at least news articles like that help bring it to the attention of the people that can do something about it.