Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Perhaps we need some sort of "cry wolf" doctrine, where you can sue an entity for "suing people too often for spurious reasons" and, if proven (e.g. if 99% of their proposed suits would have been thrown out of court if they had gone to trial), remove their ability to sue others.


Sounds like you're referring to something along the lines of anti-SLAPP laws: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_publ...

There's also the notion of a "vexatious litigant": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vexatious_litigation


Interesting. It doesn't seem like the concept of vexatious litigation has been applied to corporations. I wonder why not?


That would be very impractical in the real world. How would you prove that 99% of the suits would be thrown out without having 100 trials?


I meant "thrown out in preliminary hearing." You can work through 100 preliminary hearings (especially when it's essentially the same suit, just with different subjects) pretty quickly, especially if you parallelize it across a bunch of the judge's analysts.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: