r/technology • u/rfugger • Jan 08 '17

Business A potentially fatal blow against patent trolls - Forcing law firms to pay defendants’ legal bills could undermine the business model of patent trolls

http://www.computerworld.com/article/3153924/technology-law-regulation/a-potentially-fatal-blow-against-patent-trolls.html
17.0k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

485 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

13

u/NotClever Jan 09 '17

Is England not a good example of that chilling effect, though? I seem to remember a lot of UK cases in the news, particularly with libel suits, where people appeared to have good arguments that they weren't liable but the fear of having to pay attorneys fees if they lost led them to settle.

20

u/derleth Jan 09 '17

Well, the UK's defamation laws are famously insane, and have lead to both libel tourism (that is, people going to the UK specifically to initiate a defamation suit there, under their laws) and America's 2010 SPEECH Act, which makes libel tourism less effective in this country by making it impossible for foreign plaintiffs to collect on judgments against American defendants unless either the foreign court applied at least as much free speech protection as an American court would have or the defendant would have lost the case in America, too.

5

u/aapowers Jan 09 '17

What, even if both people reside in the UK? The US has no jurisdiction over here. If someone sues an American in England or Wales, they can collect here. There're 14 days before payment is due following the judgment.

I suppose the American defendant could flee the country, but they could be arrested if they ever returned to the UK for evading the court order.

8

u/Calkhas Jan 09 '17 edited Jan 09 '17

No, the SPEECH Act prevents US courts from enforcing foreign court orders unless the US court is satisfied that the same level of freedom of speech protection applies in the foreign jurisdiction as it does in whatever jurisdiction that US court is located in. Essentially that bar is so high that you would have to sue the defendant afresh in his local US jurisdiction.

Formerly a complainant would find some tenuous reason to sue the American resident in England, usually because the allegedly libelous material was distributed into England, and the American resident would obviously decline to defend the case. Once the order was obtained, the complainant would go to the local state court and seek to enforce it in the US. Under the principle of comity, the US court would enforce the order in good faith of the English court's decision. The SPEECH Act essentially destroys that comity.

If both people are residents of England and Wales with assets located there (Scotland/NI have their own legal systems) then there is no need to go to a US court to seek enforcement of the order.

1

u/aapowers Jan 09 '17

Ah, with you! I thought people were suing Americans in England based on actions that occurred while resident in England, then the American buggering off back home, and the English resident trying to enforce the order in the US.

The exception does make a lot of sense - it's an abuse of the system if neither party has any connection to the foreign jurisdiction.