The reason that the American government hasn't implemented this broadly in legal disputes, as is practice in other countries, is that it makes it dangerous to pursue legal action for any entity. If I am a lone engineer who has just invented the perfect fuel source and GE rips it off, I have no recourse, because they can hire $50 million worth of lawyers and if she can't beat them in court, she's stuck with an impossible bill. These laws unfairly stifle the little businesses who are "supposed" to have a fair footing in the unbiased court of laws.
How are the current laws any more favorable to the little guy? In the current situation, patent trolls "win" against small businesses, because even if you fight the patent and win, you still are severely damaged - if not bankrupted - by the legal fees.
I would far rather have the lion's share of the risk be assigned to the plaintiff.
>If I am a lone engineer who has just invented the perfect fuel source and GE rips it off, I have no recourse, because they can hire $50 million worth of lawyers and if she can't beat them in court, she's stuck with an impossible bill.
Yeah, that's what the ABA says. But in the real world you're going to get stuck with an impossible bill anyway when the deep pocketed people you sue start filing countersuits.
The way US politicians are funded, they do not give a shit about this hypothetical lone inventor. This is just a romantic ideal used by the pro-patent lobby to glamorise patents.
