E.g. If a prosecutor accuses you of homicide, but neither you can provide an alibi, nor him can provide any proof against you, then you have to be declared not guilty. "The proof of burden is on him who declares".

 

But a patent case is a civil case - not a criminal case. A civil case is based on the balance of probabilities. That means  one party's case need only be more probable than the others.

No... most often it's money that decides.

Then change the USA's legal system to match most of the rest of the world by adopting a "loser pays" system.

Austin's video is certainly worth looking at!   Fighting the system, and contributions to animal shelters........ good.   I'll give him lot's more time to work out the torque flaw  He's busy! 

Well, actually it should be the other way around, in theory. In a just law system, the burden to prove the wrongdoing should always be on the shoulder of the prosecutor, or the accuser. Looks like this is not the case. :smile:

 

Generally the accuser does have the burden of proof, but they'll bring you to court, so you have to put up a defense, which is quite costly in these cases. Win lose or draw, unless the case is declared frivolous, you usually won't recoup the costs. Smaller companies can't afford this, so even though they may win in court, it's cheaper for them just to settle. These trolls know that, which is why they prey on them. 

The US legal system is next to useless people sue mcdonalds because they are fat. Child molesters gets set free after a few years,yet people sit in jail for 20 years over some pot.

people sue mcdonalds because they are fat. Child molesters gets set free after a few years,yet people sit in jail for 20 years over some pot.

You're joking, right? I hope you are.

You're joking, right? I hope you are.

Not really,I know of a few people who are serving life a sentence because they were caught with pot more than 3 times.

Not really,I know of a few people who are serving life a sentence because they were caught with pot more than 3 times.

You can Blame Bill Clinton for signing the 3 times you're out law.  Which he now says that he regrets, oops.

Not really,I know of a few people who are serving life a sentence because they were caught with pot more than 3 times.

Eh, well. In my country, if you're a child molester it's caning + several decades (usually life) in jail with no parole. If it's serious enough, i.e. the child is of single-digit age, give or take, it's capital punishment. Likewise for too much pot. Soft drugs where I live get a fairly long sentence (or life imprisonment); even possessing a few grams of hard drugs like meth, heroin or cocaine will get you hanged.

 

Anyway, back on topic. Is there any way we can donate to his cause, or something?

Eh, well. In my country, if you're a child molester it's caning + several decades (usually life) in jail with no parole. If it's serious enough, i.e. the child is of single-digit age, give or take, it's capital punishment. Likewise for too much pot. Soft drugs where I live get a fairly long sentence (or life imprisonment); even possessing a few grams of hard drugs like meth, heroin or cocaine will get you hanged.

Anyway, back on topic. Is there any way we can donate to his cause, or something?

Are drugs still a major issue in your county, like they are in the US? Even with those kind of punishments?

Are drugs still a major issue in your county, like they are in the US? Even with those kind of punishments?

Not at all. It's precisely because of those sorts of punishments that drugs aren't an issue. 

 

 

Smaller companies can't afford this, so even though they may win in court, it's cheaper for them just to settle

 

Sadly true. Broken system that allows this.

That's typical US mentality only the strongest survives...while being superficial.

 

Not sure if such would be possible in Europe? I mean they would have no chance to sue an european company for such silly things?

 

Well Samsung had to pay 1 billion to Apple for the rounded edges, right? Doouh I might sue my neighbor for cutting the lawn and become rich.

I read somewhere that a German court just rejected Apples "slide to unlock" patent, declaring it was more aesthetics then a technical innovation, and shouldn't have appeared in front off his court for that same reason.

"Slide to unlock" actually was fairly ingenious (I'm speaking about that very nice UI where you actually slid a button), but the concept itself is fairly old - just need to look at bolted doors.

Somebody should use their own tools against them. Form a company ,patent the idea of how to troll patents and then go about sueing the same patent trolls for the same. . Nice innovation huh...put their words in their own mouth.