Slashdot Mirror
Tech Companies Swimming In Lawsuits
conq writes "A new survey shows that the tech industry places third after healthcare and energy companies in the number of lawsuits it deals with. It states that an average tech company faces 42 lawsuits currently, more than the insurance industry!" From the article: "An average U.S. technology company currently faces 42 lawsuits vs. 37 lawsuit for an average company. The tech industry places third, after healthcare and energy companies, in the number of lawsuits it deals with ... Needless to say, that's quite expensive. Nearly a third of these companies spend more than 2% of their gross revenue on legal expenses, according to one of the largest surveys of corporate counsel in America."
It was explained to me this way when I was researching the cost of medicine in New Zealand versus the USA. "Look mate, we got rid of all the lawyers in the system and can actually afford to provide healthcare to every single one of our citizens as well as many visitors to our country". Perhaps that is a little simplistic, but there is an element of truth to that. I've written before on the number of Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Bentlys and Maybachs! that I've seen in Sarasota, Florida. Apparently, a good number of the class action lawyers for the tobacco settlements live there and in fact, there was one law firm out on the key where I was staying that routinely had the most amazing high dollar automobiles out there. (Ever seen a Mclaren on the street?) That money comes from somewhere.
The reasons for high number of suits in healthcare are somewhat different that that for tech companies lawsuits, which are more dependent upon a broken patent system which allows frivolous patents.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Plus, they don't define what they mean by "average". When they say "the average company", that would most accurately be represented by the median, halfway in rank in distribution of the lawsuits across all of the (meager) 342 companies. But medians are usually further detailed to indicate what it's like at the top or bottom, or how big is the middle. So they're probably talking about "arithmetic mean", the statistically vague division of the total lawsuits by those sued. Which means one company with thousands of suits raises the average, making them all look sued. Since the research was done by a law firm, and published most likely for marketing, their sample is also likely to be those companies with lots of suits - in the firm's audience. Just saying the results were produced by lawyers and subject to interpretations that render them meaningless should tell the whole story.
FWIW, the fortune at the bottom of this page says "Emphasize the flaws".
--
make install -not war
Um, is this Microsoft plus 350 other companies averaging 42 lawsuits apiece? Kind of like the average net worth of the people in a bar going to one billion dollars when Bill Gates walks in?
Remain calm! All is well!
Personally, I would like to know the percentages of which are personal lawsuits, class action lawsuits, government lawsuits, and company v. company lawsuits as well as actual expenses (not just awards).
Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
The problem is that society is entering the information age, but society has two models of what kind of age that should be. In one model, all information must be controlled like "intellectual ptoperty" and leveraged for unlimited growth and profit. In the other, all information should flow without restrictions, and money should be made from collaberation, services, customisation, and general things that use information to create value.
These are inherently and fundamentally incompatable. An anti-thesis to each other, and while you can't contoroll information with force - you can certainly attempt to bully, threaten, decieve, and sue - and this is exactly what is happening.
So the suits that are happening now, I'm sure are just barely scratching the surface - as companies on the "intellectual property" side start to loose real money, and real market share, and loose out technology wise to the "freedom is free markets" side. You can be sure they will almost certainly freak, and "pull a SCO" across every industry and every sector.
Also, as a note, a parrallel situation is also happening in the financial markets where industries and government are trying to controll and manipulate information on value and money for unlmited growth and profit too. This is about to explode as well.
So watch out, and go offshore if you can, becasue all freakin hell is about to break loose.
My ex wife is a very successful barrister. She's a brilliant, talented woman. Through her I came to know the various subcultures of the legal world. One of the recurring analogies among the lawyers I've known is that they are hired guns. They are the new warrior class.
During WWII a combat soldier, I can't recall his name or rank, noted that among his comrades only a few (~15%) actively engaged in combat and were responsible for most of the damage done to the enemy. Recently on the Discovery channel a U.S. Army Lt.Col. was shown trying to instill a 'killer instinct' in his troops. The show referred to the earlier WWII report that only a few combat soldiers did the actual wounding/killing. The Lt. Col. on the Discovery show said it was like having 85% of librarians illiterate.
Following WWII tribes in New Gunea were introduced to rugby. The tribes took to wearing war gear to the rugby games and rugby substituted for tribal warfare.
Remember the TOS episode where warfare had become virtual and those areas marked as 'hit' had to have it's citizenry report for euthanasia. In real combat losses are not that great in terms of the overall number of combatants. It may be because only a limited number of people are able and willing to kill or be killed. In a world overpopulated with 6 billion the amount of homicidal acts are not that great.
Now with money substitutable for anything, the inclination to combat among individuals and corporate tribes, can be translated into litigation. The amount of litigation might be an index to our willingness to 'kill' oneanother, the more so when money substitutes for one's own blood.
Lawyers are the new esquired warriors. What a horse and armour were to knights and warring lords, a law degree is to the corporate world.
The question arises if, in an evolutionary context, the litiguous 'mortal/capital' combat effects a beneficial path.
One of my favourite authors G. Bateson spoke to... "adversarial systems are notoriously subject to irrelevant determinism. The relative 'strength' of the adversaries is likely to rule the decision regardless of the relative strength of their arguments."
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
Nine lawyers per tech company - w0w! That's amazing considering that the overwhelming majority of tech companies that I can think of don't even have nine employees. Do you have any idea how many startups there are in California alone? Do six PHDs in a small lab working on, say, the next medical laser breakthrough not count?
Do you really think that lawyers would sue small startup companies at the same rate as large, rich ones?
Bah, it's been a long day.
:p
But, the basic premise still stands.
1. Private Corporation: Why should they sink tons of money into in depth studies for less profit when they can rake it in with cheap "reporting" of shiney object stories and adlibed press releases.
2. The Bigots: There are some people that think facts are biased, items of evidence are forgeries, and will lash out at any media that does not conform to their own personal views. So, naturally, a media company will shy away from stories. And, when it does cover one, almost always reports what one person says, what the person that disagree's with him/her says, and makes little to no attempt to see who is factually correct.
3. Self Interest: Think about it, how many media companies are actually independant nowadays? Many of these mega-conglomerates are not only in the media business, and may try to avoid information which may cause problems for other parts of the conglomerate. In addition, many people have items in their life outside of work and act similarly.
These apply to specialized web only editions or television or anywhere else.
Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
Tripe. Compare with countries where court costs for frivolous litigation are routinely awarded to the defendant. Such awards are rare in the U.S., which I believe is one of the main reasons lawsuits are such a popular business model in the U.S. (plus, of course, the astronomical damages still being awarded).
In most jurisdictions (e.g. Canada), it's fairly common that the defendant is awarded legal costs. The instigators of frivolous or exploratory civil suits have to reimburse those they attacked for lawyer and court costs, on top of any damages.