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."

22 of 147 comments (clear)

  1. Lies, damned, lies, and... by seanadams.com · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Lies, damned, lies, and...


    The firm asked 354 companies in various industries about their top legal concerns.


    Which 354 did you ask? There are thousands of tech companies! Define "tech company". Or is this just the 354 you could think of who'd pick up the phone?


    That probably has something to do with tech companies having by far the greatest number of in-house attorneys managing litigation - an average of nine per company.


    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?


    Nearly a third of these companies spend more than 2% of their gross revenue on legal expenses


    Which companies? What about the other two thirds? Are we supposed to think that 2% is a lot to spend on total legal expenses? What's the distribution?


    Olga, your numbers are a crock of shit, and they stinketh. If you're going to give us stats, try starting with something like "of the 100 highest-grossing telecom service companies".

    1. Re:Lies, damned, lies, and... by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree completely, but just because their statistics suck does not mean it is false. Intuitively it seems it would be true, but whatever...

      Anyway, my main point is a question. I understand why in traditional media you would not want to take the space for indepth analysis of the actual numbers (preferably alongside the numbers themselves). Why the hell though, on the web where extra information means adding a line under a word, do they refuse to ever show the actual numbers? Is it really just laziness? It seems like it would be so easy....

    2. Re:Lies, damned, lies, and... by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, Average is a really bad number in this case. If microsoft has 17000 laywers, and 999 companies have 0 lawyers, then the average is 17 lawyers per company. on the other hand, only 0.1% of companies have any lawyers at all. A better number would be the median for the number of lawyers, or the number of lawyers per capita (other employees).

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    3. Re:Lies, damned, lies, and... by CrazyDuke · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Bah, it's been a long day.

      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. :p

      These apply to specialized web only editions or television or anywhere else.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
    4. Re:Lies, damned, lies, and... by Krach42 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, statistically, the better choice would be to give the average and the standard of deviation.

      Giving the median would be a bad idea, as in your example, the median is 0. But we know darn well that we shouldn't report that sort of information, it's perhaps even more misleading and alarming than 17 per company.

      Reporting that the average is 17, but that the standard deviation is 537.033803405335 (an extremely highly high value) would work in the sense that it would be accurate, but wouldn't work in the case that most people wouldn't know or understand what the hell that meant.

      --

      I am unamerican, and proud of it!
  2. Frivolous patents by BWJones · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.
  3. When the average is 37 lawsuits... by Trigun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think that there's a much larger problem then tech companies facing 42.

  4. 42 is the answer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    NOW! we know the question!

  5. Clearly what we need here are... by Bin_jammin · · Score: 4, Funny

    more software patents. That will solve almost all legal woes with clear cut lines of IP ownership.

  6. Did you hear about the little old lady? by Argonne · · Score: 5, Funny

    She sued a tech firm after she spilled GTA "Hot Coffee" in her laptop.

  7. Question by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 3, Funny

    How many of these lawsuits involve "Intellectual Property" (copyright / RIAA subpoenas / patents),spamming or spyware?

    Just curious.

  8. average vs. mean by 0WaitState · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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!
  9. It's just the beginning by argoff · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  10. Rules of Combat for the New Warriors Class by Quirk · · Score: 5, Interesting
    A few points in loose conjecture.

    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
    1. Re:Rules of Combat for the New Warriors Class by cbdavis · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A quote from a Roman general, Heraclitis, over 2000 years ago, about
      warfare and his troops:

          "Of every 100 soldiers, 10 do not belong there and should be sent home. 80 are just targets. Nine are the true warriors, and we are glad to have them, for they make the battle. But one, he is the leader, and he brings the rest home."

    2. Re:Rules of Combat for the New Warriors Class by Quirk · · Score: 3, Interesting
      what you're saying is that if Microsoft, Sun, etc didn't have lawyers, they'd be engaged in actual armed combat with each other?

      Hi, my post was prefaced as loose conjecture. The post amounts to a few points taken from a notebook given over to a study I hope, time permitting, to undertake.

      The general course of the notes goes to the relationship between war and trade, and, further, ritualized war/contest. Loosely, in answer to your question, if commerce incorporates the territorial imperative and equally primitive drives sublimated from open warfare, then, in my terms, commerce is war and the handmaiden to evolutionary drive.

      Example, the historian Fernand Braudel notes in one of his work that the term robber baron, now used to refer to a 19th century captain of industry, originally refered to robbers who seized by force strategic mountain passes in the Alps between the mediterranean and northwestern europe. Robbers, once in control of a pass, built castles and imposed an arbitrary tariff on traders taking goods to and fro. Wealth garnered by force perhaps led them to see themselves as Barons. It's not a stretch to see commerce as contest, and to see contest as an abstraction of war.

      Britan from, more or less, the time of Drake profitted from piracy, and, the British Empire, at it's zenith, was enforced by 'gunboat diplomacy' and the machine gun. Yet, in part, the object of Empire building was increased trade and access to raw/rare materials.

      As I posted, only ~15% of combatants are effective. It's further interesting to note among feral rutting males mortal wounds are rare. Usually a show of force is sufficient for the combatants to size oneanother up and break off with the weaker male giving way. (As an aside OTOH try taking the young of a feral, predatory mother.) I'm suggesting our genetic makeup might have given us pause to find something like trade as preferable to war, but to carry with it the impetus, strategy and tactics of war.

      I simply hold that where commerce and war become intermingled by implementing convention, protocol, law and litigation, there, lawyers are the new warrior class.

      Even law has violent beginnings. Trial by Ordeal was as brutal as Hammurabi's law of an eye for an eye. And even though we've managed to reach protocols of goverance like Robert's Rules of Order, it's instructive to remember that the rows of seats separating the governing party from the opposition in Britan and Canada are two and one half sword lenghts apart.

      Lastly, (aren't you sorry you asked :)) I'm interested in knowing if ritualized combat in the form of litigation promotes more reckless and predatory attitudes than would mortal combat.

      cheers

      --
      "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
      Cohen
  11. I wouldn't doubt it by cthulhuology · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just on the personal level, I'm involved in a small startup venture. We have three people working here, 2 developers, 1 lawyer, and we also retain an outside counsel as well. We're not facing any lawsuits, and hopefully will never face one. When doing contract work, I'd say we spend more of our time dealing with the client's legal department than with the actual technical specification. Its utterly disgusting.

  12. My experience by tjic · · Score: 5, Informative

    I have no problem believing this.

    I run Technical Video Rental, and I've had - literally - dozens of legal threats over the simple fact that I buy DVDs, then rent them out. Despite the fact that this is deeply settled case law, I've gotten everything from a legal cease-and-desist from one firm's CEO (who has a degree from Harvard Law School and was formerly Chief Counsel of the United States Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources) to a threat to - ahem - anally rape me (from a guy who think's he's anonymous, because he doesn't know what website logs and IP addrs are).

    I spend about $2,000 - $3,000 per month on attorney fees trying to explain to people what the First Sale Doctrine is.

    This is money that could be spent growing the business, and delivering more interesting videos to my customers...but it gets squandered because so many folks (a) don't understand what the copyright law says; (b) don't understand that exposure increases sales (see also: MP3s and the RIAA).

    Bah.

    It'd be nice to spend more time doing business, instead of doing meta-business (lawsuits).

  13. 42! by MarcoPon · · Score: 4, Funny
    Not 41, or 43.
    42!

    When a number say it all. Lawsuits are the final answer!

    --

    SeqBox
  14. In other news...... by rune2 · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is one area where SCO is waaayy ahead of the average... pffft only 42 lawsuits...

  15. U.S. only (of course) by spookytoes · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  16. Swimming in lawsuits? by mysidia · · Score: 3, Funny

    More like sinking in lawsuits, maybe. When innovation is replaced with litigation, What other eventual outcome is to be expected?