Is this any more of an asylum than what we have today? I'd much rather see a world where $BIGMUSICCOMPANY sues ten million people for $5 each for stealing (oops, I mean violating the copyright on) music rather than a world where an effectively random set of 50 people each get sued for a million dollars.
The big problem with legal processes right now is that they have a high frictional cost. If that cost can be brought down -- on both sides, so that suits can be filed more widely for smaller amounts AND people have a reason to defend against frivolous suits -- then I'd say we would be better off, not worse.
There are some appealing aspects of the future portrayed (an apparently efficient legal system), but taking a step back this does not quite look like where we want to head (the death of privacy and fair-use).
It makes the scenario scarier, in some ways, than a clearly dystopian future, as one could see society falling into just such a suboptimal trap, where the gains in one area allow apathy to to shrug off the concerns in another.
I hope it's not too much to ask for both legal efficiency and fair copyright laws, not to mention privacy.
As for frivolous suits, I think you're right that leveling the playing field will also let the victims retaliate more easily. I'd hope they prove less stubborn than spammers, at any rate; I don't like the idea of spam that carries legal weight.
What makes this scenario extremely scary to me is the proposition that every single person alive would have to spend even 15 minutes dismissing/paying off frivolous lawsuits every single day.
Having the overhead of a parasitic legal system spread thin over the entire population doesn't make it any less of a monstrous sink of lifetime.
That's a story conceit. If you're going to pay off < 5 cent suits, and ignore suites from Nigeria, you just program your lawsuit filter to do it. If that doesn't cut it, you buy access to an legal expert service that is updated as needed for suites, and decides for you using bounds you set.
So there would actually be two mutually parasitic industries, much as there are today for virii/virus filters, and spam/spam filters. Of course they're still both social parasites, not a nice thing, etc.
"
The big problem with legal processes right now is that they have a high frictional cost. If that cost can be brought down -- on both sides, so that suits can be filed more widely for smaller amounts AND people have a reason to defend against frivolous suits -- then I'd say we would be better off, not worse".
I think that would be the legal equivalent of expecting average Joes to debug their own kernels when their printer doesn't work.
Comments here seem to be focusing on the IP aspect of the story, but I think that's missing the forest through the trees. Let me remind you that the first suit described sounds like a slavery reparations issue, nothing to do with IP at all.
As I read it, the theme is simply a legal system run amok, facilitated by data mining and hyper-efficient communication.
It seems to be about a typical morning in a world where the capability to sue has been commoditized and automated to the point where everyone sues everyone else for every little rights violation all day long (nanolaw). This makes everyone a "lawyer." Tablet software makes settling the suits that matter trivial - just a tap a box to settle for a few cents or a few dollars. The father experiences this world as somewhat surreal, while it's normal for the daughter.
A fictional story that IMHO illustrates a future where micro-sueing is established and done in such a manner that the friction of the lawsuits is very low.
Comments
TLDR?
No, it is not too long, and I did read it. Thanks for your kind interest in this matter.
Near-future fiction where copyright trolls run the asylum.
Is this any more of an asylum than what we have today? I'd much rather see a world where $BIGMUSICCOMPANY sues ten million people for $5 each for stealing (oops, I mean violating the copyright on) music rather than a world where an effectively random set of 50 people each get sued for a million dollars.
The big problem with legal processes right now is that they have a high frictional cost. If that cost can be brought down -- on both sides, so that suits can be filed more widely for smaller amounts AND people have a reason to defend against frivolous suits -- then I'd say we would be better off, not worse.
There are some appealing aspects of the future portrayed (an apparently efficient legal system), but taking a step back this does not quite look like where we want to head (the death of privacy and fair-use).
It makes the scenario scarier, in some ways, than a clearly dystopian future, as one could see society falling into just such a suboptimal trap, where the gains in one area allow apathy to to shrug off the concerns in another.
I hope it's not too much to ask for both legal efficiency and fair copyright laws, not to mention privacy.
As for frivolous suits, I think you're right that leveling the playing field will also let the victims retaliate more easily. I'd hope they prove less stubborn than spammers, at any rate; I don't like the idea of spam that carries legal weight.
What makes this scenario extremely scary to me is the proposition that every single person alive would have to spend even 15 minutes dismissing/paying off frivolous lawsuits every single day.
Having the overhead of a parasitic legal system spread thin over the entire population doesn't make it any less of a monstrous sink of lifetime.
That's a story conceit. If you're going to pay off < 5 cent suits, and ignore suites from Nigeria, you just program your lawsuit filter to do it. If that doesn't cut it, you buy access to an legal expert service that is updated as needed for suites, and decides for you using bounds you set.
So there would actually be two mutually parasitic industries, much as there are today for virii/virus filters, and spam/spam filters. Of course they're still both social parasites, not a nice thing, etc.
" The big problem with legal processes right now is that they have a high frictional cost. If that cost can be brought down -- on both sides, so that suits can be filed more widely for smaller amounts AND people have a reason to defend against frivolous suits -- then I'd say we would be better off, not worse".
I think that would be the legal equivalent of expecting average Joes to debug their own kernels when their printer doesn't work.
The fact that people need to hire lawyers is a frictional cost.
Comments here seem to be focusing on the IP aspect of the story, but I think that's missing the forest through the trees. Let me remind you that the first suit described sounds like a slavery reparations issue, nothing to do with IP at all.
As I read it, the theme is simply a legal system run amok, facilitated by data mining and hyper-efficient communication.
I read the entire thing and still don't know the context of which it was written. (fiction?)
It seems to be about a typical morning in a world where the capability to sue has been commoditized and automated to the point where everyone sues everyone else for every little rights violation all day long (nanolaw). This makes everyone a "lawyer." Tablet software makes settling the suits that matter trivial - just a tap a box to settle for a few cents or a few dollars. The father experiences this world as somewhat surreal, while it's normal for the daughter.
Near-future sci-fi, it appears, with a (large) hint of social commentary.
Gotcha. Figured as much, but wasn't sure.
I like to say it isn’t sci-fi it doesn’t have social commentary or at least a warning from a possible future.
Within the next generation or so too, since the first notices were sent by postal mail.
Yes
A fictional story that IMHO illustrates a future where micro-sueing is established and done in such a manner that the friction of the lawsuits is very low.
Near-future speculative fiction on the increasing sources of interesting data and data mining. I enjoyed the read.
Was it really necessary to downvote spoon16's request for a synopsis?
Could someone then explain why?