Norway's Consumer Council is recommending that ADR be introduced in copyright litigation so that parties can meaningfully settle cases instead of "being forced into settlement arrangements simply because they could not afford to defend legal action brought by copyright holders."
What an interesting concept--that lawsuits can be so expensive that a party feels forced into settlement simply because it can't afford the fight.
Perhaps an advantage of alternative dispute resolution methods is that it helps to level the playing field, in that the parties do not have the expense of a trial?
My experience is that the most expensive portion of litigation is the pre-trial work: getting the defendant served, discovery, and dispositive motions. After that, the trial preparation is certainly expensive, but I wonder how many people would willingly sit down pre-discovery and try to negotiate a settlement?
No comments:
Post a Comment