Legal aspects [was: anybody else see darl on teevee?]

[Leon Goldstein]

dep wrote:

>the sco case is a case study in what's wrong with our legal system. it 
>also points to needed remedies: the loser ought to pay both sides' 
>costs -- and the loser's law firm should be liable for those costs as 
>well. the judge should be able to hold hearings on whether the 
>allegations were malicious and find probable cause for arrest for 
>criminal fraud those who bring such lawsuits in bad faith (and i do not 
>think that the darl regime has done a single thing, ever, in good 
>faith), with those charges extending, too, to the law firm. it's only 
>when the lawyers themselves are at risk that any sanity will be brought 
>to the system.
>
You obviously do not understand the political structure in this country 
today :-)
Brief tutorial follows:  there are two major parties.  One is the "Oil" 
party, or the
"Replutocrats."  Their objective is to make money, no matter who gets 
screwed.
Then there is the "Lawyer" party, or the "Demautocrats."  Their 
objective is to take
away money from people who have it, no matter who gets screwed.

I live in a state (North Carolina) with a lawyer supposedly serving as a 
US senator.
He has hardly spent any time in session, and has been absent for the 
majority of
votes.  He wants to be president.  He obviously believes in the lawyers' 
code: "no matter
what the verdict is, the lawyer always wins."

I received a letter announcing a settlement in a class action suit 
against Microsoft. It applies to
NC residents.  I can get a $10 voucher (not cash) for every computer I 
bought between 1995 and late last year
if it came with windows installed.  The suit alleges MS "overcharged" 
its software purchasers.
MS has allocated $89 million for the settlement.  The lawyers get $22 
million for their services.
I get a piece of paper I can redeem for $10 if I buy some computer stuff 
later.

-- 
Leon A. Goldstein

Powered by Libranet 2.8 Debian Linux
System G2