Well, they can’t in the case of a criminal case. These are civil cases, buying your way out is all that happens in the best of circumstances in a civil case. It is just a matter of how much you have to pay to buy out. Punitive damages might do some extra justice, but what would that be? In the end you have to imagine that some radom person has sued you unjustly and decide how you want an innocent person to be treated, or perhaps they sued you with some small real point to their lawsuit, do you want the default to be that you are ruined. Maybe you didn’t intend harm, but want to either make ammends or at least get past the lawsuit so you can get on with your life, do you want no recourse possible?
In the end, if Google was forced out of business, many(most) of us would be way worse off. That is not the ideal outcome. Ideally, the case brings enough money to the plaintiff to right any hardship caused and, in the case of punitive damages, does just enough hardship to the defendant that they are dissuaded from pursuing that course of action, but you aren’t trying to kill them.
waterSticksToMyBalls@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
But are you sure you don’t want to opt out and go 1v1 vs a trillion dollar company???
angelmountain@feddit.nl 8 hours ago
It is kinda problematic that it matters how deep pockets of both parties are in court, isn’t it?