Is hate code speech?
IS YOUR FAVORITE COMPUTER PROGRAM RACIST? Texas programmer sues former employer over offensive code. When Willa Jackson started working the night shift at Integrated Systech in Austin, Texas, she felt she was entering a world filled with opportunity. Jackson had just completed three years of intensive course work in computer programming at a local community college and, at the age of 47, had recently been hired by the successful software developer. Her night-shift position at IS was to be Jackson's first non-minimum wage job. But that optimism soon turned to shame and then anger as Jackson discovered that many of her colleagues at IS were accustomed to making racist jokes in the office. In fact, the epithets were never actually uttered in Jackson's presence, they were encoded within the dozens of software applications being developed at IS. Her painful discovery occurred less than one month after she began working as an entry-level programming assistant. It was Jackson's responsibility to find bugs in sections of code that other, higher-level IS programmers produced during the day. But when Jackson -- an African-American woman who hopes to one day launch her own software startup -- began to dig deeper into a faulty section of source code she was mortified by what she found. Programmers at the company had been using racist monikers and explicit sexual language in the variables used by their programs to sort information. In one instance, a program had been instructed to "fetch watermelons" and "somefriedchicken" when handling a certain procedure. The handler had even been dubbed "pickaninny" and was only one of several dozen like sequences embedded in IS programs designed for home and office use. When Jackson showed the racist code to her supervisor she was assured that IS would act decisively to reprimand and possibly even dismiss the offending employee. But as weeks passed and no one approached Jackson with a follow-up to her complaint, she began to suspect that no disciplinary action would be forthcoming. At that point, Jackson began to pore over the mountains of used code that IS had stockpiled over the past six years. Much to her dismay, Jackson discovered derogatory and occasionally violent terms inside the programming language used by almost all IS software programs. "It went all the way back to the first version of ISDisk," explains an incredulous Jackson, "and they never bothered to hide it." Shortly after she had printed out over a thousand pages of tainted code, Jackson hired an attorney and filed a $10 million dollar lawsuit against the profitable software firm. Just who is responsible for the recurring use of discriminatory language in the company's computer code is still a mystery. IS executives have issued several public apologies since the lawsuit began, but they have yet to cooperate with the investigation into its allegedly hostile work environment. In 1996, Texaco paid out $140 million to resolve a similar lawsuit brought by its minority employees. But labor law experts speculate that the IS case may never be resolved due to the unprecedented circumstances of the alleged misconduct. "No jury in this state will believe that the code Jackson found is speech," argues Mitch Shapson, an attorney with the labor relations firm of Stennis, Shapson & Velasquez. "Even if they did think the messages hidden inside the programs were offensive," continues Shapson, "it would be like trying an auto manufacturer for putting a Swastika-shaped part in your car's engine." Jackson, who is now working as a full-time programmer at Dell Computers in San Antonio, is not willing to give up her fight against IS despite the slim chances of a legal victory. "At this point, I'm not interested in the money," claims an unbowed Jackson, "I only want the public to think twice about the kinds of hateful messages that may be hidden inside the software they use everyday."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <19980825175524.13582.qmail@suburbia.net>, on 08/25/98 at 05:55 PM, proff@suburbia.net said:
Jackson, who is now working as a full-time programmer at Dell Computers in San Antonio, is not willing to give up her fight against IS despite the slim chances of a legal victory. "At this point, I'm not interested in the money," claims an unbowed Jackson, "I only want the public to think twice about the kinds of hateful messages that may be hidden inside the software they use everyday."
<sigh> Now we have to worry about PC variable and function names. What a crock. Isn't there laws on the books that if you file a frivolous law suite like the one above and you loose then you have to pay the expenses of the other party? - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 5.0 at: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: Friends don't let friends use Windows. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNeMWF49Co1n+aLhhAQGFPwP/VrmD/PpCSqCn1sa5eS/LVeIBi12ivja9 XkPqSIbu2kAu2nvjHct9ma7hJgoP6OMgwJA/mSKC1EkgYjPv4EwcmhubgJgmYLsz G8EuES5KV51/rHUGtMpP9mNVW9RGo0eb5JhLuLcupNWZUa25XHrUz3/qvRI37tRk eUiqTgbhu3E= =ugUD -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, William H. Geiger III wrote:
<sigh> Now we have to worry about PC variable and function names. What a crock.
Oh, yeah, you really have to worry about *accidentally* calling your variables getwatermelons and somefriedchicken. Reminds me of this one guy in our neighborhood who was just jogging by our house, bent down to tie a shoelace, lost his balance and accidentally planted a huge burning cross in our front lawn. Woops! Those damn PC-mongers are making it a crime to jog! One note: I don't see why this lawsuit would be hard to win on the grounds that source code isn't necessarily "speech." If co-workers left a big wooden swastika on her desk it wouldn't be speech either, but I'd call that actionable. Another note: frivolous naming conventions are dangerous for more than one reason. Some Y2K firms scan COBOL code for variables which are likely to be dates, using the actual variable names for clues; this is much less likely to work if you name your field BLOW-JOB instead of ESTIMATED-START-DATE. -Scott
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <Pine.SUN.3.91.980825155854.3483A-100000@baker>, on 08/25/98 at 04:19 PM, Xcott Craver <caj@math.niu.edu> said:
On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, William H. Geiger III wrote:
<sigh> Now we have to worry about PC variable and function names. What a crock.
Oh, yeah, you really have to worry about *accidentally* calling your variables getwatermelons and somefriedchicken. Reminds me of this one guy in our neighborhood who was just jogging by our house, bent down to tie a shoelace, lost his balance and accidentally planted a huge burning cross in our front lawn. Woops! Those damn PC-mongers are making it a crime to jog!
Yes and if I want to name my variables getwatermelons and somefiredchicken who are you to tell me I can't?
One note: I don't see why this lawsuit would be hard to win on the grounds that source code isn't necessarily "speech." If co-workers left a big wooden swastika on her desk it wouldn't be speech either, but I'd call that actionable.
But they didn't. There is no proof that any of theses variable names were written to be directed at her and the majority of them were written *before* she ever started working there!! - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 5.0 at: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: OS/2: Not just another pretty program loader! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNeM6Qo9Co1n+aLhhAQEHMAP+OdR38utDHJd4s8r3/fTVedI+xH9A+lNX CU/yeqOx2Y9P8K/ol1wdLf4U3Dzv3VZ+CvRUmVB4juRdFBTnor7wrS3CQiQ1krut K3nLi7HtUqb92VD55eCM4W61c67lqLTD7TTXW2p6sHm8ti3NgK1fGfRPTSk5Ay9S j2tEl6HI5P8= =jRNy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, William H. Geiger III wrote:
Yes and if I want to name my variables getwatermelons and somefiredchicken who are you to tell me I can't?
Nobody's saying that you can't. This is about liability for the _results_ of what you type. The same goes for libel: nobody's saying you _can't_ declare that McDonalds puts dead rats in their hamburgers, but hoo boy can you and your boss get sued to pieces if you do. Nothing new here. Further, this is about someone writing code for a company, where others read it; not you, Bill Geiger III, writing code in the privacy of your own basement. Yes, you will get your ass fired clean off of its hinges if you treat company source code as your own little bathroom wall. As for the fact that this code was put there before the woman's arrival, and pretty clearly not intended for her, that may be important in the suit. I don't know how successful harassment suits are when the harassment is undirected --- i.e., crude graffiti, leaving a copy of Playboy lying around, etc. On the other hand, only a moron would write source code for a commercial product without the assumption that other people will be reading it, and in fact will *have* to read it to get paid. Any arguments that the coders didn't intend/expect that the messages would one day be read by a black person is pretty weak. All in all, then, I'd say she has a good chance of winning. The whole bit about source code not being speech is irrelevant, IMHO, since harassment still counts if it ain't speech. The company's only real defense is to rely on the judge & jury's technical confusion about what this "source code" stuff is. -Caj
William H. Geiger III wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In <Pine.SUN.3.91.980825155854.3483A-100000@baker>, on 08/25/98 at 04:19 PM, Xcott Craver <caj@math.niu.edu> said:
On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, William H. Geiger III wrote:
<sigh> Now we have to worry about PC variable and function names. What a crock.
Oh, yeah, you really have to worry about *accidentally* calling your variables getwatermelons and somefriedchicken. Reminds me of this one guy in our neighborhood who was just jogging by our house, bent down to tie a shoelace, lost his balance and accidentally planted a huge burning cross in our front lawn. Woops! Those damn PC-mongers are making it a crime to jog!
Yes and if I want to name my variables getwatermelons and somefiredchicken who are you to tell me I can't?
A company worth working for will have a policy that tells you you cannot. (Ok, those variables are a fuzzy issue - Very bad taste. The violent stuff mentioned in the original article is clear cut, however)
One note: I don't see why this lawsuit would be hard to win on the grounds that source code isn't necessarily "speech." If co-workers left a big wooden swastika on her desk it wouldn't be speech either, but I'd call that actionable.
But they didn't. There is no proof that any of theses variable names were written to be directed at her and the majority of them were written *before* she ever started working there!!
So what's your point? Creating a hostile environment with the expectation that you'll never hire someone who's black is "ok"?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <35E44AD1.442F@nis.acs.uci.edu>, on 08/26/98 at 12:50 PM, Dan Stromberg <strombrg@nis.acs.uci.edu> said:
William H. Geiger III wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In <Pine.SUN.3.91.980825155854.3483A-100000@baker>, on 08/25/98 at 04:19 PM, Xcott Craver <caj@math.niu.edu> said:
On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, William H. Geiger III wrote:
<sigh> Now we have to worry about PC variable and function names. What a crock.
Oh, yeah, you really have to worry about *accidentally* calling your variables getwatermelons and somefriedchicken. Reminds me of this one guy in our neighborhood who was just jogging by our house, bent down to tie a shoelace, lost his balance and accidentally planted a huge burning cross in our front lawn. Woops! Those damn PC-mongers are making it a crime to jog!
Yes and if I want to name my variables getwatermelons and somefiredchicken who are you to tell me I can't?
A company worth working for will have a policy that tells you you cannot. (Ok, those variables are a fuzzy issue - Very bad taste. The violent stuff mentioned in the original article is clear cut, however)
Company policy and federal law are two different things. A company should be able to set their policy to whatever they want, don't like it don't work there. Also please explain exactly what "violent stuff" you are in reference to and how it is "clear cut".
One note: I don't see why this lawsuit would be hard to win on the grounds that source code isn't necessarily "speech." If co-workers left a big wooden swastika on her desk it wouldn't be speech either, but I'd call that actionable.
But they didn't. There is no proof that any of theses variable names were written to be directed at her and the majority of them were written *before* she ever started working there!!
So what's your point?
Creating a hostile environment with the expectation that you'll never hire someone who's black is "ok"?
1st off the whole notion of "hostile environment" is bunk. It is a loosely undefined term to mean anything the PC crowd wants it to. If you do or say anything that might "offend" a PCer then you have a "hostile workplace". As I said in previous posts you do not have a right to not be offended not only that but thanks to the 1st Amendment I have the right to offend you. One should be very carefull of this whole notion of protecting people from being offended. Not only does it erode the rights protected under the Constitution but it can very easily be turned against those who are promoting it. Political tides are turning and the country as a whole is getting fed up with the PC crowd. I can see lawsuits in the not to distant future against the Pcer for creating a "hostile workplace" by pushing their PC dogma. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 5.0 at: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: Double your drive space! Delete Windows! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNeRXiI9Co1n+aLhhAQEBHQQAsSUpThEplcfGgsZW2Q6+iqHyp0anMP30 iDAYhd7nhiUE7IpjeeBLSOZAVNYGtgeAtz2fV16EN7watpUtY8DHfDgVdvLPuAr+ FmeQECWpEgl3H+r2diGQYnY9uSAbWew9B6qME6hL0iFdtpT+QNjsxBA0XU0sVWvZ x/7rhIhb/Lo= =R9GK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
William H. Geiger III wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In <35E44AD1.442F@nis.acs.uci.edu>, on 08/26/98 at 12:50 PM, Dan Stromberg <strombrg@nis.acs.uci.edu> said:
William H. Geiger III wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In <Pine.SUN.3.91.980825155854.3483A-100000@baker>, on 08/25/98 at 04:19 PM, Xcott Craver <caj@math.niu.edu> said:
On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, William H. Geiger III wrote:
<sigh> Now we have to worry about PC variable and function names. What a crock.
Oh, yeah, you really have to worry about *accidentally* calling your variables getwatermelons and somefriedchicken. Reminds me of this one guy in our neighborhood who was just jogging by our house, bent down to tie a shoelace, lost his balance and accidentally planted a huge burning cross in our front lawn. Woops! Those damn PC-mongers are making it a crime to jog!
Yes and if I want to name my variables getwatermelons and somefiredchicken who are you to tell me I can't?
A company worth working for will have a policy that tells you you cannot. (Ok, those variables are a fuzzy issue - Very bad taste. The violent stuff mentioned in the original article is clear cut, however)
Company policy and federal law are two different things. A company should be able to set their policy to whatever they want, don't like it don't work there.
Gosh, no kidding? Company policy isn't the same as fed law? As I said, a company worth working for, will have a policy that creates/preserves a decent working environment.
Also please explain exactly what "violent stuff" you are in reference to and how it is "clear cut".
Violence is obviously out of line. Or do you like being threatened?
Creating a hostile environment with the expectation that you'll never hire someone who's black is "ok"?
1st off the whole notion of "hostile environment" is bunk. It is a loosely undefined term to mean anything the PC crowd wants it to. If you do or say
I can see you're not worth bothering with. Sad that I wasted this much time responding.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <35E45A31.1CD2@nis.acs.uci.edu>, on 08/26/98 at 11:55 AM, Dan Stromberg <strombrg@nis.acs.uci.edu> said:
Also please explain exactly what "violent stuff" you are in reference to and how it is "clear cut".
Violence is obviously out of line. Or do you like being threatened?
No where in the article was it ever mentioned that the you lady in question was ever threatened or ever directly "harassed". That is why I asked the above question which you failed to answer.
Creating a hostile environment with the expectation that you'll never hire someone who's black is "ok"?
1st off the whole notion of "hostile environment" is bunk. It is a loosely undefined term to mean anything the PC crowd wants it to. If you do or say
I can see you're not worth bothering with. Sad that I wasted this much time responding.
Why, because I challenge your PC dogma and require to to rationally justify it? We have an old saying here "If you are scared son, then say you are scared". If you are unable to rationally and objectively justify your PC dogma than just say so. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 5.0 at: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: Turn your 486 into a Gameboy: Type WIN at C:\> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNeRkB49Co1n+aLhhAQH0+gQAwuGSiy0ZSP0don4VS5UBKoARjg9LLx26 D8N6xP4286uHW4Phm9A+nHBYohV1bWPTLOM259G0gcy1xIUebNnLg7W4iV+2ITHH lm6yoPLvtN8Oa1QW5hAZAVTC2zIZ+iglD49WhblTMjMd69KR7nU3CWD36rXb4Vsu oc2RxcrCPJ8= =k0l2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
William H. Geiger III wrote:
Sad that I wasted this much time responding.
Why, because I challenge your PC dogma and require to to rationally justify it? We have an old saying here "If you are scared son, then say you are scared". If you are unable to rationally and objectively justify your PC dogma than just say so.
Smirk. /I'm terrified/ I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, and the pig likes it.
At 12:42 PM 8/26/98 -0700, Dan Stromberg wrote:
William H. Geiger III wrote:
Sad that I wasted this much time responding.
Why, because I challenge your PC dogma and require to to rationally justify it? We have an old saying here "If you are scared son, then say you are scared". If you are unable to rationally and objectively justify your PC dogma than just say so.
Smirk. /I'm terrified/ I've said it before, and I'll say it again:
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, and the pig likes it.
<chortle> oh yes, an EXCELLENT justification of your 'PC beliefs' How exactly does that answer the challenge to defend your point of view? Ad hominem attacks are pretty low, even for list-members, think-ye-not? </chortle> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- james 'keith' thomson <jkthomson@bigfoot.com> www.bigfoot.com/~ceildh jkthomson:C181 991A 405C EAFB 2C46 79B5 B1DC DB78 8196 122D [06.07.98] ceildh :1D79 59AF ED75 5945 6003 8240 DA34 ACCA 9DE4 6BC9 [05.14.98] ICQ:746241 <keys> at pgp.mit.edu ...and former sysop of tnbnog BBS ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Jennings Corollary to the Law of Selective Gravity: The chance of the bread falling with the butter side down is directly proportional to the value of the carpet. =======================================================================
At 10:50 AM -0700 8/26/98, Dan Stromberg wrote:
A company worth working for will have a policy that tells you you cannot. (Ok, those variables are a fuzzy issue - Very bad taste. The violent stuff mentioned in the original article is clear cut, however)
This is not the issue. Maybe a company will have a policy forbidding flaky or unusual variable names, maybe it won't. Maybe it will even encourage such names. The issue is whether the government or the courts has any right to intervene to force changes in such matters. ....
So what's your point?
Creating a hostile environment with the expectation that you'll never hire someone who's black is "ok"?
In a free society, of course it should be legal, even if not desireable to many. Consider some parallels. * The Hitler Corporation is dedicated to selling literature and memorabilia exalting Adolph Hitler. It sells "Mein Kampf." It sells Nazi flags. It sells scale models of the Auschwitz crematoria. All very legal to do, at least in the United States. However, Jewish employees feel offended. They consider the Hitler Corporation to have a "hostile environment." What are their options? In a free society, they walk. In fact, they were fools to ever apply for jobs, and THC was foolish to hire them. * The Carnivore's Den is a meat-only restaurant. Alice B. Vegan feels offended that she is "forced" to serve meat, and she feels her civil rights are being violated by the restaurant. And so on. Non-Mormons feel slighted at Mormon bookstores. Satanists feel slighted at Christian day care centers. And honkies feel out of place at Rastafarian Chicken and Watermelon roadside stands. So? The right to "fit in" in all places is not a right, only a wish. --Tim May "The tree of liberty must be watered periodically with the blood of tyrants...." ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments.
On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, Xcott Craver wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, William H. Geiger III wrote:
<sigh> Now we have to worry about PC variable and function names. What a crock.
Um, er, I think, though I am not sure, that the issue in question is either a hypothetical (judging from the article disclaimer), or that if not, it just about ought to be. It is the precise set of facts to lean for the opinion that program code is meaningful speech or activity due the full protection of the First Amendment. I.e., a case with these facts
Oh, yeah, you really have to worry about *accidentally* calling your variables getwatermelons and somefriedchicken. Reminds me of this one guy in our neighborhood who was just jogging by our house, bent down to tie a shoelace, lost his balance and accidentally planted a huge burning cross in our front lawn. Woops! Those damn PC-mongers are making it a crime to jog!
One note: I don't see why this lawsuit would be hard to win on the grounds that source code isn't necessarily "speech." If co-workers left a big wooden swastika on her desk it wouldn't be speech either, but I'd call that actionable.
Another note: frivolous naming conventions are dangerous for more than one reason. Some Y2K firms scan COBOL code for variables which are likely to be dates, using the actual variable names for clues; this is much less likely to work if you name your field BLOW-JOB instead of ESTIMATED-START-DATE.
-Scott
Michael Brian Scher (MS683) | Anthropologist, Attorney, Policy Analyst strange@cultural.com | http://www.tezcat.com/~strange/ strange@uchicago.edu | strange@tezcat.com Give me a compiler and a box to run it, and I can move the mail.
At 05:24 PM 8/25/98 -0500, William H. Geiger III wrote:
at 04:19 PM, Xcott Craver <caj@math.niu.edu> said:
On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, William H. Geiger III wrote:
Yes and if I want to name my variables getwatermelons and somefiredchicken who are you to tell me I can't?
One note: I don't see why this lawsuit would be hard to win on the grounds that source code isn't necessarily "speech." If co-workers left a big wooden swastika on her desk it wouldn't be speech either, but I'd call that actionable.
But they didn't. There is no proof that any of theses variable names were written to be directed at her and the majority of them were written *before* she ever started working there!!
Is a swastika on a billboard anywhere in the US objectionable? Is it actionable? By the same Token, By the same Rule. Source code has freely assignable variables, but I sincerely doubt that the originator of the prog. lang. thought watermelons, ribs, or chicken were appropriate variable names. Sis in your own Backyard, Pister. Got Milk??? Reeza! Near famous misquotes, taken out of context: "Dammit kid, how do you expect to learn anything if you insist that I make sense all the time,,,"
William H. Geiger III wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In <19980825175524.13582.qmail@suburbia.net>, on 08/25/98 at 05:55 PM, proff@suburbia.net said:
Jackson, who is now working as a full-time programmer at Dell Computers in San Antonio, is not willing to give up her fight against IS despite the slim chances of a legal victory. "At this point, I'm not interested in the money," claims an unbowed Jackson, "I only want the public to think twice about the kinds of hateful messages that may be hidden inside the software they use everyday."
<sigh> Now we have to worry about PC variable and function names. What a crock.
Isn't there laws on the books that if you file a frivolous law suite like the one above and you loose then you have to pay the expenses of the other party?
Well this far in the USA we do not have such a law :< We should that way stupid fools that spill hot coffee on themselves will not try to sue McDonalds for over 1.2 Million$ because the coffee was to hot... Go figure, hot coffee is not supposed to be hot. Many other countries have laws that if your bring a case to court and loose you pay the fees of the one you sued. Any folks from around the world that can attest to how your country handles cases? - lhe
participants (9)
-
Dan Stromberg -
jkthomson -
Leif Ericksen -
Mike Scher -
proff＠suburbia.net -
Reeza! -
Tim May -
William H. Geiger III -
Xcott Craver