

Entrepreneurs Beware: In the US, legal equality is myth - robomartin

This is NOT intended to be a political discussion. Yes, it can certainly take a deep and ugly dive in that direction. Let's have a discussion about how entrepreneurs can protect themselves in this environment.<p>Legal equality only exists when there's a good impedance match between the parties involved in litigation.<p>If you, as a small to medium entrepreneur, tangle with a large entity you could very well be screwed.  It really doesn't matter who is right.  He who has more money can prevail in spite of the facts by causing financial pain.  You either give-up or go broke fighting.  You are not receiving the same kind of "justice" they can effectively buy.<p>The same applies (sadly, apparently Aaron's case) to situations in which the government sinks it's teeth into you.  The whole idea of government-provided public defenders sounds great.  Then you realize that it is the equivalent of a call-center support person who's script always seems to call for erasing the operating system.  In other words, not a very good option when your life and liberty are at stake.<p>Again, I don't want to have this become a discussion about politics.  I think we can generally agree that our country is navigating an incredible surreal political period when it seems impossible to get even the most sensible things done.  Nobody is going to fix this until a significant tipping point of some sort is reached.  It's the "waiting for Superman" syndrome.  Don't count on it.<p>When the justice you get is directly proportional to how much money you can spend you can't really call it justice. I'm not sure we can even call it "the rule of law".<p>So, then, how does one protect life, property and the good-old pursuit of happiness when faced with the potential for being on the wrong side of this equation?  What should entrepreneurs do (or not)?  How have you dealt with it yourself?
======
brudgers
Your questions require buy in to a set of debatable premises. Your ideas are
more appropriate for a blog post.

The way to avoid descent into a political discussion is to not post items
likely to do so.

------
doctorwho
Sometimes you don't have a choice but to get into a fight. In that case you
would be right. Aaron had a choice. Raise awareness by educating the public
about flaws in the law and work to change them OR raise awareness by provoking
a fight. He chose the role of the heroic underdog. Aaron was a smart guy who
made a bad choice. He wasn't strong enough to deal with the results of his
actions.

