[geofft]

If you actually believe in the moral correctness of the law being used, I don't think that's actually wrong, is it? "You are breaking this law. You and I will both spend a bunch of money getting the courts to stop you from doing it. Instead, you can choose to stop doing it and settle with my firm for the cost of tracking you down, which is strictly preferable for everyone involved."

(I hold this opinion weakly, so please argue me out of it if it's dumb.)

[nitrogen]

Most of the time laws are designed to prevent vigilantism, because vigilantes are not accountable to society and the punishments they give may be disproportionate or self-serving. Enforcing laws through private suits sounds a lot like officially sanctioned vigilantism, and points to a failure of the legal system.

[johncolanduoni]

> Most of the time laws are designed to prevent vigilantism

That's quite a claim! I also don't see how that doesn't apply to virtually every law surrounding civil cases. If I pay for a service and you don't give it to me, I have to sue you. Why is that any less like officially sanctioned vigilantism than if I sue you over patent claims? Do you also advocate breach of contract being made legal?