Innocents will only be hurt during the transitional period before they learn that they should avoid relationships with patent trolls for the same collateral risk reasons they avoid befriending gang members, child-molesters, and other anti-socials.
One of the arguments made against repealing Jim Crow laws was the harm that would come to business owners in terms of infrastructure and other spending. There were many such businesses whose owners were not racist but who had invested in locations and buildings out of innocent compliance with the law and the demographic business climate it created. The judicial system makes accomodations for parenthood but it does not refuse to punish parents despite the fact that it is absolutely certain that such punishments will be detrimental to the child. By definition, disruptive social change is disruptive and punishment is punative. Surely that no collatoral innocents be harmed ever is too high a standard that favors both the status quo and protects bad actors?
"Surely that no collatoral innocents be harmed ever is too high a standard ..."
When we're talking about independent outlaw actors, as opposed to the law and justice that you invoke in your response, then no, I don't think it's too high a standard.
This. We have a bubble in dubious relationships not being properly exposed: from patent trolls, to wealth financial scammers, etc. If you play with fire - be prepared to get burned. Let's hoping Anonymous and others can help burst this bubble.
