[citation][nom]mitch074[/nom]Obviously, some people don't seem to understand that not all legal systems are US-like.In France, the court system doesn't require lawyers[/citation]
You don't need a lawyer in US courts either. You can choose to represent yourself.
[citation][nom]mitch074[/nom]This has a cost.In order to prevent trivial trials, costs are paid for by the parties - the loser pays.[/citation]
This is a bias against lower income people who may fear losing a case will cause them financial ruin, even if they know they are in the right. No one should have to "bet" their financial security in order to seek justice. Having said that, a judge in the U.S. may order that the loser of a case be ordered to pay court costs as well in a civil suit.
[citation][nom]mitch074[/nom]However, compared with the US system where lawyers can bill whatever sum they want, in France, these costs are fixed by the hour, by the number of persons forced to stop their normal activity, etc.[/citation]
It is true, lawyers are able to charge what they want just like any other laborer or professional (we call it free enterprise), but you don't have to hire the most expensive. Many are very reasonably priced. Also, if you are being charged with a crime a lawyer is provided for free, if you like.
[citation][nom]mitch074[/nom].The fact is, in France, Google represents 90% of all search results, and more than a third of the population has Internet access. Internet is thus a media like any other, and Google a 'publication' with some clout, and Google associates the guy's name wit 'satanist'.[/citation]
Really? Google is a publication? Google is just a window to what is already out there in the internet. Why not sue the maker of the web browser as well, since the the web browser is what displayed the result of of what google found on the internet. How about the computer manufacturers, since they are running the browser that displayed google search results that displayed what was on the internet?
[citation][nom]mitch074[/nom]Google displays the results of said algorithm.Google has control of said displays, as it's been shown that they can influence it in other cases in other countries.As such, considering the algorithm labels the guy as a satanist, Google is responsible for the guy being labeled a satanist, however he hasn't gone through all recourses, so he hasn't been fully convicted.[/citation]
The problem with this is that Google didn't technically say he was a satanist. It didn't say "So-and-so is a satanist". It just brought the word up next to his name. I'm sure many French newspapers would have printed "So-and-so is accused of being a satanist", and therefore loosely associated him with satanism.
[citation][nom]mitch074[/nom].Now, compare with the US system, where someone can sue someone else for looking at them oddly and get USD 50 000.[/citation]
What? If that were true, I'd be a millionaire.
Anyway, Viva Le France and God Bless America