Big business lobbyists are winning an obscure — but hugely consequential — battle over the future of the judicial system. If these lobbyists get their way, small businesses will be the biggest losers.

The lobbyists are quietly waging their battle in state legislatures and our nation's capital. Recently, Georgia became the latest of several states to pass legislation that makes it harder for small businesses to sue larger companies that steal their technology. Congress is considering a similar change at the national level through the deceptively named Litigation Transparency Act.

Proponents say these bills will increase fairness and accountability in patent infringement lawsuits. But the bills will tilt the playing field in favor of large corporate patent infringers — and deal a massive blow to the small innovators who drive America's high-tech economy.

The bills make it easier for big companies to engage in “efficient infringement” — in which they make the calculated decision to steal patented technology from smaller firms, instead of licensing it and paying a royalty as required by law. When the victim sues for compensation, the large company uses its resources to drag out the lawsuit until the smaller firm can no longer afford to continue.

This predatory practice is “efficient” because many infringers bet — correctly — that smaller firms will run out of money and settle the suit for pennies on the dollar. That means big companies end up spending less on legal fees than they'd spend on licensing the technology.

Essentially, they're betting that crime does, in fact, pay.

To combat these deep-pocketed infringers, many inventors enter into partnerships with investors who help fund their legal defenses.

These financing agreements ensure that infringement suits are decided on the merits of the case, instead of which side has the most money.

Naturally, infringers don't want small companies to defend themselves. They're lobbying for legislation, like the Litigation Transparency Act, that'd impose extensive disclosure requirements on inventors that seek this outside funding.

Lobbyists claim disclosures are necessary to prevent foreign powers from providing litigation funding to gain access to trade secrets or damage U.S. businesses. Yet there's no evidence this happens — and both the courts and the government have implemented safeguards to block foreign investments that could harm America's security. Moreover, American inventors often require outside funding to take on wealthy foreign infringers from countries like China.

Mandatory disclosure legislation would make it harder for small innovators to take their claims to court — harming America's economy.

Mandatory disclosure rules would discourage investors from backing innovators. Investors often operate confidentially due to the risk of retaliation from businesses or the government if their identities are exposed. If disclosure of that information were required, many would stop providing support.

Disclosure rules would also force small innovators to reveal the extent of their resources and sensitive legal strategies. That would provide a significant advantage to well-funded patent thieves who can turn lawsuits into battles of attrition.

Small inventors already face major challenges competing with large corporations. We can't afford to further stack the deck against them. If policymakers make it more difficult for inventors to secure justice when competitors violate their rights, it'll only slow innovation and stifle our national competitiveness.

Kristen Osenga is chief policy counselor at the Inventors Defense Alliance.