I know that in the old version there was a “fund” for each case and the winning litigant was compensated first with the remainder split between both parties.
What’s the story these days? When people lose, they seem genuinely pissed. Are they fronting their actual money ahead of time?
I don’t know the answer for sure, but I think that neither party is out their own money, and I have two ideas about why the losers might seem legitimately pissed even so.
The entertainment value of the show is enhanced by people acting strongly. I don’t know if there are direct incentives for the litigants to act strongly, but certainly if they were sufficiently detached, the show probably wouldn’t be aired.
The difference between losing $x I already have, and failing to win $x that is available to me is not that big. There is some difference because of some quirks of the human psyche, but it’s totally reasonable to think that someone would be upset over failing to win a prize.
There’s still a fund. I think that a lot of people are upset when they lose because of the principle of it all. By the time you’ve gotten to the point of being dragged on tv because of a dispute, you’re probably very attached to your version of the story. You don’t want to be told that you’re wrong, even if you’re not out any money.
I would imagine it’s a combination of the principle of the thing (as has been pointed out) and the fact they’ve just been humiliated on national television. I’d be pissed too, if I went on TV to demonstrate how completely right I am only to have the judge to tell me to fuck off (so to speak).