[lmilcin]

I don't understand something. Please, help me understand:

"According to the lawsuit, filed Thursday in California federal court, the plaintiffs alleged that Plaid has “exploited its position as middleman” to obtain app users’ banking login credentials and use that information to gain access to and sell their transaction histories. Allegedly, these actions occurred without users knowing about Plaid’s role is a variance of “deceptive tactics.”"

So, the lawsuit is for selling the transaction histories and you say you never did it.

Why do you settle for $58M if you never did it rather than go to court so that they present proofs that, according to your explanation, must be false?

I am not convinced.

Or, the simpler explanation you just lie here to us because you can. But you settle to not go to court because you know you can't lie yourself out of loosing.

[madamelic]

Here's my dumb explanation:

Ever seen Fight Club and that recall equation?

Yeah, that's why. It would cost them more time, bad PR and money to fight than it would be to just settle and take the lumps even if it is untrue.

[lmilcin]

$58M?

In this case, you ask to dismiss the case for lack of evidence. That is, if you are innocent and there really is no evidence.