[finnthehuman]

A sentiment that a lawyer is so good they will overcome this challenge rather than conveying that the lawyer will prove the questions of law and fact resolve it in their favor... it just... well... seems like the kind of shit that's for a TV show where it's not about contesting facts and law.

[nickff]

Lawyering is not just about knowing the law and proving facts, for an example of this, I recommend the book about Theranos: “Bad Blood”.

[finnthehuman]

Yeah, ofc, the lawyer skill gradient exists and causes slam-dunk cases to be decided in the "wrong" [0] direction. It's just odd to say you will win because the lawyer is that good, makes it sound like you might be wrong but are going to win simply because you have better council.

[0] There's gotta be a fancy latin-sounding lawyer word for this, right?

[singleshot_]

No one is going to “win.” They’re going to settle. The quality of your lawyer will absolutely, positively influence your pleasure in the settlement. There are facts and law bad enough to overwhelm any lawyer, but usually there’s garbage on either side of the case and each lawyer will be able to use his or her skill to handle the garbage.

> There's gotta be a fancy latin-sounding lawyer word for this, right?

“America”

[FireBeyond]

WPEngine's goal may be to break Automattic's exclusive, perpetual and irrevocable license on WordPress.

That's something I could (especially given his comments) never, ever, ever see Matt conceding, so they may end up going to trial (as part of their lawsuit centers on the self-dealing, inappropriate use of non-profits, etc., and getting judgment there might be the only route to that).

[singleshot_]

I hear you when you say that stubbornness is a way to get to a judgment. You’re right, but it also takes money and patience. I think this Matt fellow has no patience but I acknowledge he has money. We will see but my gut says settlement in March 2027 after everyone wastes the requisite money on lawyers.