[jfoster]

I understand what the common wisdom is ("shut-up") when it comes to this type of thing, and I understand the stated reason why ("it will get used against you!"), but I don't understand the "how" part.

Carmack made a very clear, short public message about it. Rather than being any kind of admission, it was the opposite. A complete denial. How could Zenimax use that to strengthen their case? He's likely to repeat the same denial to the court anyway.

I'm not pretending I know better than the common wisdom, just trying to understand it better. If you were Zenimax, how would you use this tweet against him?

[jacquesm]

It wasn't a complete denial ('code' and 'patents' are not the only work products protected by IP laws and by employment contract terms).

That alone makes me believe this was not vetted by his lawyer unless they specifically wanted to misdirect the opposition. I don't think that's likely, and such misdirection would most likely fail anyway assuming the opposite side is halfway competent.

Making falsifiable claims in public simply does not help.

As for how Zenimax could use this against Carmack, let's not make their lives easier than we have to.