[personZ]

The blog post is pure speculation by what appears to be a layman. It has no more weight than any random comment on HN.

It's worth stating that because people are treating it as if a famed IP lawyer has made a pronouncement of fact, when in actuality it's just someone giving, like, an opinion, man.

[jacquesm]

Let's see a famed IP lawyer that would disagree with the premise of the article.

Attack the contents, if you can.

There are several lawyers that I know of right here in this thread and I don't see anybody contradicting the advice.

[personZ]

Unnecessarily defensive. Was there something, anything, in my comment that is incorrect? Are you actually a contract/IP lawyer? Note that I'm not saying that you are wrong, because honestly I don't know. Because I'm not a lawyer, and I don't know all of the specifics of this case. But am I wrong in what I said about the authority of the post?

This is why people preface things with IANAL.

People often petition to the public (Tesla quite recently) in such cases -- regardless of pending lawsuits -- because the damage in perception can be larger than any possible legal damage. And stating simple facts of truth (such as "I copied 0 lines of code") seems doubtful to aggravate anything if they are truthful. So there are separate issues of IP: Great, but they are neither worsened or relieved by a statement about code, are they?

[jacquesm]

Don't shoot yourself in the foot is good advice, even when it doesn't come from your surgeon.

[personZ]

That analogy hardly fits such a complex situation. This advice is more akin to "if someone is breaking into your house, call the police and hide in a closet". Situations may be a little more complex than that.

[wpietri]

It's someone who has been involved in the business of technology for a long time, so I'd give his opinion substantially more weight than the average HN comment. It's also bog-standard legal advice, so I'd say it doesn't need a lot of footnoting.

[personZ]

Years in technology means exactly nothing relating to IP/Copyright/Contract lawsuits, and I find that claim extraordinary: It is the sort of thing that builds false confidence and pseudo expertise.

It's also a bit ironic given that in this case it's someone telling John Carmack -- guy who was a founder and partner at a number of businesses to great success and for many years -- what he should do. John clearly made his own analysis and decisions, and he is hardly a green entrant to the industry. And maybe Carmack is making the wrong calls, because again years in technology mean exactly nothing.

Is it bog standard advice to shut up until a trial? Hardly. Many facing such a suit will make statements such as vigorously denies, etc. There is absolutely nothing abnormal or unexpected about that.

[wpietri]

Years in the business of technology definitely mean something in relation to both IP and lawsuits. The former being a key ingredient to tech businesses, and the latter being a a risk you must consider any time you sign a contract.

The fellow clearly says that, having been through a couple of lawsuits, that it's tempting to react to the initial wave of emotion. So he's not questioning Carmack's knowledge, he's using Carmack's situation as a handy illustration of his point.

Also, his advice isn't to shut up until trial. It is to wait out the initial wave of emotion, to talk to your lawyer, and think things through until you are truly ready to speak on the permanent record. Which is indeed bog-standard advice.