Nostr Web Client

I’m admittedly someone who likes conspiracies, but this is also my area of expertise—high stakes litigation. With all the rabble out there and the podcast circuit that guy just went on which he seemed to effortlessly secure but only after he failed to secure funding for his defense, just doesn’t smell right to me.

I have seen small businesses spend millions of dollars on litigation just to demonstrate to the public that they will enforce their contracts if they are challenged, regardless of whether they can collect on those

It just doesn’t pass that smell test that the world seems uniformly in agreement that the Samurai case is a serious danger to speech, coding, etc.etc., but these guys couldn’t sure defense funding, or just pro bono lawyers, to help.

If you have practiced federal litigation you know that when an industry sees a threat in a given lawsuit, lawyers come from all over out of the woodwork to help and make sure the precedent set is good for the industry, yet here there was a mediocre campaign for funds and then a plea deal ostensibly due to lack of funding.

There is definitely more to this story.

nostr:note1jnuxhgjunenndacyhxzusrd72rtertl2sdtd4na62gdjvax5qpvs60a798

dern 1w ago 💬 1

I appreciate that you’re well versed in litigation, i am too, but on the jury side of things.

My hunch is that their lawyers saw the writing on the wall: sufficient number of texts/tweets for prosecution to frame around their narrative, and that the SDNY operators might be trying to make an example of these devs for political or career reasons.

That’s why i asked how you’d think about a defense (generally, not specifically). I am thinking about it myself, i don’t have answers.

In any case, thanks for the thoughts. It’s nice to get the gears turning

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

SuiGenerisJohn 1w ago 💬 1

I cant begrudge a person for settling out their case when they face a real personal threat, but the lack of support for their case up to the point where the plea deal was reached is curious to me, thats all. “Facts and evidence” are like 25% of what cases are about most of the time. The story and how it’s told is the bulk of it.

dern 1w ago

Agree re 25%. Narrative is everything.

I think what I’m struggling with is believing that this case would have gone any differently with any amount of money. Delayed the outcome? Sure. But without that compelling narrative, this was always going to be a tough tough fight.

I’m thinking about it myself. If i come up with anything good re general defense arguments, I’ll be sure to share with whoever needs them pro bono