← Back to context

Comment by otterley

6 hours ago

No judge I’ve ever met gave a damn how much a party spent on legal resources. With rare exceptions, they care a great deal about achieving justice, and often bend over backwards to help indigent parties avoid prejudicing themselves. Keep in mind that there are no indigent parties in this debate; both major IP rights holders and the frontier AI companies are well capitalized.

(I worked in a federal district court for a while.)

The problem is that money buys lawyers, and you need those to get justice. If the other side spends more, you are likely to lose.

  • Which of these parties doesn’t have lawyers? (I’m talking about bigcorps stealing from bigcorps here.)

    In a case where both parties have lawyers, having more and more expensive lawyers is not necessarily predictive of a case’s outcome. There are diminishing returns.

    What having more resources tends to do is force the poorer party to settle quicker. But that’s not necessarily a loss. Judges still have to approve settlements in the interest of justice.