There's what looks like a typo in paragraph 2 of the original. "Twitter knows [things]. With that knowledge Meta [did wrong]". That should be "Meta knows", shouldn't it? Smacks of carelessness.
Although as you say entirely unsubstantiated either way.
Thank you. Very well explained. Meta’s timing and Musk’s back foot - a fiery Intellectual Property lawsuit - threats are not promises let alone chances of success
Idle reservations of rights are a particular bugbear to me.
This is excellent and I shall send it to trainees whom I’ve supervised - it’s useful as both recipient of these letters and as someone who writes litigation letters.
I hugely enjoyed this, not because the particular issue interests me that much, but for the limpid elegance of DAG's analysis - it's a pure intellectual pleasure. Chris Grey
Cracking read, David, thoroughly enjoyable, just the perfect hint of shade! Thank you for taking the time, this legally-illiterate attempt at a human would love to see more like this when the opportunity arises. <3
In my opinion, most if not all of this letter is AI-generated. This means it could have been written by anyone, not by a lawyer. And by « anyone », I mean...
So, done to keep the lawyers client happy?
Most likely explanation.
so interesting! Thanks
There's what looks like a typo in paragraph 2 of the original. "Twitter knows [things]. With that knowledge Meta [did wrong]". That should be "Meta knows", shouldn't it? Smacks of carelessness.
Although as you say entirely unsubstantiated either way.
Thank you. Very well explained. Meta’s timing and Musk’s back foot - a fiery Intellectual Property lawsuit - threats are not promises let alone chances of success
Thank you! I love the clarity of your analysis which cuts through the words used.
Idle reservations of rights are a particular bugbear to me.
This is excellent and I shall send it to trainees whom I’ve supervised - it’s useful as both recipient of these letters and as someone who writes litigation letters.
I hugely enjoyed this, not because the particular issue interests me that much, but for the limpid elegance of DAG's analysis - it's a pure intellectual pleasure. Chris Grey
Cracking read, David, thoroughly enjoyable, just the perfect hint of shade! Thank you for taking the time, this legally-illiterate attempt at a human would love to see more like this when the opportunity arises. <3
In my opinion, most if not all of this letter is AI-generated. This means it could have been written by anyone, not by a lawyer. And by « anyone », I mean...