Even as a lawyer, I would heartily concur that relationships based on trust and cooperation are far better than those based solely on legalistic concerns. That

Even as a lawyer, I would heartily concur that relationships based on trust and cooperation are far better than those based solely on legalistic concerns. That said, I think the author underestimates the risk of opportunistic behavior by those involved in startups. Even years ago, when I started practicing, I vividly remember the refrain: "My buddies and I started this thing and everything was going well . . . but then it became really valuable . . . and then . . ." You fill in the blank but it was always some variation of "I would never believe he would have done that to me" as the "buddy" stuck some knife in or grabbed some disproportionate share of the reward from the once cooperative effort. The most frequent situation involved a dominant founder, who legally controlled everything, taking opportunistic advantage of co-founders who had trusted in his integrity and ultimately found it to be wanting. There were many other variations, however, and these can take any forms made possible by human ingenuity. It is important to strike a balance. Normally, nothing good will come out of bad relationships, even if they are documented to the hilt with big, fat contracts. On the other hand, blind trust in a business setting, or even relying on your instincts to judge the character of others while believing them invariably to want to do good, is normally not wise. Trust but document. Just don't overdo it in a way that kills the spirit of cooperation.