3 ms·

All of the phrasing you take issue with is directly from the linked complaint. The complaint flatly alleges Google “bought off Samsung” (as quoted in the headli

All of the phrasing you take issue with is directly from the linked complaint. The complaint flatly alleges Google “bought off Samsung” (as quoted in the headline) and that Google was both willing to attempt to buy off Samsung and did indeed attempt to do so. They are the logical order of events, no? I can’t have bought someone off without first having attempted to buy them off and before that having been willing to buy them off.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
GavinMcG 5y ago
The point I think OP was making is that you can say anything with a reasonable evidentiary basis in a complaint. (And some lawyers don't bother with the evidentiary basis part—see the post-election lawsuits that are being sanctioned for just that.) It's not about whether the language is in the article or the legal document; the legal document itself is merely a lawyer saying something that is in their client's interest.