3 ms·
> then he'd have to find a lawyer willing to take it on contingency, meaning he'd pay as much as half of any award at trial, after legal costs were deducted ri
by irjustin 3y ago
> then he'd have to find a lawyer willing to take it on contingency, meaning he'd pay as much as half of any award at trial, after legal costs were deducted
right, so "extremely straight forward". You seem to think that "giving up a lot of money" somehow invalidates it being "straight forward".
Also, I didn't didn't say it was easy (hence the "requires lots of disclosure" actually i mean discovery so thanks on that correction) - it is definitely not. But it is straight forward and very well defined. Royalty law is similar to family law in that there are a LOT of cases with lots of lawyers specializing in this. If you believe his case is special, I assure it, it is not.
Straight forward and easy are not the same things.
- sowbug 3y agoSorry, I'm just using the dictionary definition of "straightforward," which is "easy to do or understand." I'm also a lawyer, and no lawyer on Earth would call a Hollywood-accounting case straightforward. Perhaps we're using different terminology. I concede you are consistently writing it as two words, so maybe you don't actually mean the English word "straightforward." Have a nice day.
- irjustin 3y agoAh then my apologies on not knowing that "easy" is literally part of the definition of straight forward. Should have used a different term.