3 ms·
The HBS prof got it "right" in that he pushed for triple damages which is the highest plausible outcome of this case and has the potential to scare the defendan
by omalleyt 12y ago
The HBS prof got it "right" in that he pushed for triple damages which is the highest plausible outcome of this case and has the potential to scare the defendant. This is the kind of "right" that the HBS prof's consulting clients (he consults in advertising fraud) want, not the actual kind. This article is practically an ad for the prof.
- omalleyt 12y agoAlso, to clarify the prof mentioned specifically that triple damages was a result of the fact that this was a willful and knowing violation. So in fact he's actually absolutely right to demand 2-3 times damages. This article is wrong about him being wrong