Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ames!haven!purdue!i.cc.purdue.edu!j.cc.purdue.edu!mace.cc.purdue.edu!mtr
From: mtr@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Miek Rowan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: SEA threat to other ARC utility aut
Message-ID: <586@mace.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: 9 Sep 88 21:31:57 GMT
References: <4574232@<KPETERSEN> <16800358@clio> <925@psu-cs.UUCP>
Organization: Unix Groupie
Lines: 17

In article <925@psu-cs.UUCP>, warren@psu-cs.UUCP (Warren Harrison) writes:
> which you're expected to pay within 30 days.  The kind of attorney you need to
> get to defend a case like this is expensive (minimum of $125/hr).  Figure maybe
> $10,000 a month or more.  The case could easily cost Katz $60,000 to $100,000
> to defend.  If he won, he'd still have to sue to recover his costs, and there's
> no telling SEA would have any money to pay him off after paying THEIR lawyers.
> Could many small firms come up with an extra $10,000 month after month?  I doubt
> it very much - and small businesses seldom tend to have a legal expense
> contingency fund.  So even if Katz could collect his expenses from SEA in a
> separate action, how does he pay his legal people in the meantime?

It was estamated that a defense for Katz would cost him between 
500,000 and a million dollars.  I have a re-typed copy of the 
settlement.   Even though Katz was in the right, there was nothing
he could do.  that is a healthy amount of money just to prove you
are right.  

mtr