My G, respectfully, you’re not a lawyer or if you are you’re not talking like one. This has happened time and again on this board where the actual lawyers like myself tell you the probable outcomes, coli legal experts argue with us, and then we end up being right and Nîggas act like it didn’t happen. This is a result of a world where people don’t defer to authority anymore. If you read that article he specifically breaks down the legal avenues WBD can take. He speaks on how these contracts are typically written and he’s referring to precedent in plain language. It’s not blind speculation, it’s how legal advice is given - based on precedent and probability. It’s actually very well written and exactly what I would’ve wrote. In other words, you’re not familiar enough to recognize how well crafted that article is. Now read that last article about the Amazon facts versus the WBD facts. The point is, suing is a last resort and WBD is unlikely to win that lawsuit just based on the pure fact that Amazon has more household and worldwide reach. The NBA has no duty to take what it deems to be an inferior deal. I couldn’t even access Max in half the countries I was in while in Europe this summer but Amazon worked everywhere. The NBA has a pure economic argument that the deals don’t match up. The idea that the NBA’s lawyers who come from white shoe firms like Silver would draft a contract where they are forced to take a suboptimal deal is the most ridiculous insertion I’ve seen in this entire thread. It would take legal malpractice. If anything, WBD may very well sue just to give it extra time to negotiate with the NBA and ward off ratification.