Its the same way "embrace, extend, and extinguish" was coined. "Embrace and extend", without extinguish/exterminate, was used in Microsoft corp docs that were handed to the DOJ during the famous antitrust case, but it was the DOJ that turned it into EEE after realizing what "embrace and extend" actually meant in the broader context of Microsoft's machinations.
The DOJ's clever hook won them the case.
This is false. They explicitly used extinguish in their internal doctrine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...
Not unlike "delay, deny, defend".
Would explain Zuck’s late interest in martial arts …
Very much his schtoyle
> The DOJ's clever hook won them the case.
Or, rather, the fact that Microsoft was blatantly illegally abusing their monopoly position to kill competitors.
Blatant complex behavior, no matter how illegal, won’t convince a judge or jury without clear rhetoric. So catch phrases are essential elements to conveying the truth about the behavior
[citation needed]
It's hard to prove a negative, you know.
Seems like a good argument for tempering claims around negatives then, if people want to be taken seriously.