I found an article about the ongoing Six4Three case in CA [1]. From the article:

> David Godkin, Six4Three’s lead counsel said: “We believe the public has a right to see the evidence and are confident the evidence clearly demonstrates the truth of our allegations, and much more.”

I have little-to-no legal understanding, but it seems to me that it was in Six4Three's interest to have these documents seized and perhaps released to the public? I see others here talking of how bold of a move this was for Parliament and that it wouldn't have worked if Six4Three simply refused. However, if Six4Three was trying to get the documents released anyways, was this really that bold of a move? Seems to me its more just giving Six4Three an excuse to leak the documents.

1: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/may/24/mark-zuck...