Oh, I get why founders waiving their right to a jury trial if Atlassian screws them is a great idea for Atlassian. The question is why is it a great idea for the founders?
How much less money would accept to retain the right to go to trial?
Option A: sell company for $25 million and waive right to trial
Option B: sell company for $20 million and don't waive right to trial
Term sheets are negotiable, if you actually care that much about retaining the right to a jury trial. Just tell your lawyer to strike out the term and accept less money in exchange.
The point of this term sheet is presumptive starting terms. Those are not founder friendly terms. Obviously my lawyer is there to help me, but there's a lot of inertia to starting terms.
Juries probably don’t have a predisposition to either party in this case. If anything, they’re more likely to get bored and confused than a judge or arbitrator. This seems like the wrong thing to get upset about.
Maybe it's just to save the expense, delay, and uncertainty that jury trials introduce in highly technical corporate disputes? This is not opting out of the court system, since judges still get to hear the case as usual.
I'm not sure I like it even so, but it would prevent Atlassian from financially pressuring founders in a litigation by insisting on a jury trial.
