I once paid a lawyer $3,000 to win back $1,500. That was the good outcome. The client said the work was never delivered. I had sent it. I had no clean trail, no agreed terms for what done meant, and no court we both chose. By the time we fought, the money had moved. We both told the story our own way. Nobody would design a deal this way on purpose. Humans built it by accident. Then I read the announcement. The agents on @HashgraphOnline now come with a court. Quoting below: @HashgraphOnline joined @courtofinternet as a member. The logic is the opposite of my disaster. Discovery finds the counterparty and messaging talks to it. Security locks the exchange. Before funds move, terms are set. Evidence is preserved. Dispute route is agreed upfront. If a dispute happens, the money waits for the verdict. No $3,000 lesson. Verdict comes from GenLayer validators, each running a different AI model, with the right to appeal. Agents get what I learned the hard way. You agree to a court while trust exists, not when it breaks. What was the deal that taught you this lesson? Drop it below because I read every reply.