People seem to be assuming that it would be easy for Braun and his team to prove he used Bosch as a consultant, but it may not be that simple. Here's a question - was it established that they actually paid the guy anything? There was a dispute after all. If they never paid him, it's possible that they don't have much if any documentation to actually prove that Bosch was used as a consultant. I say that because I'm a lawyer and the general practice is to keep most conversations with consultants and experts verbal as oppossed to written. The reason is that you want to keep those communications as confidential as possible since you never want the other side to know what you're thinking. Once something is in writing, you create a greater risk that it will be leaked or inadvertently produced in discovery. Plus, if a court ever says, for whatever reason, that you need to produce all communications with the expert/consultant, you have that much less to produce if conversations were verbal. Come to think of it, even if they paid Bosch something, they'd still need to somehow show what the payment was actually for. So, unless Bosch produced some sort of written report to Braun's attorneys, it's at least conceivable to me that Braun's camp does not necessarily have documented "proof" that they used Bosch as a consultant. Plus, even if that proof existed, as has been discussed, he risks waiving privilege by making any of it public, or even turning it over to MLB. So, I'll be surprised if we ever get any further confirmation on that.