OK, I made the movie-of-the-week thing up. But consider this plotline:
A billionaire wine collector buys a bottle of wine he knows to be counterfeit in order to prove that the auction house peddling the wine sells counterfeit wine. The billionaire investor then sues the auction house for selling the counterfeit bottle. The judge looks out over this legal landscape and decides that the billionaire wine collector can’t collect damages from someone for selling him a counterfeit bottle of wine that he knew was counterfeit because, in effect, he got what he wanted, which was a counterfeit bottle of wine.
Whatever the outcome of this particular case may be, the billionaire wine collector, William Koch, is performing a public service by forcing auction houses everywhere to increase their due diligence in endorsing the wine they sell. And no matter how much the auction house (Christie’s) may celebrate it’s legal victory, it can’t escape the fact that it endorsed a fraudulent bottle of wine. Testifying, basically, that your best professional judgment in your field of specialization was grossly inadequate may be legally effective, but it’s way embarrassing.