Title is inaccurate. At the very bottom of the post, he says that fighting the suit over the past two years has cost him about $100K in his and his employees' lost time.
That's not the same as having spent $100K to fight the suit.
I disagree. Unless that time could have been directly converted into billed client work (or something with a tangible payoff) then it isn't the same at all.
It's like people taking about their "hourly rate" when deciding to pay for some convenient service. Your time is only worth that if someone is paying you for it.
Equivalent? Perhaps, for accounting purposes. But that doesn't mean they're the same.
When you spend something, you're using money that you already have.
That's not the same as having lost out on potential income.
If I'm offered two jobs, one of which pays $10,000 more than the other, and I take the lower-paying job, I don't tell people, "Hey, I just spent $10,000," even if (in an accounting sense) it's equivalent to having spent $10,000.
It's not the same because time is not directly convertible into money(nor vice versa). Perhaps if the author had clients lined up with money in hand, but those situations are rare, especially for small shops.
That's not the same as having spent $100K to fight the suit.