It appears that they didn't have a lawyer review the final version of an article about a legal case in which they're involved (since I think a lawyer would've caught the "copyright" bit).
When you're being sued, you should be careful about what you say about that, especially what you put in writing, and publish globally.
So I think this is one example of them not consulting a lawyer enough.
I'm not a lawyer but I suspect that confusing copyright and trademark isn't going to land them in particularly hot water.
And, their lawyer's response is pretty decent. I think that there's lots wrong with everything cryptocurrency, but their shirt looks like a rock solid parody.
Whoever posted an article doesn't seem to have been qualified to know what might and might not land them in hot water. So they should've had a lawyer review the final version. If they're missing that one, what else are they missing.
When you're being sued, you should be careful about what you say about that, especially what you put in writing, and publish globally.
So I think this is one example of them not consulting a lawyer enough.