Karl's defense was bonkers.
"if I can prove he cheated in video games and that he had no reputation to begin with then i didn't defamed him".
and:
"I also said other 5 things about him that were true and 1 that was false so in balance is ok".
Both logics are super flawed.
1) if Billy cheated or not in games is 100% irrelevant to the suit.
2) The fact that you said other irrelevant things about him that were true doesn't make the one thing you are being sued for not matter, in fact it's the only thing that matters.
It's bonkers his lawyer didn't advice him better. He had no case, and to settle right away.
It takes 5 minutes to anyone half rational to realize this.