That’s why I never said “you have to use bitcoin because courts are too expensive”. That’s an implication you made up out of whole cloth because you never considered that I wrote my comment before the edit.

As it happens — and not that it matters to you — I agree that the small-transaction-with-untrusted-party case is not a good use of blockchain.

I was only objecting to the OP’s implication that courts are sufficient to ward off all contractual violations. As of the edit, the OP clarified s/he didn’t mean that, and so I’m in agreement with him/her, but that apparently doesn’t stop you from lecturing me as if I weren’t.