« PubPat Releases Claim Construction Dictionaries | Main | Patent Litigation Weekly: Digging Beneath the Surface of Apple v. HTC »

March 05, 2010



This is a strange post. It's obvious (at least to me) that the NYT just doesn't understand the entire picture. I don't think anything they were doing here was intentional.

It's especially strange given that the Prior Art provides a certain point of view on patent litigation that would not, by some, be considered accurate or a complete picture.

The comments to this entry are closed.