Egghead skill counsel?  It started with a news article reporting on patent law comments by the firm's founder.  A news aggregating website translated the article into another language.  Another website translated it back into English.  Along the way, the article's original description of "David W. Long, patent attorney" became "David W. Long, egghead skill counsel."  An amusing phrase that we've embraced.

But misinterpretations are not always amusing.  Hi-tech patent disputes require understanding the different languages and perspectives of those who will resolve the dispute.

Patents are written for technically trained people and applied against technically complex products and prior art.  Other people who play crucial roles in resolving a patent dispute—e.g., business decision makers, in-house counsel, judges, mediators and jurors—may struggle with the patents and technology.

Patents are scrutinized by patent attorneys trained in the legal nuances of how patents are written and inventions claimed.  Subtleties may control whether a patent is valid, infringed or valuable.  Technical people and others may struggle with the patent legalese.

And the road to resolution is driven by business needs, market conditions and projections that engineers, judges, juries and others may not fully appreciate.

A situation ripe for misinterpretation, miscommunication and missed opportunities to favorably resolve a patent dispute.  Understanding the different perspectives of important players and bridging the gaps between them is critical.  We do that.