A slanted journalistic piece that doesn't tell the other side-- in particular, the inventor. Instead of finding one, the article says they can't. (Surely, the news broadcasters can find some inventor's view.) Where's the other side of the story?
If the other side isn't presented, I'm always suspicious whether the story has integrity.
I think the inventors can't speak about their dealings with IV because of contractual reasons. Or maybe they're just ashamed to have sold their patents to a troll.
If the other side isn't presented, I'm always suspicious whether the story has integrity.