The judge said, at  to :
"14. The expert witness instructed by Virgin was Mr Kerr. He was a business/IT consultant with extensive experience in the telecommunications, multimedia and TV areas up to 2001 and, subsequently, in more general communications and IT systems. His experience and expertise in the interactive TV/VOD arena spanned 19 years from 1981 to 2000. During this time he covered system-level architectures, designs and performance.It's good to be reminded that being too clever needn't be a bar to discharging one's duties as an expert witness though, presumably, when it comes to issues of inventive step, some expert witnesses will be valuable to a party defending the validity of its patent if they're neither that clever or that imaginative.
15. Mr Kerr was a very impressive and knowledgeable witness who was able to explain concepts clearly and succinctly. I found him very helpful.
16. Mr Abrahams, counsel for Rovi, had two main criticisms. The first was that Mr Kerr was much too clever and imaginative to be able to give an opinion upon what the skilled addressee might learn from a document or what the skilled addressee might do in consequence of any teaching in a document. But, as Jacob LJ explained in Technip France SA's Patent  RPC 46 at  – , it does not really matter whether or not the expert approximates to the skilled team, what matters is how good he is at explaining things and what are the reasons for his opinion".
This blogger is sad that the judge's quote began at , when  is the bit that contains one of Jacob LJ's most memorable lines. Speaking of the person skilled in the arts: