[JamesBlair]

Seems to be neither:

Indeed, the written description of the patents in question expressly refuted the claim construction of the patentee-plaintiff. As a result, the district court properly found that EonNet pursued objectively baseless infringement claims.

If this set a precedent it wouldn't be against vague patents, or against suing implementations of the obvious, etc.

[chc]

It sounds potentially about as true of Lodsys' claims as this patent troll's.