or the specific ones used by Mr. Muravnik) in forming the basis of expert testimony is not inherently unreliable. The court cited a recent and highly publicized analysis in the magazine Nature which found that the error rate of Wikipedia entries was not significantly greater than in those of the Encyclopædia Britannica. Jim Giles, Internet Encyclopaedias Go Head to Head (Dec. 14, 2005) (finding that “the difference in accuracy was not particularly great: the average science entry in Wikipedia contained around four inaccuracies; Britannica, about three.”) Furthermore, the court noted that Alfa Group was unable to identify any errors in Muravnik's testimony. Therefore, despite the potential liability of Wikipedia, references it alone does not make an experts testimony inadmissible in court. Outcome The underlying trademark dispute was settled out of court. Alfa Group agreed not to infringement on Alfa Insurance's trademarks. No money was exchanged in the settlement. References External links 2007 in United States case law United States District Court for the Southern District of New York cases United States trademark case law Wikipedia reliability Alfa Group