Paper pushers want to tax computing
Summary: The appointment of more people whose stance on the subject of patents leaves little room for objectivity
The EPO sets up a biased board:
Using studies and analyses supplied by the EPO and external partners, the board will also provide early warnings on sensitive issues, and make policy recommendations.
As the FFII’s president put it:
By nominating such people, the EPO fails to think outside of the patent microcosm
Watch the list of those people, it’s quite telling. The EPO is in the business of granting patents, and therefore it is naturally biased and inclined to grant more of them. The unitary patent would mean more business for the lawyers and a global patent system seems like a scary destination, which is further exacerbated by the realisation that patent lawyers start thinking global:
The firm’s advanced IP services include access to 11 million Japanese patents and 4.9 million Chinese patents, both searchable in full English texts.
What would the point of that be if not to pollute one country’s monopolies with another’s? Patents are a taxing mechanism, they in no way serve the public. Scholarly findings on this subject are clear. █