Posted by what seems to be an EPO patent examiner (or some other EPO staff)

Summary: The EPO's rotten influence over the media is having unintended consequences, detrimental to a high degree not just to the EPO's management but also to its media partners

THE Battistelli-led EPO waltzes and dances from one scandal to the next, now shaming Apple in EurActiv despite Apple being a prolific applicant. Apple's patent wars against Samsung (or Android/Linux), covered by EPO critic Florian Müller, seems to have just culminated in over half a billion dollars (reluctant payment). At the same time, over at Texas (the trolls' docker), Apple is said to have been sued by a "two-month-old company," to quote WIPR's headline. As the author framed it: "A company that was formed nearly two months ago has sued multinational business Apple for allegedly infringing a patent covering mobile phones.

"Anything one sees in the media regarding the EPO one must suspect could be part of the EPO's €73,000-per-month reputation laundering campaign (leaked here a week ago).""In a lawsuit filed at the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas on Wednesday, December 2, Iris Connex claimed Apple’s iPhone 5 model and all models produced since then have infringed the patent."

This serves to show just how broken the US patent system that Battistelli increasingly emulates really is, despite growing efforts to thwart software patents there^*. This is the type of mess that the unitary patent, or UPC, promises to bring to Europe (a subject we increasingly cover these days). Now that the EPO muddies the media (or pays the media) for positive coverage it is easier to fall for the brainwash (from the likes of IAM) and not get the facts. Google News deems the EPO's own site a credible source of news (see result number 2 below) and this site is, for the most part, also flooding search results for other EPO-related searches.

Anything one sees in the media regarding the EPO one must suspect could be part of the EPO's €73,000-per-month reputation laundering campaign (leaked here a week ago). ⬆ ___________ ^* According to Patent Buddy, "US Pat 7,756,855, Asserted Against Google; Killed by Alice/101;" The Docket Report says: "The magistrate judge recommended denying without prejudice defendants' motion to dismiss the asserted claims of plaintiff’s data compression patents because claim construction had not occurred and defendant failed to establish that the claims were directed toward an abstract idea."