03.15.16

Consequences of Straining Staff: Patent Quality at the European Patent Office Has Gotten Rather Terrible

Posted in Europe, Patents at 2:33 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Squeezing not only staff but also the EPO’s (traditionally) good reputation for short-term gains

Strainer

Summary: A look at some recent news and personal perspectives on the status quo of today’s European Patent Office, where examiners’ performance is measured using the wrong yardstick and patent quality is severely compromised, resulting in overpatenting that the public pays for dearly

THE EPO ‘results’ are being debunked already, but the EPO’s PR team keeps spreading that today, regardless of all the scrutiny [1, 2]. How much longer is this sustainable for?

Earlier today we spotted English language Chinese media citing the EPO’s ‘results’ which are basically embellished if not a half-truth/lie (or intentionally bad statistics).

“How much longer is this sustainable for?”Why is the EPO risking damage to its integrity and record on truth? Well, it already lies to journalists and to staff, so there’s probably not much reputation left to lose.

The other day we noticed EPO-friendly media citing the USPTO‘s Senior Counsel as follows:

USPTO Senior Counsel Mark Cohen notes that aggressive antitrust enforcement like that sought in the Hitachi Metals case could affect patenting activity in general, adding: “This can be of great concern in the non-SEP space, where a patentee may have a choice whether to disclose an invention or keep a proprietary method secret.”

Actually, this is what many in the software field do. They rely on hiding source code, copyright on Free software (that everyone can study, inspect and modify as long as copyleft is respected), and there’s hardly any room for antitrust enforcement in such a setting. There’s no rigid requirement imposed, nor are there patent lawsuits and shakedowns. India has been getting it right on software patents for many years and as WIPR put it a few days ago:

The revised guidelines on computer-related inventions by the Indian Patent Office imply a reversed position on whether software inventions should be patentable. Abhishek Pandurangi of Khurana & Khurana reports.

After the Indian Patent Office (IPO) published the first set of guidelines for examining patents for computer-related inventions in August, in February the office introduced an amended set of rules.

While the previous guidelines were kept in abeyance in response to strong protests by critics, a revision was expected, but surprisingly the IPO has replaced an excessively liberal set of guidelines indicating that any software is patentable with a contrary one which almost indicates that no software patents are allowed.

This article from Abhishek Pandurangi serves to remind us that much of the world (large populations) does not accept software patents, whereas the EPO increasingly does, unlike the US where Alice keeps marginalising them.

“The answers to the questions about patent leniency may actually be found in anonymous comments from insiders.”Simply put, under Battistelli there is a huge patent maximalism problem. Patent scope gets broadened in pursuit of additional profits, rendering any performance requirement invalid (comparing apples to oranges, if not actually patenting apples and oranges, which now seems possible at the EPO). Yesterday we saw this announcement titled “EPO Revokes a Patent of Biogen, Inc.’s (NASDAQ:BIIB) Top-Selling Tecfidera”. Why was this patent granted in the first place? Working under pressure or in rush? Inclination to lower the patent bar and issue/grant bogus patents? Whatever it is, as the article put it: “The European Patent Office (EPO) has revoked European Patent EP2137537, a method of use patent concerning Tecfidera, last week. If left unresolved, the move will take a big hit on Biogen’s balance sheets because sales of Tecfidera account for a third of its overall revenue in 2015.”

The answers to the questions about patent leniency may actually be found in anonymous comments from insiders. While many comments on the debunking of EPO ‘results’ have come from EPO apologists (if not worse) who are simply shooting the messenger, some of them come from insiders who acknowledge the problem (we have been hearing about these problems for a while). To quote:

I accept that life always involves compromises. But it is distressing to see EPO examiners slowly turning into the three wise monkeys (that is, if you don’t look too hard for problematic prior art, and don’t think too hard about strict compliance with all of the provisions of the EPC, then examination becomes a lot simpler… and faster).

I fully understand what is driving this process, as applicants, the EPO and national patent offices all stand to benefit. However, it does look like it could be the beginning of a process of erosion of the fundamental bargain with the public that underpins the whole patent system.

I am not saying that where we stand now is definitely unacceptable. Instead, I am merely pointing out that what appears to be a drive from the EPO for “examination light” represents a potentially dangerous trend that needs counterbalancing with strong input from voices representing the public interest.

I say this not as a “patent denier” but rather someone who believes in the patent system, and who wants to cherish it for many years to come.

Think about it. If the pendulum swings too far in terms of permissiveness, then there are certain to be cases where aggressive patent owners assert blatantly invalid patents against competitors with shallow pockets – potentially aided by the €11k fee at the UPC for filing a counterclaim for invalidity. It will not take many cases where a patent owner can be painted as a bad actor for there to be overreactions in the opposite direction. If you have any doubts about what can happen, then witness the effect that lobbying by anti-patent pressure groups has had on “gene” (or other “natural phenomenon”) patents in the US and Australia. Scary stuff!

I agree that some of the professed aims of the ECFS system are laudable. Indeed, there is no point prioritising cases where everyone is happy to let sleeping dogs lie. However, it is not hard to see that much of what is prioritised by ECFS are the “easy wins”, where examination is very straightforward.

The inevitable short term hike in productivity figures produced by ECFS is not to be welcomed for two reasons. Firstly, it will leave a rump of “clearly difficult” cases that no examiner wants to tackle – because the time taken to sort them out will be too detrimental to the examiner’s apparent productivity. Secondly, it is likely to provide a strong temptation to examiners to keep their productivity figures high by waiving through “borderline” cases – ie. treating them as if they are also “easy wins”.

Nobody expects the EPO’s search and examination to be exhaustive. However, they will be doing us all a favour if a way is found to reward examiners for doing their job properly – and not just speedily. In this respect, it is important to acknowledge that it is impossible to constantly drive down the time taken to search and examine applications without compromising on quality. The best that you can hope for is an acceptable balance between speed and quality. Thus, management initiatives that seek to constantly increase productivity look increasingly like a drive to reach the bottom of the barrel.

Here is another noteworthy and long comment:

Based on our own experience and talking to others in the profession, it seems that for some examiners getting examination reports issued quickly involves being totally unhelpful, simply not dealing with issues or throwing in a load of amendments and gambling on the applicant just accepting what is given to avoid remaining in examination.

I have recently seen a first examination report to issue on amendments filed in 2011 in response to the EESR. Unfortunately, an amendment shown on a manuscript amended copy of the claims filed with the response did not make it into the clean copy of the claims. The amendment was described at length in the covering letter and is shown clearly on the manuscript amended copy. Rather than examine the claims as including that amendment or call the representative to ask him to submit a clean copy of the claims that included the amendment, some four plus years after the filing of the response, the examiner examined the claims as those the amendment did not exist. Furthermore, despite the fact the representative’s letter explained various reasons why other features of claim 1 distinguished over the cited prior art, the examiner has just parroted the objections from the EESR without giving any clue as to why he/she disagrees with the representative’s analysis. So about as helpful as a chocolate teapot. However, somewhat craftily, an allowable dependent claim has been allowed.

In a case of my own, we submitted amended claims on entering the regional phase accompanied by a two-part letter explaining the basis for the amendments. Ahead of the search report we got a note from the examiner saying that no basis for the amendments had been supplied when the amendments were filed and if this was not supplied within a month or two, I don’t remember which now, the amended claims would not be searched. We were given no more information than that so wrote back pointing out that we had filed a two page letter explaining the basis for the amendments. The response from the examiner was to issue a partial search report with the comment that neither our first letter or our second letter explained the basis for amendments. As far as I can make out, since the **** has not been sufficiently helpful to provide any useful indication, he just did not consider the explanation of the amendments to a couple of claims sufficiently complete. Leaving aside whether he is entitled to ask for further detail at that stage, we might have been able to move things forward if he’d just said asked us to provide additional explanation of the amendments made to particular claims instead of sending out a communication which was misleading and, basically, factually incorrect.

These are just two examples I am aware of and I am guessing that neither I nor those I know in the profession are being singled out for special treatment.

Basically we are seeing cases that already suffer from long delays in examination making no meaningful progress because examiners are simply bloody-minded, unhelpful or do not take the trouble to explain the issue. How much this is down to the mindset of individual examiners and how much a response to management pressure, I really do not know; whatever , it is not doing the reputation of the EPO any favours.

As the above put it, “cases that already suffer from long delays in examination [are] not doing the reputation of the EPO any favours.” Discriminatory practices aren’t the solution to this.

Not only delays are the problem; patent quality too is a serious issues, including grants of software patents in spite of the EPC.

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

This post is also available in Gemini over at:

gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2016/03/15/epo-patent-quality/

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. Links 7/5/2021: GNU/Linux Preinstalled, Plamo 7.3, LibreOffice 7.1.3

    Links for the day



  2. The Latest Reports About Bill Gates Serve to Confirm or at Least Reaffirm Many People's Suspicions

    So, just as many people suspected, Melinda Gates did not appreciate her husband sneaking behind her back to meet someone who had trafficked thousands of underage girls for sexual exploitation and there are high-profile calls right now for greater transparency, seeing the impact on the world’s biggest tax evasion vehicle



  3. Disregard Web Sites That Call Themselves 'News' and Instead Promote Proprietary Software for Companies Like Microsoft

    Publishers like IDG have long been paid-for marketing in ‘article’ clothing, sometimes with the veneer of ‘reporting’ (as if they have some inside knowledge or insight, e.g. speaking with or for the company they secretly coordinate with or market for); but sadly we’ve been seeing some so-called ‘Linux’ sites doing the same thing, in effect acting like de facto Microsoft marketers



  4. [Meme] Who Needs Examination Anyway When There's 'Hey Hi' (AI)?

    The patent production line could do away with 'pesky' and 'opinionated' examiners who actually wish to scrutinise alleged 'inventions'



  5. Europe's Second-Largest Institution Corrupting the Media and Buying Expensive Puff Pieces

    As annual reports reveal, the EPO wastes an extraordinary amount of money on reputation laundering campaigns and it pollutes the signal by paying publishers; we examine this issue using the new 'reports' shown in the video above



  6. Links 6/5/2021: Fedora’s Compiler Policy and Celemony Software GmbH Adopting Free Software

    Links for the day



  7. Free Software Proponents Don't Fall for Bullshit (Same is True for EPO Examiners)

    There are parallels between what happens in the Free Software Movement and the EPO, where well-meaning people — and usually hard-working scientists — are besieged by people who never really contributed anything to society



  8. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, May 05, 2021

    IRC logs for Wednesday, May 05, 2021



  9. Lessons From Another Failed Coup Against the Free Software Movement

    The coup has very clearly failed and we should prepare for future attempts (they go in cycles); the monopolies really dislike software they cannot control fully (e.g. copyleft/GPL-licensed software)



  10. Links 5/5/2021: Mesa 21.1 Released and New Releases of Python

    Links for the day



  11. Links 5/5/2021: StarLabs, GNU Zile 2.6.2, Fedora i3 Spin

    Links for the day



  12. Phony 'Scandals' From Phony 'News' Site ZDNet

    Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols continues the coup against the FSF (trying to separate it from its founder, Richard Stallman), funded by IBM and Microsoft to engage in libel at a marketing company-owned ‘news’ site called ZDNet



  13. Links 5/5/2021: Windows Security Breaches and GNU Pokology Launched

    Links for the day



  14. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, May 04, 2021

    IRC logs for Tuesday, May 04, 2021



  15. Links 4/5/2021: Taiwins 0.3, KDE Plasma 5.21.5 Released

    Links for the day



  16. EPO Already Wasting Money on Media Manipulation Campaigns for European Inventor Award

    An online-only European Inventor Award 'event' is being used as a pretext/excuse to flood European publishers with money they can rightly perceive as 'hush money'; everyone out there with no spine would likely buckle at the sight of EPO euros and just produce mindless puff pieces that serve to distract from EPO corruption



  17. The Timing of This Melinda Gates Tweet Was Always Curious...

    Remarking on her trip to Africa, where the Gates family lobbies for monopolies on seeds (for profit or course, notably through Monsanto/Bayer, which the Gates family heavily invests in), she posted pure fluff and old photos. And it’s hard to believe she had nothing better to do at the time (better than such nostalgia). As we noted last year: “The above tweet of a beach was posted [by Melinda Gates] on the date of the arrest/search of their employee, who was at their residence at the time.” He was arrested around the very same time this tweet was posted. As we wrote last year (based on detailed documents obtained from the police department): “This tweet was posted 2 hours and 40 minutes after the door was breached and incriminating evidence collected.” He was arrested later that morning at the mansion of Bill and Melinda Gates (the police records contain detailed timelines to confirm the chronology). Melinda’s first name was also in the CP 'stash'.



  18. Media Frenzy Around Gates Divorce Helps Distract From Bill's Crimes

    The distraction from many Gates scandals is cushioned by yet another personal fluff; we would rather see investigative journalism pursuing real answers about real scandals



  19. IRC Proceedings: Monday, May 03, 2021

    IRC logs for Monday, May 03, 2021



  20. EPO Disregards Animal Welfare

    An often overlooked issue surrounding the second-largest institution in Europe is its impact on millions if not billions of animals; there's ongoing research into that



  21. Links 3/5/2021: Sparky 5.15, Bill Gates Divorce, Netflix Fraud

    Links for the day



  22. Links 3/5/2021: New in OpenBSD 6.9 and Audacity Acquired By Muse Group

    Links for the day



  23. Adding, Seaming Together, Merging, or Concatenating Videos From the Command Line With FFMPEG (Scripting for Streamlining of Workflows)

    In order to enrich the looks of videos with almost no extra time/effort (all scripted, no GUIs should be needed) use ffmpeg with the concat operator; but there are several big gotchas, namely lack of sound and need for consistency across formats/codecs and even sampling rates



  24. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, May 02, 2021

    IRC logs for Sunday, May 02, 2021



  25. StatCounter: In May 2021 Windows Market Share Falls Sharply to Just 28%, Whereas GNU/Linux Climbs to 2.31% in Desktops/Laptops

    StatCounter isn't an authority on truth; nevertheless, it helps expose some trends and it shows that Windows is consistently falling, whereas GNU/Linux moves up steadily



  26. Links 3/5/2021: Ubuntu EoL Dates and Nitrux 1.4.0

    Links for the day



  27. Richard Stallman: “Google Can Forcibly Impose Software Changes and the User Can’t Say No.”

    "This is the same thing that Microsoft has in Windows," Stallman told me, "so Microsoft can also impose software changes. Any malicious feature that's not in the program today could be remotely installed tomorrow."



  28. It's Not About Richard Stallman

    First they came for the Founder...



  29. Links 2/5/2021: “Landlock” in Linux 5.13, Comics, Patents Catch-up

    Links for the day



  30. Audacity for Audio Editing With Free Software Only (GPL)

    Audacity is still our software of choice for audio editing; it had a new stable release just 10 days ago (GPL-licensed)


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts