EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

05.15.16

UPC is Class War (the Rich Fighting Everyone Else), Hence the Increasing Militarisation of the European Patent Office

Posted in Europe, Patents at 9:03 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

The EPO’s management is trying to ‘pacify’ the Office by force

Slave trade

Summary: In the face of resistance to controversial and often antidemocratic, illegal, possibly criminal or felonious acts, Team Battistelli resorts to ‘decapitation tactics’ (attacking or torturing figureheads) and armament around itself — all this while falsely accusing others of bearing arms or resorting to aggression

THE EPO scandals are happening for a reason. As Dr. Glyn Moody put it earlier this year: “When asked by Ars, the EPO’s spokesperson mentioned the imminent arrival of the unitary patent system as an important reason for revising the EPO’s internal rules…”

Think along the lines of globalisation in line/lieu with TPP, TTIP or whatever corporate-leaning agenda is interjected in transit (amid unison, where laws get ‘harmonised’, i.e. modified in accordance to some peripheral interests).

Techrights is genuinely concerned about UPC and has been concerned about it for more than half a decade (we wrote about this well before it was known as “UPC”). We are gratified to see that writers, attorneys, examiners and even politicians are beginning to catch up. They realise what it’s all about and they occasionally rant about it. In response, the UPC’s proponents get all paranoid and even aggressive. As one tongue-in-cheek comment put it the other day: “Why are you astonished Merpel? Have you not been reading the comments on your own blog over these last few years? These people are so far up their own backsides,,,,they lost touch with reality so long ago,,,, However I can understand their insecurity, It’s pretty easy to imagine a scenario whereby somebody kidnaps an EPO VP or PD and sends a ransom note along the lines of “we have kidnapped a senior member of your EPO management – pay us 10 Euros in cash or we will send them back”” (that’s a joke of course).

Some people who perhaps lack a sense of humour responded as though it’s a Battistelli-funded comment. “Apparently,” one person wrote, “FTI Consulting keep sending out their trolls…”

Well, FTI is quite likely injecting EPO talking points into discussions, but this isn’t it. As one person put it:

Is it really necessary to call somebody a paid troll for pointing out the obvious?

Of course jihadists are unlikely to be aware of Mr. Battistelli’s existence, never mind hatch any scheme against it. However, Mr. Battistelli himself, who has a notoriously inflated opinion of his own importance, probably doesn’t see things like that, and may even be convinced that offing him would be ISIL’s biggest success since the fall of Mosul.

Another comment said (BB is short for Battistelli):

Thanks for the observation. I hadn’t noticed the second “trolling” comment and have to say I’m not sure who the first one was directed at, let alone with regard to what! I stuck to one factual statement, relevant to the issue of why security is thought by BB (for whatever reason) to be needed, and an expression of my own opinion that my colleagues are not a threat. Not clear how that can be trolling.
Perhaps it might be worth considering that an opinion which you don’t share is not trolling without further qualification – ironically, the criers appear to imply that their colleagues are such that BB may need protection. Now that would be trolling if I put that idea out there without any justification.
To return to my comment – BB thinks he could be a target of terrorists (I have no way of knowing, I hope he is over-egging it out of caution) and I don’t think my colleagues, however upset or even distressed, would resort to violence.
And if that is still provocative…

Battistelli is trying to maintain the illusion that EPO representatives are violent and dangerous. Keeping bodyguards around perpetuates this illusion and the aforementioned sarcastic comment (about kidnapping “a senior member of your EPO management”) is actually rather funny. Battistelli sees conspiracies where there are none (“To the man who is afraid everything rustles,” said this comment) and the only broad conspiracy nowadays is one that’s perpetrated by Battistelli and his super-rich buddies, who are eager to make the UPC a reality at all costs (even breaking European or international laws in the process). Recall the above remark from Dr. Moody about the role of the UPC in a lot of the present mess.

“Logic does not seem to enter into these recent “security” precautions,” one person pointed out, “an example being the need for representatives to demonstrate to security staff that the contents of their brief cases contain nothing more threatening than a ring-binder. I wonder what they would do if in a hearing concerning, say, a patent for an arrow tip, the rep. was to bring examples to the hearing.”

We wrote about it earlier this year. It is amazing, isn’t it? Here is another comment on the subject:

I read that: “the bodyguards are precisely for within the EPO”.

Also I read that the EPO’s highest paid employee, its President, wants DG3 bundled out of the building in which he has his office.

I conclude that Mr Battistelli in his Isar Building fastness finds inconvenient or embarrassing even the mere presence of any EPO employee, one who is not a member of the coterie he has gathered around himself. Incidentally, is it true, that he has his own private lift, to shuttle him in isolation between the garage and the penthouse suite?

The function of the bodyguards within the EPO is presumably then to keep all other humans a safe distance away from their man, to ensure that the President when in the office never has to even suffer eye contact with any other employee of the EPO.

“Your mind is working at its best when you’re being paranoid,” one person said. “You explore every roadmap and possibility of your situation at high speed with total clarity.”

Here is another comment on this subject:

according to my info the bodyguards are precisely for within the EPO (contrary to the troll assertion above).

In the outside world no one knows Battistelli, Bergot al. And as to the real risks: the EPO is only the targetted by Greenpeace coming once in a while with a banner on the facade or the like.

Do not forget that Battistelli sees “enemies from within” (the insulting title of an interview he gave to the epo friendly Les Echos (FR in the past).

I also heard that first the epo wanted the sheriffs with weapons before to finally accept them without. A top management who needs to be protected from its workforce says a lot about the level of tensions reached.

At the EPO, as a result of this militarisation, a lot of money now gets wasted. “This money was entirely paid by the applicants and nobody knows where it will disappear,” said this one comment. To quote it in full:

Non-unity objections in search have become more popular in the EPO lately, because the internal rules have changed. Examiner have less time to deal with a search (they have larger numbers of searches and examination assigned than the previous years), and non-unity is seen by their directors as a quick way to send the file back to the applicants to be put into order. Or, if the applicants pay extra fees, the directorate figures are increased by the number of extra search fees.

It is one of the many measures of the Battistelli team designed to both lower the level of service and increase the fees.

I wonder why the industry does not complain about the evolution of the European Patent system. Battistelli is saving millions of euros, but the fees do not decrease. The official figures from the budget is that we have 340 millions left last year after we spend 200 millions on the new building and about as much on modernizing our computer system (all the money went to French firms like “Infotel conseil”, btw…). This money was entirely paid by the applicants and nobody knows where it will disappear.

The European Patent Office is simply not what it used to be. Examiners are not paid enough for it to be competitive on the Munich work market (Munich is not France where everybody seems to be desperate for a job), so the EPO cannot fill half the posts they want. Work pressure, especially under directors who want to profile themselves, is so high that people are cutting huge corners. The boards of appeal do not work for lack of staff. Staff representatives are dismissed and prohibited entry on the premises and more dismissals are under way. It has never been that bad since the EPO was founded.

“The European Patent Office is simply not what it used to be,” the above says, stating the obvious. Another person concurs:

I agree with that last posting, from “Concerned Examiner”. The Rules have been there since 1978, to discipline recalcitrant applicants. For example, the one that decrees that the consent of the Exam Division is needed, before you can get a second round of amendment admitted. Given the sequential performance at the EPO of search and then substantive examination, of course it was never going to be your right to switch during substantive examination to unsearched subject matter.

The trouble starts though, when management belatedly starts to dragoon examiners into enforcing the Rules rigorously and inflexibly, with no appreciation of user needs.

Of course, there needs to be a balance between i) allowing Applicants to file at the EPO materials drafted in US-style, and ii) expecting Applicants to re-draft, before the end of the Paris Convention year, into EPO style. I recall that G Decision which recognised the need for Applicants, post-filing, to be able to re-draft methods of medical treatment claims into EPC-compliant claims. To deny them that freedom, thought the EBA, would be unfair to such Applicants from outside Europe. Conversely though, you shouldn’t be letting such Applicants get away with amendments refused to those Applicants based in Europe.

Time was, when Examiners searched not only what was claimed but also what Applicant would likely fall back on, when all the originally filed claims turn out to be old or obvious. Personally, I haven’t yet noticed any general refusal amongst Examiners to examine amended claims that draw from the description but do still claim, albeit more narrowly, the inventive concept that the Applicant was presenting from the outset. Yes, there are rogue Examiners, but there always were. If you want to claim a different concept, file a divisional. That was always what you had to do.

Readers, I think you might find that there is only one jurisdiction which finds the EPC so difficult to understand. Everywhere else in the world, it is nothing special. When working for clients in that one jurisdiction, boy, it sure does help, to have amassed considerable experience so you can understand how they tick. For then you really can help them, by mediating effectively between what they can get under the EPC, and what they mistakenly suppose they are entitled to.

EPO Examiners, I am still your friend. I think you (or nearly all of you) continue to do a thorough, conscientious and competent job, giving Applicants all the help it is within your power to provide, while exercising the Rules in the same way for all Applicants, big or small.

“Basically,” noted this comment, “the EPO is turning fast into a registration system.” To quote with context:

unfortunately, I am afraid that you have no felt what is still in the pipe-line. Or maybe, you are active in a technical domain in which the director does not give in to pressure from higher up. But I can assure you that you will not be our friend when the changes have trickled down.

Battistelli wants to improve “efficiency”. Translation: 20% more grants per year. Last year, the examiners had to send out the easy cases out. This year, most have only the rubbish files left. But they still have to find something to grant or they’ll get bad markings. And the reform which has just been announced is that bad markings can get you dismissed for professional incompetence, the dismissal procedure has been streamlined.

Some examiners are resisting the push to grant the rubbish files, especially the older ones. Last year, the EPO silently got rid of the most reluctant examiners by pushing them into pension. This year will be different.

Basically, the EPO is turning fast into a registration system. That should not be a surprise, coming from a French president, should it? Except that it will be a registration system at the price of an examination system.

This is what we have been saying for quite some time. Quality is declining due to policy, so the EPO becomes not much better than the USPTO, which is also getting worse (in the quality sense) over time.

One commenter ponders and wonders if Battistelli “and the other politicians [are] nurtured by the lobbying activities of Big Corp?”

This is exactly what’s happening. See the memo “Closer Contact with Major Applicants”. The commenter agrees with the above, too:

It fits with what I gather from all sides.

Power users of the EPO want a pile of patents that is higher than the pile their competitors have amassed. Never mind the quality; instead, feel the weight! BB is only too ready to oblige them. BigCorp negotiates with BigCorp to stay out of the courts of law. Neither side knows what patent strength they really possess. The only thing the negotiators have to go on is how high is their own pile of patents and how high is the pile on the other side of the table.

Whether that is good for promoting technological progress is another thing entirely. Not sure that France can hold itself out to be the world’s best jurisdiction for technological innovation. But technological progress is the only thing that can create well-paid jobs, raise living standards and lift prosperity for the masses.

Now, do BB and the other politicians care about those living standards? Or is it just their own living standards, nurtured by the lobbying activities of Big Corp? If you want to see political hypocrisy and willful blindness in action, just look at the Conference on “Corruption” running at the moment in London. English politicians never come to the idea that the City of London is the sump of corruption in Europe, even after they read the most recent issue of The Economist, because they only see what they want to see.

Deep inside the EPO it’s still pretty ugly and nothing has improved, based on our sources and anonymous voices from within. Battistelli et al try to silence everyone by attacking figureheads and increasingly, over time, staff is controlled through fear rather than loyalty. To quote one last comment from another thread:

Do not worry. No DG3 members will dare to disobey.
From December 2015 onwards they can be suspended on half pay for a minimum of two years with the possibility of infinite extension.

http://www.epo.org/modules/epoweb/acdocument/epoweb2/194/en/CA-D_18-15_en.pdf

All that is needed is for the President to make such a proposal to the AC.
Bye bye independence.

It should say December 2014 actually.

As the EPO crisis deepens we wonder if a month from now the Administrative Council will do the right thing and dismiss Battistelli from his duties, preferably along with his UPC ‘reforms’ that brought chaos (a coup atmosphere) to what was once a reputable Office.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

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. Can We Quit Celebrating DRM in GNU/Linux?

    Over the past couple of days various news sites and "Linux" sites expressed great satisfaction [1-5] over the passive embrace of Disney's DRM ploy (Disney+), even when Disney itself rejects DRM, seeing the harms practically caused by it [6,7]



  2. You Know WSL is Bad for GNU/Linux Because Anti-Linux People, Microsoft and Its Propagandists, Want People to Use That

    Microsoft and its boosters (and media partners) haven’t grown tired of spreading falsehoods to stigmatise and take control of GNU/Linux by creating their own versions and traps for it



  3. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, December 07, 2019

    IRC logs for Saturday, December 07, 2019



  4. 5 Years Ago the Linux Foundation Turned Linux.com Into a Non-Linux Site

    One can leverage the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine to better understand how, over time, the Foundation called “Linux” deviated or diverged away from its mission statement for the sole purpose of raising corporate funds and selling influence to corporations (passing the community’s hard work to them — a form of tacit privatisation)



  5. Microsoft Redefining Ownership and Identity of GNU/Linux

    The idea that “Microsoft loves Linux” is as insane as it gets; but the lie which is “Microsoft loves Linux” is a powerful enabler of Microsoft entryism, e.g. if Greg steps down, does a Microsoft employee become the deputy of Linus Torvalds?



  6. Things That Cannot Be Said

    The limits on what we can say are mostly defined by what sources permit us to say publicly (for the sake of source protection)



  7. Fake European Patents (on Algorithms) Leading to Fake Embargoes

    Law firms have gotten their way in Germany; instead of supporting the productive workers the patent system is nowadays promoting the litigation 'industry' and it ought to be corrected



  8. From Moderate Advice to FUD and Misinformation: The Case of a VPN Vulnerability (CVE-2019-14899)

    What should have been a trivial bugfix in a variety of operating systems and bits of software — both proprietary and Free software — somehow became anti-Linux FUD, clickbait and worse



  9. Dangerous Thinker

    Society oughtn't be alarmed by people who say unusual things; it should be wary and sceptical of those corporations ever so eager to silence such people



  10. Unitary Patent (UPC) Died Along With the Credibility of Managing IP and the Rest of the UPC Lobby

    It is pretty astounding that Team UPC (collective term for people who crafted and lobby for this illegal construct) is still telling us lies, even in the absence of underlying supportive facts, and pressure groups disguised as "news sites" latch onto anything to perpetuate an illusion of progress (even in the face of a growing number of major barriers)



  11. IRC Proceedings: Friday, December 06, 2019

    IRC logs for Friday, December 06, 2019



  12. Links 7/12/2019: Fedora 31 Elections Results, Lots of Media Drama Over VPN Bug

    Links for the day



  13. Links 6/12/2019: DRM in GNU/Linux and Sparky Bonsai

    Links for the day



  14. The EPO Rejects Innovation

    The EPO ceased caring about the needs of scientists whose work involves invention; instead, EPO management crafts increasingly lenient guidelines that yield illegal European Patents (not compatible with the EPC) that heavily-besieged EPO judges are unable to stop



  15. Startpage CEO Robert Beens in 'Damage Control' Mode, Trying to Get Startpage Relisted After Selling to a Massive Surveillance Company

    PrivacytoolsIO is being lobbied by the CEO of Startpage to relist Startpage, based on no actual refutations at all



  16. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, December 05, 2019

    IRC logs for Thursday, December 05, 2019



  17. Links 5/12/2019: qBittorrent 4.2.0, Expensive Librem 5 and OpenBSD Bugs

    Links for the day



  18. Microsoft Staff Repeatedly Refuses to Tell How Many People Use WSL, Defends Patent Extortion and Blackmail of Linux Instead

    The people who develop WSL (mostly Microsoft employees) get easily irritated when asked how many people actually use this thing; but more interestingly, however, they reveal their disdain for GNU/Linux and support for Microsoft blackmail (for 'Linux patent tax')



  19. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, December 04, 2019

    IRC logs for Wednesday, December 04, 2019



  20. Links 4/12/2019: Tails 4.1, UCS 4.4-3 and Proxmox VE 6.1

    Links for the day



  21. Google Tightens Its Noose

    Now it’s official! Google is just a bunch of shareholders looking to appease the Pentagon at all costs



  22. Europeans Still Need to Save the European Patent Office From Those Who Attack Its Patent Quality

    Patent quality is of utmost interest; without it, as we're seeing at the EPO and have already seen at the USPTO for a number of years, legal disputes will arise where neither side wins (only the lawyers win) and small, impoverished inventors or businesses will be forced to settle outside the courts over baseless allegations, often made by parasitic patent trolls (possessing low-quality patents they don't want scrutinised by courts)



  23. We Never Accepted and Will Never Accept Corporate Money

    Corporate money is a unique problem because of its magnitude and the fact that it's impersonal; shareholders can only ever accept its supposed justifications if they're receiving something in return (of proportional worth to the payment/transaction)



  24. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, December 03, 2019

    IRC logs for Tuesday, December 03, 2019



  25. Links 3/12/2019: elementary OS 5.1 Hera, Plasma 5.17.4, Firefox 71

    Links for the day



  26. Laundering the Reputation of Criminals: That's an Actual Job

    An important reminder that the manufactured, paid-for (media is being bribed) image of Bill Gates is the product of the PR industry he enlisted to distract from his endless crimes



  27. 'Priceless' Tickets to the EPO's Back End and Team UPC

    CIPA's and the EPO's event (later this week) is more of the same; the EPO exists not to serve European businesses but a bunch of law firms and their biggest clients (which usually aren't even European)



  28. IRC Proceedings: Monday, December 02, 2019

    IRC logs for Monday, December 02, 2019



  29. New EPO Leak Shows That the Rumours and Jokes Are Partly True and We Know Who 'Runs the Show'

    Europe’s second-largest institution is so profoundly dysfunctional, a reprehensible kakistocracy of tribalism, money-grabbing career-climbing autocrats and possibly major fraud; today’s leak looks at what motivated and enabled the formation and latest incarnation of “Team Campinos”



  30. Links 2/12/2019: Linux Mint 19.3 Beta, DPL Sam Hartman Talks About SystemD

    Links for the day


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