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

07.03.16

Post-Jeremy IP Kat Deems It OK to Publish Anonymous Comment Comparing Techrights to “Daesh” While Censoring Polite Response to That

Posted in Patents at 5:32 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Censorship in IP Kat. Again.

IP Kat gags

Summary: The troublesome pattern of sanitisation of comments (presumably based on agenda rather than commenting policy) continues at IP Kat, which prides itself in being the most popular blog for IP matters

LAST month we tried to protect IP Kat from EPO censorship (by generating backlash or Streisand Effect, which eventually seemed to have worked), but IP Kat does not reciprocate. To make matters worse, it blatantly censors polite comments of mine and even lets an anonymous commenter (unnamed person) label me a “foreign power”, “Daesh”, “communist/anarchistic”, or “anti-IP” (yes, no kidding!). This comment is not at all rational and some EPO workers have already responded to it online with some shock (new lows of character assassination).

“This comment is not at all rational and some EPO workers have already responded to it online with some shock (new lows of character assassination).”The comment almost seems like comedy, but the tone is serious. It says: “Reading all these insider comments above about “decreasing patent quality”, “criminal international organisation”, “applicants should go to national patent offices”, “admin council not caring about staff” etc..etc.. it appears to me that there might be some darker forces at play here. Who has any interest in discrediting a good employer and an organisation that delivers an excellent product in this way? Perhaps some foreign power? Perhaps some communist/anarchistic or anti-IP rights organisation? Daesh? Who knows.. It says a lot that a lot of confidential documents and information ends up on the website of the very secretive anti-IP organisation Techrights.”

Taking into account a pattern of IP Kat censorship (which readers have been telling us about for months), I kept my response to this polite (and this time I saved it too, as previously IP Kat just deleted my comment, of which I had no copy, and was unable to send me a copy upon repeated requests as there’s usually some ‘paper trail’ in E-mail form). Be the one to judge whether my rebuttal, which I thought was imperative as I had been ‘defamed’ (not just by Battistell’s standards), is worthy of deletion:

Wow. What an accusation. Congratulations for reducing everything to “foreign power” “Daesh” “communist/anarchistic” or “anti-IP”. This comment is not at all rational. First of all, “criminal international organisation” is not a term from me, “decreasing patent quality” is somewhat of a consensus and “applicants should go to national patent offices” is an opinion I’ve increasingly seen expressed and it gives me no solace as an ardent supporter of the EU (I’m a German living in the UK, so calling me “foreign power” is ludicrous, set aside “Daesh”); regarding “communist/anarchistic” — again, totally baseless. I support neither Communism not anarchism. As for “anti-IP”? I spent over a decade fighting against software patents. Everyone who has read Techrights that long (or even for one week) knows this. This opinion is expressed repeatedly, but those who try to discredit the messenger would rather misrepresent the messenger, whereupon criticism becomes trivial. I know these tricks, they’re commonplace. Remember that the patent system was all along dependent on quality control, not just for its its legitimacy but also for perceived value (per granted patent). The same goes for copyright law.

You said “it appears to me that there might be some darker forces at play here.” Right, let’s ignore how Battistelli has been ruining the EPO to the point where his approval rate is 0%; why not call his critics “dark forces” and believe that Battistelli’s critics are “snipers”, “Mafia”, and armed “Nazis” [sic]? Maybe the “darker forces” are not his critics; maybe they’re even anonymous comments in Google’s Blogspot. Who knows…

You called my site “secretive anti-IP organisation Techrights.” Actually, it’s one of the most transparent sites out there. We are huge proponents of transparency at all levels in society (see daily links), as it helps guard against corruption and mischief. We used to even publish IRC logs on a daily/weekly basis (since 2008) until Control Risks with the Investigative Unit started scraping them in an effort to crack down on people (they never succeeded because thankfully we’re technically ahead of them).

You also said: “It says a lot that a lot of confidential documents and information ends up on the website” (we don’t even publish everything; far from it!).

The last point serves to demonstrate that people with access to such documents and information trust Techrights more than they trust their bosses. Why use that to discredit me and my site?

I welcome people to challenge my track record and check if I’m “anti-IP” as “European patent examiner” claims. I have published nearly 21,000 articles in Techrights with focus on justice for software development (my profession). We in the software spheres have copyrights for code; software developers generally don’t wish to pursue patents because they know that such patents would slow down development, increase development cost, and potentially be used against them, quite famously by patent trolls (in the majority of cases NPEs rely on software patents and prey on SMEs that would settle without challenge).

Best regards and with true sincerity,

Roy Schestowitz

Quite a few comments have been approved since (including later ones in the same thread), so it’s abundantly clear they deleted mine. Apparently I have not even a right of self-defense, whereas pseudonymous/anonymous people comparing me to “Daesh” is absolutely fine. Well, Battistelli sure view as everything he doesn’t like as terrorism, as we’ve documented here before.

Out of frustration perhaps I decided to send a message to Merpel, whom I consider the most likely person to be empathetic among the Kats (she and I previously exchanged quite a few messages on the subject of comment moderation policy). I asked: “Can you please tell me who deleted my defence of myself from defamatory accusations like “Daesh”? And why?”

“Apparently I have not even a right of self-defense, whereas pseudonymous/anonymous people comparing me to “Daesh” is absolutely fine.”This is similar to previous inquiries like these, which eventually went unanswered. Jeremy is no longer the boss of the blog, so it’s hard to tell who has the last word on such matters. I later contacted Jeremy as well, but still, no reply….

Hours ago, seeing that IP Kat was still active in moderation (even on a Sunday evening) I just came to the conclusion that not much would come out of it and posted the following in social media:

It seems like @ipkat is censoring my polite comment again, even when I merely defend myself from defamatory accusations in #ipkat

please have a quick check to understand why @ipkat censors my comments on @EPOorg – fear of #censorship (again)?

Honestly, I can only hypothesise there’s a power play at #ipkat where several writers offer #epo and #upc protectionism, dodge the truth

Remember that there is no single person who is ‘the Kat’ (especially after Jeremy left), it’s just a collection of people from different background with potentially conflicting interests

What I worry about is that we’re all getting a sanitised view of comments and thus on @EPOorg happenings @JeremyTheKat

We need courageous writers with little loyalties to salaries/employers and power to speak truth to power

I don’t want to waste energy bickering over reporting standards with #ipkat but if you deal with thugs in the case of #epo then grow a pair

Remember that there is no single person who is ‘the Kat’ (especially after Jeremy left), so #ipkat is a mix of less cohesive writings

Reluctance to criticise #epo at #ipkat isn’t a Merpel thing. I think she’s genuinely concerned for EPO (not the management), has colleagues

#ipkat not consistent on EPO; it’s just a collection of people from different backgrounds with potentially conflicting interests

#ipkat should not be terrified of getting banned by #epo – it doesn’t need Office-bound/inbound traffic, people read after/outside work

The articles critical of #epo at #ipkat declined noticeably in terms of frequency after I told them EPO had threatened me.

Control over the view-ability of opinions is control over a story, like editorial control, or meddling in affairs rather than reporting them

I am increasingly convinced that only weeks after signing #FTIConsulting contract (they now “follow” me) #EPO started intimidating journos

Two things happened shortly after #epo signed #FTIConsulting contract (recently broadened): defaming the accused, bullying journalists

#FTIConsulting are scum of the Earth now just for promoting #fracking for their clients who in essence poison people to death [1/2]

#FTIConsulting became the #epo external apparatus before (apparently) taking control of journalists to defame ‘unwanted’ judges [2/2]

In my humble assessment, Judge C from the Appeal Boards and #SUEPo should start preparing legal action against #FTIConsulting

When Adelson bought Las Vegas media to defame a judge who had ruled against him (for his abuses), big scandal. Not when #FTIConsulting & #epo

#epo may still (for now) enjoy legal immunity and #battistelli laugh himself to sleep, but #FTIConsulting hasn’t that. Sue those bastards.

It’s probably no coincidence that European journalists received threats while fake ‘journos’ planted libel just weeks after #FTIConsulting deal

The number of #epo scandals is ever-growing, but journalists are intimidated into cooperation or silence

It may be time to revisit (probably later tonight) the EPO’s gagging campaign against the media. #epo #FTIConsulting #battistelli #de #nl

Will #battistelli write some blog post about #bangladesh on Monday to create the illusion that he cares and worries for people’s lives?

Still no reply from #ipkat or @JeremyTheKat regarding their #censorship of my defence, so I’ll take that as a “no comment”. They’re active.

There are a few more, but they may be less relevant rants. The above may seem less polite than my comment which was censored; well, that’s just what happens when you take people’s voices away and it may be fear (of the EPO) — not disdain — that causes it. We don’t know just how many other comments (regarding the EPO) are being silently deleted like this. People aren’t getting the full story! And they don’t have a platform in which to complain about censorship, hence they contact Techrights about it.

I don’t think that IP Kat folks hate me or anything like this (some chat with me amicably online, even in public). Maybe they don’t want my name to show up in their comments for fear of another censorship campaign by the EPO itself (blocking the entire IP Kat blog). As noted above, much of this weirdness began after I had informed them about the EPO's bullying (SLAPP) of bloggers. Don’t let the EPO management get its way and shape the story. That’s just what they want!

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

2 Comments

  1. One of those... said,

    July 4, 2016 at 11:54 am

    Gravatar

    I saw yours…
    http://ipkitten.blogspot.nl/2016/06/enlarged-board-publishes-decision-epo.html?showComment=1467550627509#c8174751953060828364

    Apparently took a while, for whatever reason….

    (I saw your comment before I saw this article)

    Best wishes

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    This morning Merpel sent me an E-mail saying that she had just published the comment. She said it was flagged as spam, but there were no obscenities or URLs in it.

What Else is New


  1. EPO Insiders Correct the Record of Benoît Battistelli’s Tyranny and Abuse of Law: “Legal Harassment and Retaliation”

    Battistelli’s record, as per EPO-FLIER 37, is a lot worse than the Office cares to tell stakeholders, who are already complaining about decline in patent quality



  2. Articles About a Unitary Patent System Are Lies and Marketing From Law Firms With 'Lawsuits Lust'

    Team UPC has grown louder with its lobbying efforts this past week; the same lies are being repeated without much of a challenge and press ownership plays a role in that



  3. The Decline in Patent Quality at the EPO Causes Frivolous Lawsuits That Only Lawyers Profit From

    The European Patent Office (EPO) will continue granting low-quality European Patents under the leadership of the Battistelli-'nominated' Frenchman, António Campinos; this is bad news for science and technology as that quite likely means a lot more lawsuits without merit (which only lawyers profit from)



  4. What Battistelli's Workers Think of His Latest EPO Propaganda

    "Modernising the EPO" is what Battistelli calls a plethora of human rights abuses and corruption



  5. Links 19/6/2018: Total War: WARHAMMER II Confirmed for GNU/Linux, DragonFlyBSD 5.2.2 Released

    Links for the day



  6. More Media Reports About Decline in Quality of European Patents (Granted by the EPO)

    What the media is saying about the letter from Grünecker, Hoffmann Eitle, Maiwald and Vossius & Partner whilst EPO communications shift attention to shallow puff pieces about how wonderful Benoît Battistelli is



  7. Beware Team UPC's Biggest Two Lies About the Unitary Patent (UPC)

    Claims that a Unified Patent Court (UPC) will commence next year are nothing but a fantasy of the Liar in Chief, Benoît Battistelli, who keeps telling lies to French media (some of which he passes EPO money to, just like he passes EPO money to his other employer)



  8. Diversity at the EPO

    Two decades of EPO with 16-17 years under the control of French Presidents (and nowadays predominantly French management in general with Inventor Award held in France almost half the time) is "diversity at the EPO"



  9. Orrin Hatch, Sponsored the Most by the Pharmaceutical Industry, Tries to Make Its Patents Immune From Scrutiny (PTAB)

    Orrin Hatch is the latest example of laws being up for sale, i.e. companies can 'buy' politicians to act as their 'couriers' and pass laws for them, including laws pertaining to patents



  10. Links 17/6/2018: Linux 4.18 RC1 and Deepin 15.6 Released

    Links for the day



  11. To Keep the Patent System Alive and Going Practitioners Will Have to Accept Compromises on Scope Being Narrowed

    35 U.S.C. § 101 still squashes a lot of software patents, reducing confidence in US patents; the only way to correct this is to reduce patent filings and file fewer lawsuits, judging their merit in advance based on precedents from higher courts



  12. The Affairs of the USPTO Have Turned Into Somewhat of a Battle Against the Courts, Which Are Simply Applying the Law to Invalidate US Patents

    The struggle between law, public interest, and the Cult of Patents (which only ever celebrates more patents and lawsuits) as observed in the midst of recent events in the United States



  13. Patent Marketing Disguised as Patent 'Advice'

    The meta-industry which profits from patents and lawsuits claims that it's guiding us and pursuing innovation, but in reality its sole goal is enriching itself, even if that means holding science back



  14. Microsoft is Still 'Cybermobbing' Its Competition Using Patent Trolls Such as Finjan

    In the "cybersecurity" space, a sub-domain where many software patents have been granted by the US patent office, the patent extortion by Microsoft-connected trolls (and Microsoft's 'protection' racket) seems to carry on; but Microsoft continues to insist that it has changed its ways



  15. Links 16/6/2018: LiMux Story, Okta Openwashing and More

    Links for the day



  16. The EPO's Response to the Open Letter About Decline in Patent Quality as the Latest Example of Arrogance and Resistance to Facts, Truth

    Sidestepping the existential crisis of the EPO (running out of work and issuing many questionable patents with expectation of impending layoffs), the PR people at the Office choose a facts-denying, face-saving 'damage control' strategy while staff speaks out, wholeheartedly agreeing with concerned stakeholders



  17. In the United States the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Which Assures Patent Quality, is Still Being Smeared by Law Firms That Profit From Patent Maximalism, Lawsuits

    Auditory roles which help ascertain high quality of patents (or invalidate low-quality patents, at least those pointed out by petitions) are being smeared, demonised as "death squads" and worked around using dirty tricks that are widely described as "scams"



  18. The 'Artificial Intelligence' (AI) Hype, Propped Up by Events of the European Patent Office (EPO), is Infectious and It Threatens Patent Quality Worldwide

    Having spread surrogate terms like “4IR” (somewhat of a 'mask' for software patents, by the EPO's own admission in the Gazette), the EPO continues with several more terms like “ICT” and now we’re grappling with terms like “AI”, which the media endlessly perpetuates these days (in relation to patents it de facto means little more than "clever algorithms")



  19. Links 15/6/2018: HP Chromebook X2 With GNU/Linux Software, Apple Admits and Closes a Back Door ('Loophole')

    Links for the day



  20. The '4iP Council' is a Megaphone of Team UPC and Team Battistelli at the EPO

    The EPO keeps demonstrating lack of interest in genuine patent quality (it uses buzzwords to compensate for deviation from the EPC and replaces humans with shoddy translators); it is being aided by law firms which work for patent trolls and think tanks that propel their interests



  21. Grünecker, Hoffmann Eitle, Maiwald and Vossius & Partner Find the Courage to Express Concerns About Battistelli's Ugly Legacy and Low Patent Quality

    The astounding levels of abuse at the EPO have caused some of the EPO's biggest stakeholders to speak out and lash out, condemning the Office for mismanagement amongst other things



  22. IAM Concludes Its Latest Anti-§ 101 Think Tank, Featuring Crooked Benoît Battistelli

    The attack on 35 U.S.C. § 101, which invalidates most if not all software patents, as seen through the lens of a Battistelli- and Iancu-led lobbying event (set up by IAM)



  23. Google Gets Told Off -- Even by the Typically Supportive EFF and TechDirt -- Over Patenting of Software

    The EFF's Daniel Nazer, as well as TechDirt's founder Mike Masnick, won't tolerate Google's misuse of Jarek Duda's work; the USPTO should generally reject all applications for software patents -- something which a former Commissioner for Patents at the USPTO seems to be accepting now (that such patents have no potency after Alice)



  24. From the Eastern District of Texas to Delaware, US Patent Litigation is (Overall) Still Declining

    Patent disputes/conflicts are increasingly being settled outside the courts and patents that aren't really potent/eligible are being eliminated or never brought forth at all



  25. Links 13/6/2018: Cockpit 170, Plasma 5.13, Krita 4.0.4

    Links for the day



  26. When the USPTO Grants Patents in Defiance of 35 U.S.C. § 101 the Courts Will Eventually Squash These Anyway

    Software/abstract patents, as per § 101 (Section 101) which relates to Alice Corp v CLS Bank at the US Supreme Court, are not valid in the United States, albeit one typically has to pay a fortune for a court battle to show it because the patent office (USPTO) is still far too lenient and careless



  27. Buzzwords and Three-Letter Acronyms Still Abused by the EPO to Grant a Lot of Patents on Algorithms

    Aided by Microsoft lobbying (with its very many patent trolls) as well as corrupt Battistelli, the push for software patenting under the guise of "artificial intelligence" ("AI") carries on, boosted by Battistelli's own "Pravda" (which he writes for), IAM Magazine



  28. The United States is Far Better Off With the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), So Why Do Lawyers Attack It?

    The anti-PTAB lobby (which is basically the pro-troll or pro-litigation lobby) continues to belittle and insult PTAB, having repeatedly failed to dismantle it; in the meantime PTAB is disarming several more patent trolls and removing from the system patents which were granted in error (as well as the associated lawsuits)



  29. Links 12/6/2018: Neovim 0.3 and Wine 3.10

    Links for the day



  30. Corrupt Benoît Battistelli Promotes Software Patents in IAM's Patent Trolls-Funded Event in the United States

    With less than 3 weeks remaining for Battistelli's term he engages in gross revisionism, lobbying, and even looting of the patent office


CoPilotCo

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

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts