Post-Jeremy IP Kat Deems It OK to Publish Anonymous Comment Comparing Techrights to “Daesh” While Censoring Polite Response to That
Censorship in IP Kat. Again.
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,
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! █