07.03.16
IAM’s Latest Take on the UPC: Dead End For Another 2.5 Years (At Least) With No Effective Workarounds
Summary: The EPO-connected IAM expresses some rather pessimistic views regarding the Unitary Patent regime, which was constructed secretly by (and for) patent law firms
THE EPO may have gotten a friend (or friends) at IAM, but Battistelli does not always get what he wants (even after backing a pro-UPC event organised by IAM with funding from the EPO's PR firm). “The UPC,” some insiders noted, is definitely “not for DG3″ (which Battistelli is crushing right now) and earlier today (a Sunday even!) IAM’s editor in chief published “It would be politically wrong and morally indefensible to ignore the Brexit vote and plough on with the UPC,” echoing a lot of what we have said this past week. Is it realistic, pessimistic, or a sobering sip from a non-Kool-Aid harsh reality for IAM, a longtime advocate of the UPC? Here is the part about expectation of at least 2.5 years before anything happens: “Probably the biggest IP casualty of the Brexit vote is the proposed Unified Patent Court and the EU unitary patent regime. Until the UK leaves the EU its ratification is needed for the system to come into being, so realistically that probably means a minimum of two and a half years’ delay from here. Given all the time and money that has been invested in preparing for what was thought to be its imminent introduction, that’s a big blow.”
“Perhaps democracy is treated by patent circles the same way that EU authorities and the UK government treat democracy.”Regarding Team UPC’s (like so-called 'expert' teams) effort to work around the barrier, here is what IAM says: “Perhaps in part because of that investment, over the last week there have been several suggestions (here and here, for example) that there may be ways to bypass the Brexit vote in order to get the UPC up and running in any case. I think that would be a terrible mistake. [...] The UPC already has its critics. They consider it to be the result of a deal done behind closed doors, designed to benefit nobody but big corporations and patent lawyers. That may be an entirely mistaken viewpoint, but one way to reinforce it and to give it more traction is to ignore the implications of the Brexit vote and to concoct a way for the UK to participate in the UPC.”
IAM isn’t exactly happy with the situation. The closing words from the editor are “The people have spoken, the bastards.”
Yes, that’s very professional. Perhaps democracy is treated by patent circles the same way that EU authorities and the UK government treat democracy. The ‘bastards’… because back room deals of patent lawyers (complemented by photo-ops of Battistelli with heads of offices and politicians) should apparently instruct elected officials and steer Europe’s entire policy on patents in one fell swoop (against people’s will and for lawyers, who would profit even more from if the UPC ever became a reality). █
Content is available under CC-BY-SA