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

08.12.16

German Media Becomes Aware of Battistelli’s Defiance of the Very Basis of the EPO

Posted in Europe, Patents at 5:09 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

FTI Consulting helps the EPO ‘manage’ Dutch and German media (new contract recently signed), but that does not always work

EPC

Summary: The mass media is catching up with Battistelli’s alienation, segregation or isolation of the boards of appeal as part of his plan to phase them out of existence and maintain systematic exacerbation of patent quality for production’s sake, where “production” is inaccurately and improperly measured

THE media has been rather quiet regarding the EPO recently. The only “EPO” we see in the news is actually the drug, typically in relation to doping in the Olympic games.

“For your information,” told us one of several readers who alerted us about Süddeutsche Zeitung, the local paper “finally breaks the silence on the EPO…”

It is an article composed not by one of the more familiar writers (who ought to be quite familiar with EPO matters) and several people told us about it.

“I noticed the following article which has just appeared in the Süddeutsche Zeitung,” one reader told us. “It is mainly about the planned move of the EPO Boards of Appeal to Haar and it refers to the recent coverage of this story on Techrights.” (see for example [1, 2])

It is good to know that they follow Techrights. We typically get the stories here earlier than the corporate media.

“Battistelli’s plans to send the Boards of Appeal into “exile” in Haar are eerily reminiscent of the methods employed by Željko Topić during his time at the Croatian SIPO,” told us this reader, “as previously reported by Techrights” (see for example [1, 2])

“The difference,” continued this reader, “is that in his previous role Topić could only inflict damage on the IP system in Croatia. It seems that with Battistelli’s backing he has managed to manoeuvre himself into a position where he can now operate on a European scale.”

This is pretty bad as it brings what we once saw dubbed “Balkan standards” into the whole of Europe. We previously made note of exactly the above point (similarity to Topić’s history in Croatia).

These problems at the EPO are real and there is no solution in sight for them (not in summertime anyway). European Inventor Award 2017 (EIA2017) is already being planned as if everything will be fine for another year to come and the PR people are 'spamming' for it (there have been yet more examples of that since, albeit not as much if anything at all after we published the article). “Inventors who aren’t European nationals but have been granted a European patent can also be nominated for this Award,” the EPO stated in relation to EIA2017. It’s not “European Inventor Award 2017″ just as “European Patent Office” is not really European, I’ve told them, considering the fact that there is even discriminatory prioritisation which puts small European businesses at the back of the line.

“I would replace “in Europe” by “at the EPO”,” wrote Benjamin Henrion in response to software patents advocacy in Europe. I told him that that EPO “is not European, it just has the word “European” in its name, like Federal Express which isn’t Federal.” The EPC does not permit software patenting either, but that does not exactly prevent EPO management from trying to work around the exclusions.

A lot of the above relates to how detached from the EPC Battistelli’s EPO has gotten. It’s jaw-dropping that he managed to get away with it. The EPO now has a Brexit-like 'Constitutional Crisis' (dealing with deviation from founding documents like EPC and EU/Lisbon Treaty). Apparently, with help with his marionette called Kongstad, there is something Battistelli can do. A discussion about it is buried inside a very long, multi-page comments thread (the only remaining suitable place as IP Kat barely covers EPO these days). To quote the latest in this discussion:

Hmmm. Not sure I agree that the founding fathers “made arrangements” for arbitration. For example, they failed to provide a description of how arbitration should work, and who should be the arbiter.

At best, the PPI merely provides for the possibility of arbitration. However, there are many practical barriers to that possibility being exploited. For a start, there is the complete apathy upon the part of the representatives to the AC (who, it must be remembered, come from national offices whose income from renewal fees will increase if examination standards at the EPO are lowered). Then there is the total absence of any formal procedure for initiating a dispute.

So who do you see “getting the ball rolling” in this context?

Read Article 24 of the PPI.

I keep posting the text of the Article but the comment doesn’t seem to get through …

http://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/html/epc/2016/e/ma5.html

There is a very detailed description of how the arbitration is to take place.
The President of the ICJ has a role in selecting the committee.
It’s all there in black and white.
You just need to RTFM …

Do not overlook Article 23 (2) PPI:

If a Contracting State intends to submit a dispute to arbitration, it shall notify the Chairman of the Administrative Council, who shall forthwith inform each Contracting State of such notification.

That is how the ball starts rolling.
A notification is sent to the Chairman of the AC.
It’s that simply.

Thanks. You are quite correct, of course. Interesting that Art. 24(2) PPI states that “This panel shall be established as soon as possible after the Protocol enters into force and shall be revised each time this proves necessary”. This implies that the relevant panel should have been established almost 40 years ago. So which panel is it? And what rules of procedure for that panel have been established according to Art. 24(4)? Or are those yet further provisions of the EPC that the AC has neglected to follow?

I suspect that this could very well be the case.
To the best of my knowledge the details of the “panel” – if it has been established – have never been published.
Normally one would expect that kind of information to appear in the Official Journal. However there does not seem to be any explicit requirement for publication of the membership of the panel.

From that I conclude that either the provision has been ignored or else it’s a well-kept secret.

Can Battistelli simply bend the rules and make up new rules to justify his abuses retroactively? If some time in the past he simply broke the rules, as he did as far back as 2014 (if not further back), why does he get to keep his job and astronomical salary? EPO mouthpieces have certainly helped that and based on internal documents we saw, Battistelli still cites these same mouthpieces for ‘evidence’ and ‘support’ regarding patent quality. He is fooling the delegates at times when they growingly express concerns about patent quality. Battistelli is a chronic liar. Maybe he does this without even realising (the hallmark of sociopaths, learning to believe one’s own lies and reject critical voices).

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. Teaser: “Enriching Exchanges”

    Ahead of the fourteenth part in the Breton series this old tweet seems increasingly relevant



  2. Web Site Which Exposed Microsoft Crimes is Gone From the Web, But Copies Still Exist

    Reputation laundering operations of Microsoft tell us that Microsoft is a 'new' and 'reformed' company; but Comes v Microsoft documents serve to show that little has changed



  3. Understanding Thierry Breton: Socialising With the Elite

    "Bernadette Chirac is not the only Presidential widow with whom Valerie has close connections."



  4. Justice Peter Huber Speaking to a Front Group of Team UPC May Compromise the Integrity of the FCC and Its Outcomes

    The public reaction, even from some legal professionals, isn't too positive, seeing how judges from BVerfG (FCC) speak to the mouthpieces of Team UPC (biased and in the pockets of the litigation 'industry')



  5. Injustice at Every Level Would Simply Doom the Entire Patent System

    Repeated failure to restore the Rule of Law and enforce accountability/oversight in Europe's patent system renders the entire system moot; it is a case of adherence to basic constitutional pillars



  6. Understanding Thierry Breton: Thierry and the $100 Billion Man

    Thierry Breton's connections to the tax avoidance ploy of his friend Bernard Arnault



  7. Links 21/11/2019: Mesa 19.3.0 RC4, Canonical SPS

    Links for the day



  8. Links 21/11/2019: Charmed OSM, Mesa 19.2.5, DXVK 1.4.5, Zorin OS 15 Lite

    Links for the day



  9. Understanding Thierry Breton: Atos Healthcare - “The Ugly Face of Business”

    "...2,380 people died after their claim for employment and support allowance (ESA) ended because a work capability assessment (WCA) found that they were found fit for work."



  10. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, November 20, 2019

    IRC logs for Wednesday, November 20, 2019



  11. Microsoft Tim: Microsoft is Now Defending Linux

    The difference between fiction and reality



  12. Justice Peter Huber of the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) Calls 'Bullshit' a Rumour Nobody Really Spreads

    A sort of 'trial by media' (by Team UPC) compromises the integrity of the case (constitutional complaint) and can be interpreted as judges succumbing to lobbying/pressure from those who conspire to violate many constitutions across Europe for personal/financial gain



  13. Understanding Thierry Breton: What Thierry Did Next...

    "Whether by coincidence or not, when Atos announced in 2010 that it would acquire Siemens’ IT unit, it was the 32-year-old Macron at Rothschild who advised Breton on the deal."



  14. Links 20/11/2019: HONOR MagicBook With GNU/Linux, Coreboot 4.11, GNU Health Patchset 3.6.1

    Links for the day



  15. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, November 19, 2019

    IRC logs for Tuesday, November 19, 2019



  16. EPO Geared Towards Financial Exploitation of Europe Instead of Serving Europe

    For the financial benefit of law firms and patent offices (they profit from processing loads of patents and lawsuits) Europe is being reverted back to Medieval Times when exercising invention and free thought (or free coding) was a luxury of the rich alone



  17. Microsoft and IBM Are the Patent Trolls, They Won't Protect Us From Trolls

    "Microsoft has no taste" and IBM has no taste, either; they're lying to our collective face together with OIN and the 'Linux' Foundation



  18. How Ralph Nader Put It

    Ralph Nader on money in politics



  19. ZDNet (CBS) Associates GNU/Linux Users With ISIS

    Response to "US student was allegedly building a custom Gentoo Linux distro for ISIS," just published by ZDNet and composed by their biggest troll, Catalin Cimpanu



  20. Understanding Thierry Breton: Noël Forgeard and His “Golden Parachute”

    The end of the first half of the Breton series; in this particular part we continue to cover the EADS scandal and the second half of this series will include the EPO connections (the vote in a plenary for Breton's nomination is due 27/11)



  21. Links 19/11/2019: Zswap's B-Tree Search Implementation, WordPress 5.2.4

    Links for the day



  22. We've Already Entered the Era When Patents Should be Presumed Invalid

    The abundance of low-quality patents may mean short-term profits for patent offices and law firms; but we know at whose expense they are profiting and the legitimacy of patent systems suffers as a result



  23. Jean-Luc Breton

    Breton a champion of obstruction and obfuscation



  24. Understanding Thierry Breton: Insider-Trading Scandal at EADS

    Although Breton was not directly implicated in the insider trading scandal itself he did come under fire in 2007 for the role he played in a side-show to the main story, namely the payment of a generous € 8.5m severance package to Noël Forgeard when the EADS co-CEO was compelled to resign in June 2006.



  25. Startpage is Not Denying Its Betrayal of Privacy, It is Just Being Evasive

    They can't call you a liar if you issue a non-denying 'denial'; the "Roll Safe Think About It" meme seems applicable here



  26. Guest Post: Open Source is Not Free Software

    "If you look at human history, you can see lots of similar ideas, movements, intellectuals who are affected by the power of the ruling class like this."



  27. IRC Proceedings: Monday, November 18, 2019

    IRC logs for Monday, November 18, 2019



  28. Links 19/11/2019: HPC Focus and LibreOffice 6.4 Beta

    Links for the day



  29. Understanding Thierry Breton: “Rhodiagate” and the Vivendi Universal Affair

    When the "Rhodia affair" became the "Breton affair"



  30. Links 18/11/2019: Last Linux RC, OSMC Updated

    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