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

03.17.17

Whenever Battistelli’s EPO Says Something These Days, Safest to Just Assume It’s a Lie (Because It Typically Is)

Posted in Europe, Patents at 6:07 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Now it’s the Dutch people’s turn to be omitted from the map of Europe (in order to hide -3.6%)

Poland missing

Summary: The unscientific (if not antiscientific) attitude of the EPO is showing again, and this time this is done in order to pretend that the EPO cares about European SMEs and that patent application numbers are on the rise (they are not)

THE EPO does its reputation a great disservice. It inherited the same nasty tendencies which Battistelli is so renowned or notorious for. Every day we catch the EPO in a lie or two (sometimes even more) and it’s not even funny. It has become rather obnoxious because even when the EPO gets caught in a lie and people point it out the EPO will simply continue to tell that same lie.

“It has become rather obnoxious because even when the EPO gets caught in a lie and people point it out the EPO will simply continue to tell that same lie.”Yesterday, as usual, the EPO offered “retweets” only for Philips (to its fake "followers"), e.g. this one on Thursday, but not for SMEs. The EPO is working for large corporations, at the expense of SMEs, but has to pretend otherwise. Those large corporations typically use their patents against SMEs (either deterrent or actual legal action).

“Small entities accounted 34% of all patent applicants at the EPO in 2016,” the EPO wrote the other day. “See the numbers http://buzz.mw/b1wsf_l cc @EU_Growth”

“The EPO is working for large corporations, at the expense of SMEs, but has to pretend otherwise. Those large corporations typically use their patents against SMEs (either deterrent or actual legal action).”We have already rebutted this tweet some days ago by pointing out that the EPO lobbies for the SME-hostile UPC and actively discriminates against patent applications from SMEs.

Thankfully, not only us have challenged the EPO on the above claim. The EPO has been caught lying so much that one has to be sceptical and ask followup questions, as this account did:

1. What is your methodology,sample?
2. How is this % found?
3. How did you examine the 3 criteria of #SME definition?

This kind of sceptical approach is especially required when dealing with an Office with a terrible track record (a lot of lying as of late).

“As we all know by now, the EPO tends to cherry-pick data in order to suit the desired Big Lie du jour.”The EPO’s response came in three parts [1, 2, 3] and said: “We took a statistically representative random sample of patent applications treated by the EPO in 2016. This analysis bases on the definition of SMEs of the European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/smes/ We verify information on the SMEs criteria using government and commercial databases combined with web research.”

I then asked them: “How big a sample?” (notice that their original tweet clearly said “34% of all patent applicants”)

Obviously they did not reply, but mind the fact that in the above claim they didn’t mention it was a stochastic sample which was partial (given that they had to resort to “web research” — based on their own admission — it would be infeasible to deal with a very large sample). As we all know by now, the EPO tends to cherry-pick data in order to suit the desired Big Lie du jour. Here is a recent reminder of it (from earlier this week):

So, dear readers, has the EPO refrained from further lies to that effect? Hell no. The Dodgy Patent Office, where no truths are tolerated, made up another excuse yesterday by writing: “European patent applications from the Netherlands down by 3.6 after 4% growth in 2015 http://buzz.mw/b1wwv_l cc @BOIPnews”

“See what kind of “science” one gets from the EPO these days? This does no favours to an institution which is supposed to represent the interests of European scientists.”It’s that same spin again (as with Poland), and Holland is missing from the map! (again as in the case of Poland, this map was altogether omitted)

See what kind of “science” one gets from the EPO these days? This does no favours to an institution which is supposed to represent the interests of European scientists. It’s a pariah organisation, akin to a think tank.

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. Anton_P said,

    March 17, 2017 at 7:20 am

    Gravatar

    What figure for the number of applications did they base this on though? Is it the false number which includes all PCT applications which designate the EPO or the real one of direct filings and PCT filings entering the regional phase at the EPO (which is a lot lower and decreased last year)?

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    This drawback is one among several explored a year ago (in relation to 2015 ‘results’). I invite anyone who reads this and has access to the full data to get in touch. The more we know, the closer we get to the truth… and further away from Battistelli’s “alternative facts”.

What Else is New


  1. Links 19/2/2018: Linux 4.16 RC2, Nintendo Switch Now Full-fledged GNU/Linux

    Links for the day



  2. PTAB Continues to Invalidate a Lot of Software Patents and to Stop Patent Examiners From Issuing Them

    Erasure of software patents by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) carries on unabated in spite of attempts to cause controversy and disdain towards PTAB



  3. The Patent 'Industry' Likes to Mention Berkheimer and Aatrix to Give the Mere Impression of Section 101/Alice Weakness

    Contrary to what patent maximalists keep saying about Berkheimer and Aatrix (two decisions of the Federal Circuit from earlier this month, both dealing with Alice-type challenges), neither actually changed anything in any substantial way



  4. Makan Delrahim is Wrong; Patents Are a Major Antitrust Problem, Sometimes Disguised Using Trolls Somewhere Like the Eastern District of Texas

    Debates and open disagreements over the stance of the lobbyist who is the current United States Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division



  5. Patent Trolls Watch: Microsoft-Connected Intellectual Ventures, Finjan, and Rumour of Technicolor-InterDigital Buyout

    Connections between various patent trolls and some patent troll statistics which have been circulated lately



  6. Software Patents Trickle in After § 101/Alice, But Courts Would Not Honour Them Anyway

    The dawn of § 101/Alice, which in principle eliminates almost every software patent, means that applicants find themselves having to utilise loopholes to fool examiners, but that's unlikely to impress judges (if they ever come to assessing these patents)



  7. In Aatrix v Green Shades the Court is Not Tolerating Software Patents But Merely Inquires/Wonders Whether the Patents at Hand Are Abstract

    Aatrix alleges patent infringement by Green Shades, but whether the patents at hand are abstract or not remains to be seen; this is not what patent maximalists claim it to be ("A Valentine for Software Patent Owners" or "valentine for patentee")



  8. An Indoctrinated Minority is Maintaining the Illusion That Patent Policy is to Blame for All or Most Problems of the United States

    The zealots who want to patent everything under the Sun and sue everyone under the Sun blame nations in the east (where the Sun rises) for all their misfortunes; this has reached somewhat ludicrous levels



  9. Berkheimer Decision is Still Being Spun by the Anti-Section 101/Alice Lobby

    12 days after Berkheimer v HP Inc. the patent maximalists continue to paint this decision as a game changer with regards to patent scope; the reality, however, is that this decision will soon be forgotten about and will have no substantial effect on either PTAB or Alice (because it's about neither of these)



  10. Academic Patent Immunity is Laughable and Academics Are Influenced by Corporate Money (for Steering Patent Agenda)

    Universities appear to have become battlegrounds in the war between practicing entities and a bunch of parasites who make a living out of litigation and patent bubbles



  11. UPC Optimism Languishes Even Among Paid UPC Propagandists Such as IAM

    Even voices which are attempting to give UPC momentum that it clearly lacks admit that things aren't looking well; the UK is not ratifying and Germany make take years to look into constitutional barriers



  12. Bejin Bieneman Props Up the Disgraced Randall Rader for Litigation Agenda

    Randall Rader keeps hanging out with the litigation 'industry' -- the very same 'industry' which he served in a closeted fashion when he was Chief Judge of the Federal Circuit (and vocal proponent of software patents, patent trolls and so on)



  13. With Stambler v Mastercard, Patent Maximalists Are Hoping to Prop Up Software Patents and Damage PTAB

    The patent 'industry' is hoping to persuade the highest US court to weaken the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), for PTAB is making patent lawsuits a lot harder and raises the threshold for patent eligibility



  14. Apple Discovers That Its Patent Disputes Are a Losing Battle Which Only Lawyers Win (Profit From)

    By pouring a lot of money and energy into the 'litigation card' Apple lost focus and it's also losing some key cases, as its patents are simply not strong enough



  15. The Patent Microcosm Takes Berkheimer v HP Out of Context to Pretend PTAB Disregards Fact-Finding Process

    In view or in light of a recent decision (excerpt above), patent maximalists who are afraid of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) try to paint it as inherently unjust and uncaring for facts



  16. Microsoft Has Left RPX, But RPX Now Pays a Microsoft Patent Troll, Intellectual Ventures

    The patent/litigation arms race keeps getting a little more complicated, as the 'arms' are being passed around to new and old entities that do nothing but shake-downs



  17. UPC Has Done Nothing for Europe Except Destruction of the EPO and Imminent Layoffs Due to Lack of Applications and Lowered Value of European Patents

    The Unified Patent Court (UPC) is merely a distant dream or a fantasy for litigators; to everyone else the UPC lobby has done nothing but damage, including potentially irreparable damage to the European Patent Office, which is declining very sharply



  18. Links 17/2/2018: Mesa 17.3.4, Wine 3.2, Go 1.10

    Links for the day



  19. Patent Trolls Are Thwarted by Judges, But Patent Lawyers View Them as a 'Business' Opportunity

    Patent lawyers are salivating over the idea that trolls may be coming to their state/s; owing to courts and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) other trolls' software patents get invalidated



  20. Microsoft's Patent Moves: Dominion Harbor, Intellectual Ventures, Intellectual Discovery, NEC and Uber

    A look at some of the latest moves and twists, as patents change hands and there are still signs of Microsoft's 'hidden hand'



  21. Links 15/2/2018: GNOME 3.28 Beta, Rust 1.24

    Links for the day



  22. Bavarian State Parliament Has Upcoming Debate About Issues Which Can Thwart UPC for Good

    An upcoming debate about Battistelli's attacks on the EPO Boards of Appeal will open an old can of worms, which serves to show why UPC is a non-starter



  23. The EPO is Being Destroyed and There's Nothing Left to Replace It Except National Patent Offices

    It looks like Battistelli is setting up the European Patent Office (EPO) for mass layoffs; in fact, it looks as though he is so certain that the UPC will materialise that he obsesses over "validation" for mass litigation worldwide, departing from a "model office" that used to lead the world in terms of patent quality and workers' welfare/conditions



  24. IBM is Getting Desperate and Now Suing Microsoft Over Lost Staff, Not Just Suing Everyone Using Patents

    IBM's policy when it comes to patents, not to mention its alignment with patent extremists, gives room for thought if not deep concern; the company rapidly becomes more and more like a troll



  25. In Microsoft's Lawsuit Against Corel the Only Winner is the Lawyers

    The outcome of the old Microsoft v Corel lawsuit reaffirms a trend; companies with deep pockets harass their competitors, knowing that the legal bills are more cumbersome to the defendants; there's a similar example today in Cisco v Arista Networks



  26. The Latest Lies About Unitary Patent (UPC) and the EPO

    Lobbying defies facts; we are once again seeing some easily-debunked talking points from those who stand to benefit from the UPC and mass litigation



  27. Speech Deficit and No Freedom of Association at the EPO

    True information cannot be disseminated at the EPO and justice too is beyond elusive; this poses a threat to the EPO's future, not only to its already-damaged reputation



  28. No, Britain is Not Ratifying 'Unitary' Anything, But Team UPC Insinuates It Will (Desperate Effort to Affect Tomorrow's Outcome)

    Contrary to several misleading headlines from Bristows (in its blog and others'), the UPC isn't happening and isn't coming to the UK; it all amounts to lobbying (by setting false expectations)



  29. The EPO's Paid Promotion of Software Patents Gets Patent Maximalists All Excited and Emboldened

    The software patents advocacy from Battistelli (and his cohorts) isn't just a spit in the face of European Parliament but also the EPC; but patent scope seems to no longer exist or matter under his watch, as all he cares about is granting as many patents as possible, irrespective of real quality/legitimacy/merit



  30. Andrei Iancu Begins His USPTO Career While Former USPTO Director (and Now Paid Lobbyist) Keeps Meddling in Office Affairs

    The USPTO, which is supposed to be a government branch (loosely speaking) is being lobbied by former officials, who are now being paid by private corporations to help influence and shape policies; this damages the image of the Office and harms its independence from corporate influence


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