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

06.15.17

Unitary Patent (UPC) Will Start “Real Soon” Now… Said Team UPC For So Many Years

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 6:05 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Related: New Paper Demonstrates That Unitary Patent (UPC) is Little More Than a Conspiracy of Patent ‘Professionals’ and Their Self Interest

Iraqi information minister

Summary: The Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA) is going nowhere fast, but those who spent time and money promoting it for self gain continue to lie to the press with overly optimistic predictions, unrealistic timelines, and Kool-Aid about the supposed ‘benefits’ of the Unified Patent Court (UPC)

SEEING some of the latest developments surrounding the mythical Unified Patent Court (UPC) is… well, pleasing to say the least. It was inevitably going to happen. It was going to blow up. The nonchalance and self-deception of Team UPC was all along in vain. All it accomplished is, clients came for bad advice (notably on UPC) and maybe even fell for it.

Writing to us about the UPC discussion, one reader told us: “Do you remember the former Iraqi information minister who gained a lot of (doubtful) fame for his bizarrely distorted statements during the third gulf war (see this)? Why am I suddenly reminded of this when reading some claims made in the UPC context?”

Earlier today we saw decent publications such as IP Watch actually quoting the serial liars from Bristows regarding the UPC. Don’t they know that Bristows staff will lie for profit? Even fabricate news (fake news) for the sake of the UPC?

Watch their cognitive dissonance in the wake of the election that led to May's coalition of chaos (possibly irreconcilable):

“We see no signs that the new political landscape is going to have any impact on the government’s plans concerning the UPC as they were prior to the election,” Rey-Alvite Villar told Intellectual Property Watch. The Conservative government is essentially the same, so there’s no reason why it would take a different position from the last government, he said.

Rey-Alvite Villar is not British and he works for a firm that’s part of the UPC conspiracy. Why even quote these people on this subject?

A more balanced interpretation of the situation came from Thorsten Bausch (Hoffmann Eitle), who said this:

“My own interpretation (and at this point this is mere speculation, but too tempting not to mention it!) is that the Bundesverfassungsgericht’s request to the President is based on the pending constitutional appeals against the EPO on which I wrote earlier in this blog. If the Bundesverfassungsgerichts is of the preliminary view that any of the pending four constitutional complaints may have merit, it would make eminent sense to request the President, at least for the time being, not to sign the UPCA ratification bills and first await the Federal Constitutional Court’s decision on these appeals, in order not to create faits accomplis. The decisions on these four appeals are expected later this year, but an exact point in time has not yet been defined.”

We don’t know who filed the complaint, but we can guess. We still inquire about it.

Benjamin Henrion, who thinks that Dr. Ingve Björn Stjerna may have initiated it all, asked, “German companies and citizens will also have to rely on non-legally binding automated translations from English?”

The UPC is undesirable for all sorts of reasons. Very few would benefit from it at the expense of the large majority of individuals and companies.

Regarding Brexit, one person wrote: “Correct from the UK point of view – we leave in interesting times.”

Leaving the UPC Agreement (UPCA) and possibly the EU as well.

Here is another new comment about it:

Does anyone know how long the Bundesverfassungsgericht will take to provide a ruling in this case? Indeed, is there any possibility for the proceedings to be accelerated, for example in view of the upcoming Brexit deadline?

I have not yet seen anyone seriously suggest that the UK can ratify the UPC after Brexit. However, if the BVerG takes as long with this case as is has done with the pending complaints relating to EP patents, then we could end up considering that very question in great detail.

The combination of the General Election, Brexit, and now the barriers at Europe’s largest economy may prove lethal. Even pro-UPC publications such as IAM have begun expressing the view that UPC might never happen. At all! We gave some quotes and examples yesterday.

As we have been pointing out quite a few times, many views that are sceptical of or hostile towards the UPC are being deleted by Team UPC. There is an aggressive campaign of deception. They think they are fighting an information war in which all means at their disposal are permissible. We last wrote about the censorship 2 days ago.

In a censorship-rich thread about the UPC (at IP Kat, where many comments mysteriously fall into a hole) someone is now speaking of “problems with the current UPC agreement,” stating that “everyone agrees that the current agreement would need to be amended…”

Squire Patton Boggs’ Florian Traub and Gillian M. Dennis wrote this article about it in which they conclude that the German Federal Constitutional Court “could prevent the launch of the Unified Patent Court and Unitary Patent regime in its current form altogether…”

Here is the concluding part: “The ratification of the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA) by Germany is likely to be delayed, knocking back, perhaps significantly, the launch date of the Unified Patent Court and Unitary Patent. It is expected that the Court will issue an order regarding the constitutional complaint in the next 6 months, raising the prospect of a delay of the Unified Patent Court and Unitary Patent into the first part of 2018. That presupposes, of course, that the complaint ultimately fails or the legislation can be remedied following directions by the Court. If however the Court finds the legislation unconstitutional in its entirety, it could prevent the launch of the Unified Patent Court and Unitary Patent regime in its current form altogether, as the regime cannot come into effect until Germany has ratified the UPCA.”

The European Union without United Kingdom cannot go ahead with UPC. As someone in the commens put it, the “current agreement wouldn’t enable the UK to stay in the UPC after Brexit”; Well, this is why it’s practically dead. The UPC in its current form says “UK” and “London” in it. If the UK won’t participate, then they need to rewrite the whole thing and restart the ratification process in every single member states. This can take years. And who knows what might happen in the mean time…

Here is one of the latest comments on the matter:

If G&P are to be believed (and I take this to be your position), the UPC – if it came into being under the provisions of the current UPC Agreement – would not form part of the national legal order of EU Member States. This means that bringing the UPC into being under the current Agreement would create a court that is not able to refer questions to the CJEU. This is because there would simply be no legal basis for the UPC to make such references.

The situation would be different if G&P were wrong in the sense that, under the current Agreement, the UPC would actually form part of the national legal order of EU Member States. In that event, the UPC could rely upon the authority of Article 267 TFEU to make references to the CJEU. The flip side of this, however, is that it would be impossible for the UK to continue to participate in the current UPC Agreement post-Brexit…

In other words, you can’t have your cake and eat it.

The response to the above says this:

…you are still talking about the current UPC agreement.

Why?

Everyone agrees that the current agreement wouldn’t enable the UK to stay in the UPC after Brexit. Everyone agrees that it therefore needs to be amended.

In those circumstances, I think it’s rather irrelevant to take an abstruse point about whether the UPC (under the current agreement) would form part of the legal order of national EU states.

But I think where G&P are coming from, perhaps, is that the UPCA is an international agreement, which doesn’t naturally form part of the EU legal order in and of itself. Currently it gets that status by reason of being a court common to a number of EU member states, and only EU member states. But it would lose that status when one of the states leaves the EU. Amendments are then required so that the EU legal order continues to apply in some other way.

Again, this can take a very long time and there is no guarantee that politicians will offer consent to the said amendments. The UPCA is basically stuck again and there is no imminent redemption, irrespective of what the UK does next.

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. Links 19/1/2018: Linux Journalism Fund, Grsecurity is SLAPPing Again

    Links for the day



  2. The EPO Ignores This Week's Decision Which Demonstrates Patent Scope Gone Awry; Software Patents Brought Up Again

    The worrisome growth of European Patents (EPs) — a 40% jump in one year in spite of decline in the number of patent applications — is a symptom of the poor judgment, induced largely by bad policies that impede examiners’ activities for the sake of so-called ‘production’; this week's decision regarding CRISPR is another wake-up call and software patents too need to be abolished (as a whole), in lieu with the European Patent Convention (EPC)



  3. WesternGeco v ION Geophysical (at the US Supreme Court) Won't Affect Patent Scope

    As WesternGeco v ION Geophysical is the main if not sole ‘major’ patent case that the US Supreme Court will deal with, it seems safe to say that nothing substantial will change for patent scope in the United States this year



  4. Links 18/1/2018: MenuLibre 2.1.4, Git 2.16 Released

    Links for the day



  5. Microsoft, Masking/Hiding Itself Behind Patent Trolls, is Still Engaging in Patent Extortion

    A review of Microsoft's ugly tactics, which involve coercion and extortion (for businesses to move to Azure and/or for OEMs to preload Microsoft software) while Microsoft-connected patent trolls help hide the "enforcement" element in this whole racket



  6. Patent Prosecution Highway: Low-Quality Patents for High-Frequency Patent Aggressors

    The EPO's race to the bottom of patent quality, combined with a "need for speed", is a recipe for disaster (except for litigation firms, patent bullies, and patent trolls)



  7. Press Coverage About the EPO Board Revoking Broad's CRISPR Patent

    Even though there's some decent coverage about yesterday's decision (e.g. from The Scientist), the patent microcosm googlebombs the news with stuff that serves to distract from or distort the outcome



  8. Links 17/1/2018: HHVM 3.24, WordPress 4.9.2

    Links for the day



  9. No Patents on Life (CRISPR), Said EPO Boards of Appeal Just a Few Hours Ago

    Broad spectacularly loses its key case, which may soon mean that any other patents on CRISPR too will be considered invalid



  10. Only Two Weeks on the Job, Judge Patrick Corcoran is Already Being Threatened by EPO Management

    The attack on a technical judge who is accused of relaying information many people had already relayed anyway (it was gossip at the whole Organisation for years) carries on as he is again being pushed around, just as many people predicted



  11. EPO Board of Appeal Has an Opportunity to Stop Controversial Patents on Life

    Patent maximalism at the EPO can be pushed aback slightly if the European appeal board decides to curtail CRISPR patents in a matter of days



  12. Links 16/1/2018: More on Barcelona, OSI at 20

    Links for the day



  13. 2018 Will be an Even Worse Year for Software Patents Because the US Supreme Court Shields Alice

    The latest picks (reviewed cases) of the Supreme Court of the United States signal another year with little or no hope for the software patents lobby; PTAB too is expected to endure after a record-breaking year, in which it invalidated a lot of software patents that had been erroneously granted



  14. Patent Trolls (Euphemised as “Public IP Companies”) Are Dying in the United States, But the Trouble Isn't Over

    The demise of various types of patent trolls, including publicly-traded trolls, is good news; but we take stock of the latest developments in order to better assess the remaining threat



  15. EPO Management and Team UPC Carry on Lying About Unified Patent Court, Sinking to New Lows in the Process

    At a loss for words over the loss of the Unitary Patent, Team UPC and Team Battistelli now blatantly lie and even get together with professional liars such as Watchtroll



  16. China Tightens Its Knot of Restrictive Rules and Patents

    Overzealous patent aggressors and patent trolls in China, in addition to an explosion in low-quality patents, may simply discourage companies from doing production/manufacturing there



  17. Microsoft's Patent Racket Has Just Been Broadened to Threaten GNU/Linux Users Who Don't Pay Microsoft 'Rents'

    Microsoft revisits its aggressive patent strategy which it failed to properly implement 12 years ago with Novell; it wants to 'collect' a patent tax on GNU/Linux and it uses patent trolls to make that easier



  18. EPO Scandals Played a Considerable Role in Sinking the Unified Patent Court (UPC)

    Today's press coverage about the UPC reinforces the idea that the EPO saga, culminating in despicable attacks on Patrick Corcoran (a judge), may doom the UPC once and for all (unless one believes Team UPC)



  19. J Nicholas Gross Thinks Professors Stop Being Professors If They're Not Patent Extremists Like Him

    The below-the-belt tactics of patent trolls and their allies show no signs of abatement and their tone reveals growing irritation and frustration (inability to sue and extort companies as easily as they used to)



  20. The US Supreme Court Has Just Denied Another Chance to Deal With a Case Similar to Alice (Potentially Impacting § 101)

    There is no sign that software patents will be rendered worthwhile any time in the near future, but proponents of software patents don't give up



  21. Litigation Roundup: Nintendo, TiVo, Apple, Samsung, Huawei, Philips, UMC

    The latest high-profile legal battles, spanning a growing number of nations and increasingly representing a political shift as well



  22. Roundup of Patent News From Canada, South America and Australia

    A few bits and pieces of news from around the world, serving to highlight patent trends in parts of the world where the patent offices haven't much international clout/impact



  23. Links 15/1/2018: Linux 4.15 RC8, Wine 3.0 RC6

    Links for the day



  24. PTAB is Being Demeaned, But Only by the Very Entities One Ought to Expect (Because They Hate Patent Justice/Quality)

    The latest rants/scorn against PTAB -- leaning on cases such as Wi-Fi One v Broadcom or entities like Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, Apple etc. -- are all coming from firms and people who profit from low-quality patents



  25. If Ericsson and Its Patent Trolls (Like Avanci and Unwired Planet) Cannot Make It, the Patent Microcosm Will Perish

    The demise of patent-asserting/patent assertion business models (trolling or enforcement by proxy) may see front groups/media supportive of it diminishing as well; this appears to be happening already



  26. European Patent Office Causes Physical Harm to Employees, Then Fires Them

    Another one (among many) EPO documents about the alarming physical wellbeing of EPO employees and the management’s attitude towards the issue



  27. Battistelli Was Always (Right From the Start and Since Candidacy) All About Money

    “I have always admired creative people, inventors, those who, through their passion and their work, bring about scientific progress or artistic evolution. I was not blessed with such talent myself,” explained the EPO‘s President when pursuing his current job (for which he was barely qualified and probably not eligible because of his political work)



  28. “Under the Intergovernmental EPC System It is Difficult to Speak of a Functional Separation of Powers”

    An illustration of the glaring deficiency that now prevails and cannot be tolerated as long as the goal is to ensure democratic functionality; absence of the role of Separation of Powers (or Rule of Law) at the EPO is evident now that Battistelli not only controls the Council (using EPO budget) but also blatantly attacks the independence of the Boards of Appeal



  29. The Patent Microcosm Thinks It's Wonderful That IP3 is Selling Stupid Patents, Ignores Far More Important News

    IP3, which we've always considered to be nothing but a parasite, does what it does best and those who love stupid patents consider it to be some sort of victory



  30. Automotives, Artificial Intelligence, Internet of Things and Industry 4.0 Among the Buzz Terms Used to Bypass Alice and the EPC Nowadays

    In order to make prior art search a lot harder and in order to make software patents look legitimate (even in various courtrooms) the patent microcosm and greedy patent offices embrace buzzwords


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