06.29.17
Posted in Europe, Patents at 11:50 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
So any person granted a European Patent can expect that his/her patent may be revoked/subjected to axing without even a pertinent review/trial
Reference: 1998–2002 Argentine great depression (few Argentinians deposit anything in a bank account since)
Summary: The EPO takes away from people something which they thought they had, spurring distrust and anger at the Office and ultimately devaluing EPs (perceived value)
YESTERDAY we wrote, however briefly, about CIPA's objections to the narrowing of patent scope where the patents pertain to life (not even the USPTO is that stupid). In spite of CIPA’s views (it is basically a nasty lobbying group of patent maximalists), the EPO made is official (warning: epo.org link) that, in its own words: “On a proposal of the European Patent Office its Administrative Council took a decision to amend the relevant Regulations in order to exclude from patentability plants and animals exclusively obtained by an essentially biological breeding process.”
“What does that do to confidence in EPs and the EPO in general?”So basically, after people spent a fortune pursuing patents on such things the EPO formally admits that it granted patents in error. It’s not merely a suspension but a de facto axing of patents.
Holy ****.
What does that do to confidence in EPs and the EPO in general? That’s a pretty major change at the Administrative Council. As someone put it in response to a tweet: “Can you change the law retroactively and at one days notice? Can the administration council change what can be patented?”
Well, apparently so.
This has already been covered by IP Watch and apparently nowhere else (that we could find). It mostly reproduces the official statement. To quote:
The European Patent Office today issued a clarification about the patenting of plant and animal products, putting it in line with a European Commission clarification that such products obtained through a biological breeding process should not be patentable.
Further reporting will follow as more details emerge. The documents are still in the hands of the EPO Administrative Council, but will be made available to the public soon, according to the EPO.
We will report on this as soon as we know more, but herein lies the danger of overgranting patents — something which Battistelli actively strives for in the name of so-called ‘production’. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 11:24 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Installing abject tyranny, one step at a time
Summary: Staff of the European Patent Office loses yet more of its basic rights, after the Administrative Council basically nods at/accepts one of Battistelli’s most controversial proposals
THE EPO is in shambles. We at Techrights hope to save it from the tyranny, but 3 years down the line it seems like “mission impossible” because national representatives, namely heads of national patent offices, are largely complicit (with few exceptions here and there).
“…34 Delegations (with 4 abstentions BTW the 4 who abstained are NL, IT, IE, LI) in favour of Battistelli authoritarian reforms…”
–Anonymous“Devastating for the staff!”
That’s how one person described what happened yesterday at The Hague. “The nail in the coffin,” the person added. To quote a source that is familiar with what happened:
the propositions of Battistelli related to the RFPSS (change of structure and composition) is not supported. Copy is back on table for later…
an amazing (read appalling) 34 Delegations (with 4 abstentions BTW the 4 who abstained are NL, IT, IE, LI) in favour of Battistelli authoritarian reforms and changes of ServRegs with regards to internal appeal committee, disciplinary procedures, new dismissal procedure for incompetence (be assured that this will not apply to top managers but to Fussvolk for sure), possibility to cease personal belongings in your office, 200 EUR fees for lodging internal appeals from 01.07 etc etc etc)
sighs………. another day in paradise
It’s as if delegates did not listen at all to what SUEPO an the Staff Committee had warned them about.
“To be clear, this is still Kongstad’s Council, but the votes from delegates are not his own.”Responding to “Silence is Golden,” a new comment said: “And then the states voted 34-0 to pass BB’s [Battistelli's] new and ridiculous discipline and investigation rules. Power corrupts. Some people.”
To be clear, this is still Kongstad’s Council, but the votes from delegates are not his own. So what hope is there that things will improve under the new boss, who many EPO insiders try to study these days? We will write more about him later…
Apparently, on top of all that, the Council decided or agreed on getting rid of the “irksome” judge, whose dismissal (or “house ban”) was described as “irksome” by his colleagues.
“This week is a very bad week for EPO staff, many of whom will be on strike today (until Tuesday).”Does the Council care about staff of the EPO? Well, demonstrably no.
This week is a very bad week for EPO staff, many of whom will be on strike today (until Tuesday). Some of them already look into applying for a job elsewhere, realising perhaps that there won’t be much left after Battistelli leaves. Will the vacancy for his job be published next week as planned? We shall see… █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 9:11 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Older: UPC Preparatory Committee Puts the Brakes on UPC Amid Brexit and Growing Uncertainty
Alexander Ramsay, Bristows, and the UPC gold rush
Summary: The Unified Patent Court (UPC) isn’t making progress, but those who are keen to spin, mislead, distort facts and even falsify/fabricate statements would have us believe otherwise
THE UPC is stuck. It may in fact be dead like the TPP. But will Team UPC give up and admit defeat? Of course not. They have been lying about the UPC for a living for a number of years; they lied to officials, they lied to businesses, they lied to the media and so on.
“They have been lying about the UPC for a living for a number of years; they lied to officials, they lied to businesses, they lied to the media and so on.”Expecting Team UPC to abandon the UPC is like expecting a carpenter to abandon the hammer, the shoemaker to stop obsessing over shoes or asking a model to stop staring at the mirror. No matter what happens, Team UPC will always lie, if not just to others than at least to itself. Self deception can be a moralising exercise. Without the UPC, their whole raison d’être (or at least lobbying) was all in vain.
The EPO has said absolutely nothing about what happened in Germany. Who can blame the EPO? It’s so accustomed to outright lying, so lies by omission are a lesser offense.
“Is UPC ratification back on track in the UK? In a nutshell, no. Not even close.”Yesterday, in IP Kat comments, some jokes started to surface about DUP. Is the “UP” in “DUP” “Unitary Patent”? Well, basically, Bristows are at it again, having lied, cheated, etc. They gave the illusion of UPC progress first in their blog and then in IP Kat (which actually attracts some readers, unlike their lousy blog). They would have us believe that the UK officially resumes UPC ratification and all is back on track. But as always, look at what Bristows is hiding or distracting from. A lot of wishful thinkers (as we noted yesterday) have already relayed the propaganda from Bristows. Debunking is important because few sites out there have both the interest and the information required to refute the nonsense (of which there have been heaps for a number of years).
Our rule of thumb: whenever hearing something about UPC always fact-check and trace things back to the source (with extra scepticism when those who stand to personally gain from the UPC speak).
Is UPC ratification back on track in the UK? In a nutshell, no. Not even close.
“The longer it [the UPC] is delayed, the less its value.”
–AnonymousThe comments are joking about the Conservative government, especially in light of its desperate deal with an antiscientific political party. “I suppose the DUP were in favour if the UPC then,” one comment joked. “Very progressive.”
Another asked: “Does anybody know what the DUP’s policy on IP is? Do they have a stance on the Unitary Patent?”
One answer was this: “I’ll go out on a limb and presume that they are not particularly concerned by IP or the UPC, as long as they don’t involve popery or dinosaurs…”
Suffice to say, DUP has nothing to do with it. In fact, UPC is not at all on the agenda as Tories scramble to merely survive and form a government. To believe otherwise is to either be misinformed or very, exceedingly gullible. Just unfold any British newspapers these days; it’s pretty chaotic. UPC is mentioned nowhere. At all! The EPO says not a word about it, except when Battistelli lies to impress a docile crowd.
“Better to say, the greater the delay, the less likely it is to happen. Ever!”Regarding the “DUP Bribe” (the latest scandal here, since Monday), one person wrote this: “Agreed, but as they aren’t particularly concerned, there is every possibility that if they believe the government thinks the UPC or any other IP issue is particularly important they will ask for another few £100m to agree to it.”
Someone in another thread, seemingly a UPC proponent, wrote somewhat panicky that “The longer it [the UPC] is delayed, the less its value.”
Better to say, the greater the delay, the less likely it is to happen. Ever!
Another new comment about it alludes to the deadlock in Germany, which adds perhaps another half a year in delays (and may result in Germany abandoning the UPC in its current form).
To quote:
In my understanding, the “imbalance” is that an opponent in EP opposition proceedings after unsuccessfully going through the full EPO proceedings can try again in DE nullity proceedings. The opponent gets two shots and needs only one hit.
As far as I know, it is not different for an opponent in DE opposition proceedings. I don’t see why it should matter that DE opposition proceedings have one more instance.
There is a difference in that both DE opposition proceedings and DE nullity proceedings are handled by the BPatG (and reviewed by the BGH). But is the BPatG/BGH in nullity proceedings in any way bound by the final decision in the DE opposition proceedings between the same parties on the same patent?
Only if the BPatG/BGH is legally bound (to the extent that the facts are the same etc.) would I agree that the EP/DE imbalance is not present in the DE/DE system. But then, if the imbalance in the EP/DE system really is a problem, the solution is simple: make sure that the BPatG/BGH is legally bound in the same way by a final decision in EPO opposition proceedings.
(It seems the German courts don’t require much in the way of standing in nullity proceedings and do not mind strawmen. So imbalance appears to be ingrained in the German national patent system. Likely there is nothing unconstitutional about it.)
One could think that any reasonable person would accept that Europe’s largest economy is now the centre of attention (or deadlock), not somewhere like Estonia (Bristows pays for nonsensical ‘articles’ about Estonia, to give an illusion of progress).
“We assume IP Kat doesn’t want accuracy anymore, just marketing.”
Yesterday, citing UPC propagandists (the UPC Preparatory Committee, which is essentially a misnomer as it's a bunch of moles), IP Kat again allowed propagandists from Bristows replicate and expand propaganda from their misleading blog. In our last article about the UPC we debunked what they had published in their blog. But on they go at IP Kat, never mind if commenters will identify all the holes very quickly (they can always just delete ‘inconvenient’ comments, as they habitually do these days).
The first comment, which was miraculously approved, was responding to the propagandists from Bristows by gently and politely debunking them as follows: “What difference will the Conference recess (Parliament breaks up again for party conferences between 14 September and 9 October) make to this estimate? It leaves a very short time to sort out the committees (a process which is only barely starting now and won’t be complete until at least September) and have them consider the legislation. Isn’t it more likely this will happen in October – and we are not certain how long it will take. And won’t the Scottish order have to be in place too? When is that realistically expected to happen? January sunrise seems a little optimistic to me. I suspect a month or two later but we’re all guessing…”
“Amid German constitutional challenge on UPC – what happened to Ireland’s constit[utional] referendum on the esoteric subject of patents and the UPC?”
–Luke McDonaghIt’s worse than guessing. It’s lobbying. We assume IP Kat doesn’t want accuracy anymore, just marketing. It’s reputational downfall. Bristows can’t help leaving a mess of fake news and propaganda in at least 3 blogs and paid-for ‘articles’ (they pay some sites to repost their fake news). Frankly, someone needs to clean up this mess. That someone certainly isn’t Alex Robinson, who wrote to me a couple of days ago to defend Bristows, just before he too started relaying that fake optimism. Citing Bristows, Alex Robinson said that “a draft Order was laid before the Westminster Parliament. This is subject to the so-called “affirmative resolution” procedure, requiring scrutiny by both Houses of Parliament. Despite the “Brexit” vote, no serious opposition is expected to the passage of the legislation.”
He wrote about that again, under the banner “preparatory work continues” and he also tweeted a lot about it [1, 2, 3, 4], totally ignoring the part about Germany (not alternative facts but inconvenient facts).
“UPC (Unified Patent Court) comes to a screeching halt due to Germany…”
–Rolf ClaessenHow could he miss it, omitting the parts that don’t suit Team UPC? Well, linking to the same text from Ramsay (himself a core part of Team UPC, sometimes appearing in conjunction with the EPO’s dedicated UPC liar, Margot Fröhlinger), some people took note of his comments on Germany.
Dr. Luke McDonagh asked: “Amid German constitutional challenge on #UPC – what happened to Ireland’s constit referendum on the esoteric subject of #patents & the #UPC?”
Even a UPC proponent from Germany moaned as follows: “#GRUR2017 – Germany’s most important IP conference. 3 days. More than 1000 attendees. Number of session on #UPC: 0 #spilledmilk”
Maybe because they know that it’s anything but certain. It’s a dead dream perhaps…
“UPC/UP project runs into more trouble as suit lodged in the German Constitutional Court…”
–Anne HargreavesRolf Claessen wrote that the “UPC (Unified Patent Court) comes to a screeching halt due to Germany http://bit.ly/2tnhAUS” (linking to the same text as Bristows but interpreting it differently).
Another professional, Anne Hargreaves, said that the “UPC/UP project runs into more trouble as suit lodged in the German Constitutional Court https://www.unified-patent-court.org/news/message-chair” (again, linking to the same text as Bristows but interpreting it differently).
Bristows staff should apply for a job at Donald Trump’s office. Apparently they need people to help distort reality. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 7:39 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Christoph Ernst will take over the Organisation within 3 months
Battistelli bragged to the Council about lack of strikes (after he had passed rules to restrict those), but for the second year in a row he is the cause of strikes
Summary: The demise of the EPO as a desirable employer, as an accountable employer, and a reputable employer that actually examines patent applications properly to assure high quality of European Patents (EPs)
SUEPO has not been saying much recently, but the EPO will be on strike tomorrow and Mr. Ernst has just been chosen to replace Kongstad. As far as we are aware, no media has covered that; only one publication, IP Watch, mentioned the strike, which will last 4 days (including the weekend).
Citing the report from IP Watch, which in turn references Techrights, one person wrote (correctly) that “EPO staff will be on strike soon again (sadly) since there is still absolutely ZERO social dialogue but more of the same despicable authoritarian policies, in an Orwellian atmosphere by the current French direction team.”
Another person indicated that he or she is looking to leave the EPO. Here is the full message:
The new disciplinary rules have been criticized by the anonymous “Flyer team”. Internally, we have access to the proposed text. It foresees absolutely no check and balance. On a superficial reading, it appears reasonable as there are various committees which are supposed to give an opinion. But it is like patents: the claims actually define a very short procedure after which the President can fire you without justification and without recourse.
It is an open secret in the Office that the President is trying to get rid of everyone over 40 and replace them with far cheaper examiners, younger and more docile. Word is that they would be on 3-years contracts, but that is not even necessary if they can be fired at will.
But firing people is always messy and it is far easier if they leave “voluntarily”. To ensure “voluntary” compliance, the title under which you can now be fired is called “professional incompetence”. “Professional incompetence”, as defined in the proposed text, simply means you failed to meet the production objective your superior set for you. It is public knowledge that last year objective was to grant 40% more patents.
But everything will happen behind closed doors. I expect that the older examiners in my directorate will have a nice visit of their new boss after summer which will simply tell them that they can leave “voluntarily” or get fired for “professional incompetence” before the end of the year. Because being declared “incompetent” by the EPO means that nobody will ever hire you for doing patent work, people will “voluntarily” comply.
Signed: an examiner over 40, looking for a new job outside the Patent world.
With Battistelli at the helm, many layoffs seem inevitable anyway. Maybe that was just Battistelli’s intention all along; maybe he wanted to destroy the EPO and bring rise to the UPC.
Either way, staff is truly fed up and today is the last day at the EPO until Tuesday (for those who go on strike). Why is the press ignoring this? We already notified some people in the media, yet they seem quite reluctant to point this out. Shouldn’t stakeholders be informed? Why is the EPO saying nothing (in its news section, Twitter and so on)?
Attention has meanwhile turned to Christoph Ernst. Ernst’s “main quality seems to be his aptitude to discretion which in a corrupt organisation like the EPO,” one new comment says today. It was composed yesterday, but it didn’t show up until today (due to moderation). Here it is in full, hidden well inside a very old post — the final post:
News from the 1st day of the Administrative Council in Den Haag :
1 – Christoph Ernst (DE) former head of the German Delegation at the Administrative Council of the EPO is the new Chair of the Administrative Council.
Mr Ernst is a man with a proven record of performance: indeed his silence during the entire mandate of Battistelli was remarkable, close to perfection. Mr Ernst never found the need to voice concerns when colleagues committed suicide (like for 10 days in Munich), when fundamental rights of staff were violated, when the DG3 Judge was suspended (more than 2 years…), when 3 staff reps were fired and other 3 downgraded after Orwellian trials, when quality of patents dropped due to unhealthy production pressure etc etc etc). His main quality seems to be his aptitude to discretion which in a corrupt organisation like the EPO explains that he just got promoted.
2 – Alberto Casado (SP, current VP2) becomes new VP1 in replacement of the flemmish dinausor Minnoye. Casado is known (and praised) for its exceptional competence in the various Patent Procedures as well as extensive mastering of Patent Law. No doubt that he was THE expert to task with managing 55000 highly educated examiners and formality officers. Some will say that his capacity to express himself in English may be close to that of Manuel in Falwty Towers but they are pathetic losers. In fact Alberto Casado speaks fluently Spanish which is alreaddy something.
And during this time, as the Titanic was sinking, the Orchestra was playing music…
“Mr Ernst (DE) is the new chief of AC at the EPO,” said the next comment. “Is this the beginning of the end for the French dictator?”
There is at least one more year of Battistelli; we very strongly doubt Ernst will work to oust him any earlier than that.
“Battistelli and Bergot ought to see their immunity lifted and sued for what they did,” said the next comment, which is also quoteworthy:
Battistelli and Bergot (PD HR) clais that psycho related sicknesses at EPO have decreased… Sure since they fire (mentally but not only) sick staff.
Fortunately the first case has arrived at ILO this week and the judges are not amused : http://www.ilo.org/dyn/triblex/triblexmain.fullText?p_lang=en&p_judgment_no=3887&p_language_code=EN
Battistelli and Bergot ought to see their immunity lifted and sued for what they did
We are going to examine what comes out of ILO. This may take some time to analyse. Either way, ILO is in many ways viewed as complicit (and rightly so, as we have shown recently). Secret meetings with EPO management and not with staff representatives of the EPO say quite a lot about ILO’s bias.
Ernst gives glimmer of hope, but not hope that Battistelli will be ousted, held accountable etc. He will hold Battistelli accountable as much as Obama held Bush accountable (e.g. for torture, Iraq war). As we pointed out before (last year), Ernst has little to say on Battistelli’s proposals (usually abstains), almost nothing to say about patent scope, and based on what we have shown here recently, the EPO is overgranting for those who are overpatenting, devaluing the whole lot (EPs) with shoddy, rushed assessments (the fault of management that pressures examiners to do this). Even the USPTO is stricter than the EPO now.
Here is a spammy ‘article’ or press release from yesterday. Is it still something to show off when an EP is granted/confirmed/defended? Considering how shallow the examination (or search) can be these days? Even the examiners are complaining; they must do this or lose their job (which may also mean losing one’s home, relocating the whole family to another country again).
We were deeply disgusted to see this tweet from CIPA yesterday. CIPA, as we put it last night, is a “pile of trash pretending to be a legitimate lobby” (also lobbying a lot for the UPC by lying to and manipulating officials). CIPA has been running over everything, including truth itself, for the UPC (the subject of our next post). It recently infiltrated IP Kat as well.
“We have “grave concerns” about EPO proposals to exclude certain organisms from patentability,” CIPA wrote, linking to its site and copying on it some patent maximalists, even IP Kat.
Well, the EPO publicly admitted that it went too far and decided that obeying laws was more important in this case than faking ‘production’. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Content is available under CC-BY-SA