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

09.03.17

EPO Silencers of the Media – Part IV: Response to SLAPP Tactics From EPO Vice-President Željko Topić

Posted in Europe, Patents at 8:52 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

MoU signed by Bergot
From left to right: Željko Topić, Benoît Battistelli, and Elodie Bergot

Summary: Point-by-point rebuttal to a strategic lawsuit filed by Željko Topić to chill and silence media that covers scandals associated with him

THE ABOVE IMAGE demonstrates a lot of what’s wrong at the EPO, especially the management. It’s cliquish and resistant to any form of dissent/criticism. It’s intolerant of truth itself. As we explained a couple of days ago, Mrs. Bergot’s husband has just been promoted by Battistelli (both pictured above) to a top position (‘succession’) and Topić (also pictured) continues to be their ‘bulldog’. In part 1, part 2 and part 3 we explained the role these three people have played in attacking the media or bribing the media. In Croatia, as we showed in the previous part, the EPO was willing too use that liar, Mrs. Bergot, as a witness. What a rogue institution. It’s just trying to protect its image in the face of serious abuses.

Today we deal with a reply to the SLAPP action, initiated by Mr. Topić a couple of years ago. Here is the cover page.

Tjedno reply

Here is our explanation in English.


The respondent in the Zagreb SLAPP case Pn-195/15 is Udruga Pisac i Novinar (“Association of Writers and Journalists“) which is the publisher of the news portal Tjedno.hr.

The respondent is represented by the Zagreb law firm Farčić & Šarušić and its reply to the complaint of 19 January 2015 was submitted to the Municipal Civil Court of Zagreb in May 2016.

In the reply the respondent stated that it opposed the lawsuit and the plaintiff’s claims in their entirety and it contested the factual allegations on which the lawsuit is based.

The respondent started off by pointing out that the disputed article of 18 October 2014 entitled Laži Željka Topića u Munchenu” (“The Lies of Željko Topić in Munich”) referred to an article previously published on 15 May 2014 by the international Geneva-based journal Intellectual Property Watch (IPW) and to the associated “Right of Reply” by Vesna Stilin published on 6 October 2014.

It was noted that the IPW article raised questions about the suitability of the plaintiff (Topić) for his current position at the European Patent Organisation and also raised questions about his previous position as Director of the Croatian State Intellectual Property Office (DZIV).

Concerning the claim that Topić had appeared before the Municipal Criminal Court of Zagreb at a hearing held on 29 September 2014 “solely as a prosecutor” it was noted that at the same court, Topić had also been the defendant in a prosecution initiated by the former Assistant Director of the DZIV responsible for copyright and related rights in a previously filed procedure under no. K‑163/09. An attempt to merge the lawsuit against Topić with the later-filed counter-suit in which Topić unsuccessfully attempted to prosecute the former Assistant Director (K-26/11) was rejected because the procedures were at different stages due the gap in the filing dates. If the article created an impression that the plaintiff was subject to a criminal proceedings then the respondent considered this to correspond to the truth.

With respect to the allegations about the bribery of the former Minister (Dragan Primorac), the respondent referred to the Judgment of 26.01.2015 of the Municipal Criminal Court of Zagreb (no. 7 K-26/11) from which it is evident that there was a discussion of the alleged bribery during the court proceedings. Nothing in the published articles went beyond what had been discussed in the context of the court proceedings. Further evidence was submitted to support the claim of unlawful conduct on the part of the plaintiff (Topić), including two responses from the Croatian Government to the former Assistant Director of the DZIV in which the Croatian Government took the position that the plaintiff did not have authorisation for his actions (i.e. the procurement of an official vehicle for the use of the Minister).

Concerning Topić’s claim that he had privately acquired an official Mercedes in a lawful manner, the respondent referred to correspondence between the former Assistant Director of the DZIV and the Head of the Croatian Government and the Office of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, from which it is apparent that the allegation of misconduct on the part of Topić was a matter of interest for the Public Prosecutor.

Referring to Topić’s claim that a statement in the disputed article of 18 October 2014 relating to criminal charges for “unlawful changes in the structure of the state administration” was unfounded and solely intended to harm him, the respondent noted that the phrase in question had been used in correspondence with the County Public Prosecutor’s Office in which criticism had been expressed of the protracted and ineffective manner in which criminal investigations against the plaintiff were being conducted. It was pointed out that Topić himself had stated that the authority to decide on the structure of the state administration bodies lies with the Croatian Government and the respondent submitted a letter of the Croatian Government to the state administration bodies along with other evidence related to the initiation of official investigations relating to Topić and his conduct during his time as Director of the DZIV.

Concerning the allegations about Topić’s masters degree certificate, the respondent noted that the matter had been the subject of discussion after the supervisory Ministry of Science, Education and Sports received an anonymous letter claiming to be from former student colleagues at the Faculty of Economics of the University of Banja Luka, Republic of Srpska. The matter was subsequently investigated in more detail by a research journalist, who carried out a detailed analysis of the disputed master’s degree certificate. The journalist observed an unusual disproportion in the 12-year gap between the defence of the master thesis titled “Place and role of marketing research in the process of making investment decisions” and the award of the diploma itself. It was also noted that the plaintiff’s Curriculum Vitae described the degree as “Master of Business Administration” and it was claimed to have been awarded as a result of “Inter-University Postgraduate Study, Banjaluka-Zagreb-Belgrade-Sarajevo-Maribor 1989″.

http://www.mie.org.hu/aippi/topiccv.htm (we have made a local copy [PDF])

Despite its efforts the respondent could not find any record of such an inter-university postgraduate study program.

The respondent emphatically rejected the plaintiff’s allegation that it had systematically conducted a campaign against him. It was submitted that it had to be presumed that persons in certain positions such as the plaintiff, whether as Director of the DZIV or as Vice-President of the EPO, are under public scrutiny. Judicial proceedings, whether civil or criminal, conducted against the plaintiff by a number of people inside and outside the DZIV give rise to legitimate public interest.

Not only the respondent but also a number of other media both domestic and foreign had reported on the “Topić Affair”. The respondent is not the only journalist against which Željko Topič has tried to bring private prosecution charges for defamation.

The respondent rejected the claims that the disputed article of 18 October 2014 was conceived as sensationalist and contained untrue, defamatory and offensive allegations. The information in the article was obtained from official documents of state administration bodies, international institutions and other sources close to the DZIV and the EPO. The respondent noted that despite his allegations of defamation over a lengthy period, the plaintiff had not previously challenged other articles listed in the complaint.

The respondent disclaimed all responsibility for the translation and publication of its articles on other portals and stated that it had never sent or targeted distribution of its material to other portals. According to the terms of the Media Act anybody is free to refer to an article published online by citing the source and providing a link to the original article.

Referring to Topić’s claim that his appointment as Vice-President of EPO by the EPO Administrative Council was an international recognition for his work, the respondent pointed out that during the procedure leading to his appointment the plaintiff had apparently withheld information about criminal proceedings against him from the EPO Administrative Council as well as from the President of the EPO who proposed his appointment.

It was also noted that in a secret ballot held in March 2014 at the Hague branch of the EPO there had been thousands of “no” votes expressing a lack of confidence in the plaintiff (Topić), as well as the President of the EPO Benoît Battistelli and the Principal Director of Human Resources, Elodie Bergot, who has been proposed by the plaintiff as a witness. EPO employees had been striking for months to show dissatisfaction with the EPO management including the plaintiff.

The respondent disclaimed any responsibility for alleged problems relating to the private and family life of the plaintiff.

The respondent concluded its written submission by repeating that it contested the plaintiff’s claims in their entirety and it requested the court to dismiss the case with an award of costs against the plaintiff.

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 24/3/2019: Microsoft Does Not Change; Lots of FOSS Leftovers

    Links for the day



  2. Just Published: Irrational Ignorance at the Patent Office

    Iancu and his fellow Trump-appointed "swamp" at the USPTO are urged to consult academics rather than law firms in order to improve patent quality in the United States



  3. Microsoft Paid the Open Source Initiative. Now (a Year Later) Microsoft is in the Board of the Open Source Initiative.

    The progression of Microsoft entryism in FOSS-centric institutions (while buying key "assets" such as GitHub) isn't indicative of FOSS "winning" but of FOSS being infiltrated (to be undermined)



  4. Jim Zemlin's Linux Foundation Still Does Not Care About Linux Desktops

    We are saddened to see that the largest body associated with Linux (the kernel and more) is not really eager to see GNU/Linux success; it's mostly concerned about its bottom line (about $100,000,000 per annum)



  5. Links 23/3/2019: Falkon 3.1.0 and Tails 3.13.1

    Links for the day



  6. The Unified Patent Court is Dead, But Doubts Remain Over the EPO's Appeal Boards' Ability to Rule Independently Against Patents on Nature and Code

    Patents used to cover physical inventions (such as engines); nowadays this just isn't the case anymore and judges who can clarify these questions lack the freedom to think outside the box (and disobey patent maximalists' dogma)



  7. Patent Law Firms Still Desperate to Find New Ways to Resurrect Dead Software Patents in the United States

    There's no rebound and no profound changes that favour software patents; in fact, judging by caselaw, there's nothing even remotely like that



  8. Links 22/3/2019: Libinput 1.13 RC2 and Facebook's Latest Security Scandal

    Links for the day



  9. Why the UK Intellectual Property Office (UK-IPO) Cannot Ignore Judges, Whereas the EPO Can (and Does)

    The European Patent Convention (EPC) ceased to matter, judges' interpretation of it no longer matters either; the EPO exploits this to grant hundreds of thousands of dodgy software patents, then trumpet "growth"



  10. The European Patent Office Needs to Put Lives Before Profits

    Patents that pertain to health have always posed an ethical dilemma; the EPO apparently tackled this dilemma by altogether ignoring the rights and needs of patients (in favour of large corporations that benefit financially from poor people's mortality)



  11. “Criminal Organisation”

    Brazil's ex-President, Temer, is arrested (like other former presidents of Brazil); will the EPO's ex-President Battistelli ever be arrested (now that he lacks diplomatic immunity and hides at CEIPI)?



  12. Links 21/3/2019: Wayland 1.17.0, Samba 4.10.0, OpenShot 2.4.4 and Zorin Beta

    Links for the day



  13. Team UPC (Unitary Patent) is a Headless Chicken

    Team UPC's propaganda about the Unified Patent Court (UPC) has become so ridiculous that the pertinent firms do not wish to be identified



  14. António Campinos Makes Up Claims About Patent Quality, Only to be Rebutted by Examiners, Union (Anyone But the 'Puff Pieces' Industry)

    Battistelli's propagandistic style and self-serving 'studies' carry on; the notion of patent quality has been totally discarded and is nowadays lied about as facts get 'manufactured', then disseminated internally and externally



  15. Links 20/3/2019: Google Announces ‘Stadia’, Tails 3.13

    Links for the day



  16. CEN and CENELEC Agreement With the EPO Shows That It's Definitely the European Commission's 'Department'

    With headlines such as “EPO to collaborate on raising SEP awareness” it is clear to see that the Office lacks impartiality and the European Commission cannot pretend that the EPO is “dafür bin ich nicht zuständig” or “da kenne ich mich nicht aus”



  17. Decisions Made Inside the European Patent Organisation (EPO) Lack Credibility Because Examiners and Judges Lack Independence

    The lawless, merciless, Mafia-like culture left by Battistelli continues to haunt judges and examiners; how can one ever trust the Office (or the Organisation at large) to deliver true justice in adherence or compliance with the EPC?



  18. Team UPC Buries Its Credibility Deeper in the Grave

    The three Frenchmen at the top do not mention the UPC anymore; but those who promote it for a living (because they gambled on leveraging it for litigation galore) aren't giving up and in the process they perpetuate falsehoods



  19. The EPO Has Sadly Taken a Side and It's the Patent Trolls' Side

    Abandoning the whole rationale behind patents, the Office now led for almost a year by António Campinos prioritises neither science nor technology; it's all about granting as many patents (European monopolies) as possible for legal activity (applications, litigation and so on)



  20. Where the USPTO Stands on the Subject of Abstract Software Patents

    Not much is changing as we approach Easter and software patents are still fool's gold in the United States, no matter if they get granted or not



  21. Links 19/3/2019: Jetson/JetBot, Linux 5.0.3, Kodi Foundation Joins The Linux Foundation, and Firefox 66

    Links for the day



  22. Links 18/3/2019: Solus 4, Linux 5.1 RC1, Mesa 18.3.5, OSI Individual Member Election Won by Microsoft

    Links for the day



  23. Microsoft and Its Patent Trolls Continue Their Patent War, Including the War on Linux

    Microsoft is still preying on GNU/Linux using patents, notably software patents; it wants billions of dollars served on a silver platter in spite of claims that it reached a “truce” by joining the Open Invention Network and joining the LOT Network



  24. Director Iancu Generally Viewed as a Lapdog of Patent Trolls

    As Director of the Office, Mr. Iancu, a Trump appointee, not only fails to curb patent trolls; he actively defends them and he lowers barriers in order to better equip them with bogus patents that courts would reject (if the targets of extortion could afford a day in court)



  25. Links 17/3/2019: Google Console and IBM-Red Hat Merger Delay?

    Links for the day



  26. To Team UPC the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Has Become a Joke and the European Patent Office (EPO) Never Mentions It Anymore

    The EPO's frantic rally to the very bottom of patent quality may be celebrated by obedient media and patent law firms; to people who actually produce innovative things, however, this should be a worrisome trend and thankfully courts are getting in the way of this nefarious agenda; one of these courts is the FCC in Germany



  27. Links 16/3/2019: Knoppix Release and SUSE Independence

    Links for the day



  28. Stopping António Campinos and His Software Patents Agenda (Not Legal in Europe) Would Require Independent Courts

    Software patents continue to be granted (new tricks, loopholes and buzzwords) and judges who can put an end to that are being actively assaulted by those who aren't supposed to have any authority whatsoever over them (for decisions to be impartially delivered)



  29. The Linux Foundation Needs to Speak Out Against Microsoft's Ongoing (Continued) Patent Shakedown of OEMs That Ship Linux

    Zemlin actively thanks Microsoft while taking Microsoft money; he meanwhile ignores how Microsoft viciously attacks Linux using patents, revealing the degree to which his foundation, the “Linux Foundation” (not about Linux anymore, better described as Zemlin’s PAC), has been compromised



  30. Links 15/3/2019: Linux 5.0.2, Sublime Text 3.2

    Links for the day


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