09.03.17

Gemini version available ♊︎

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 in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

Decor ᶃ Gemini Space

Below is a Web proxy. We recommend getting a Gemini client/browser.

Black/white/grey bullet button This post is also available in Gemini over at this address (requires a Gemini client/browser to open).

Decor ✐ Cross-references

Black/white/grey bullet button Pages that cross-reference this one, if any exist, are listed below or will be listed below over time.

Decor ▢ Respond and Discuss

Black/white/grey bullet button If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

DecorWhat Else is New


  1. Jim Zemlin's Wife is Funded by Puppies (Microsoft)

    Jim Zemlin — like his wife — is bagging millions from Microsoft, but that’s clearly a conflict of interest for the Linux Foundation



  2. Links 18/05/2022: More Defections From WordPress to Gemini

    Links for the day



  3. Links 18/05/2022: PikaScript and cURL's Annual User Survey

    Links for the day



  4. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, May 17, 2022

    IRC logs for Tuesday, May 17, 2022



  5. Phoronix: Microsoft and Phoronix Sponsor (and Close Microsoft Partner) AMD All Over the Place

    When you’re taking massive 'gifts' from AMD (and also some from Microsoft) maybe it’s not surprising that editorial decisions change somewhat…



  6. EPO Has No F-ing Oversight

    Earlier today SUEPO mentioned this new article demonstrating that EPO President António Campinos can very obviously and blatantly violate the Code of Conduct of the Office without facing any consequences; there are translations too, so the report is now available in four languages



  7. [Meme] Linux-Rejecting Foundation

    The Linux Foundation never really leads by example; by default, it uses proprietary software



  8. Linux Foundation Almost Never uses Open Source

    The Linux Foundation uses proprietary software (look where they hire and take money from) and be sure they're probably not even aware of it



  9. Links 17/05/2022: Many More Games on GNU/Linux, YaST Development Report

    Links for the day



  10. Links 17/05/2022: Rocky Linux 8.6 and Budgie Desktop in Fedora

    Links for the day



  11. Patent Examiners Rising Up Against EPO Abuse

    Unhappy with the law-breaking autocracy (the EPO‘s management breaks the law as a matter of routine), fast-deteriorating working conditions and rapidly-decreasing quality of work (or lack of compliance with the law), workers have escalated further, topping off strikes and industrial actions with a large-scale petition



  12. [Meme] What Managers (Really) Mean by Acting Professionally

    The myth of 'professionalism' needs to die along with the façade of conformity as prerequisite for employment (Linus Torvalds can work just fine in a bathrobe in his own home)



  13. Internal Poll: 93% of European Patent Office (EPO) Workers Are Unhappy With the EPO

    On top of strike/s and industrial action/s there are now also petitions; at the EPO, almost all staff is "disgruntled" because of utterly corrupt and defunct leadership



  14. Links 17/05/2022: OpenSUSE Leap 15.4 Release Candidate

    Links for the day



  15. IRC Proceedings: Monday, May 16, 2022

    IRC logs for Monday, May 16, 2022



  16. Links 16/05/2022: FreeBSD 13.1 and Inkscape 1.2 Released

    Links for the day



  17. Archiving Latest Posts in Geminispace (Like a Dated Web Directory But for Gemini)

    Earlier today we saw several more people crossing over from the World Wide Web to Gemini; we're trying to make a decent aggregator and archive for the rapidly-expanding Geminispace, which will soon have 2,500 capsules that are known to Lupa alone



  18. Microsoft Vidal Does Not Want to Listen (USPTO is Just for Megacorporations)

    Microsoft Vidal knows her real bosses. They’re international corporations (multinationals like Microsoft), not American people.



  19. Links 16/05/2022: China Advances on GNU/Linux and Maui 2.1.2 is Out

    Links for the day



  20. Jim Zemlin: Chief Revenue Officer in 'Linux' Seat-Selling Foundation

    Board seats in the Linux Foundation are basically a product on sale, based internal documents



  21. Reminder: Linux Foundation's Last IRS Filing is Very Old (Same Year the CFO Left)

    People really need to ask the Linux Foundation, directly, why its filings are years behind; this seems like a sensitive subject



  22. Linux Foundation Does Not Speak for GNU/Linux Users

    There's a serious problem in the "Linux" world as the so-called 'Linux' Foundation claims to speak for us (the GNU/Linux community) while in fact speaking against us (on the payroll of those looking to extinguish us)



  23. IBM's Lennart Poettering on Breaking Software for Pseudo Novelty

    Recently-uploaded ELCE 2011 clip shows a panel with Linus Torvalds, Alan Cox, Thomas Gleixner, Paul McKenney, and Lennart Poettering (relevant to novelty or perceived novelty that mostly degrades the experience of longtime users, e.g. Wayland and systemd)



  24. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, May 15, 2022

    IRC logs for Sunday, May 15, 2022



  25. Links 15/05/2022: Linux 5.18 RC7 and Calls for More Mass Surveillance

    Links for the day



  26. Audio: Mark Shuttleworth Marketed to Young Males, With Sexy Pictures

    The Web is rotting away, old links become broken links within months or years, so I’ve decided to encode a 3-minute segment of the whole as Ogg



  27. What a Difference Half a Decade Makes (When Linux Foundation is 'Having Fun')

    Media shaming campaigns may have taken their toll on the founder of Linux, who is now bossed by someone who rejects Linux and is married to a Microsoft booster. Like Richard Stallman under FSF guidance (and conditions for return, mostly for fear of further media assaults and attack dogs), he has become a more publicity-shy and private person. The Linux Foundation has in effect reduced the founder of what it’s called after (Linux) into a weekly release manager and mascot, whose brand it is gradually diluting/cheapening.



  28. Links 15/05/2022: GNU libiconv 1.17

    Links for the day



  29. [Meme] Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court (UPC) Cannot Be Reconciled With the Law

    Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court (UPC)? Impossible. But Team UPC counts on an endless torrent of fake news managing to convince you (and more importantly politicians) otherwise.



  30. Even Team Battistelli is Sometimes Admitting -- Out in Public! -- That Unified Patent Court (UPC) is Neither Legal Nor Desirable

    Daniel X. Thomas and other people who are “too old to punish” (consequences to their career profoundly minimised owing to seniority) are among those who push back against the Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court (UPC); any sane person — not a career-climbing litigation zealot — can identify the pertinent facts and realise that what’s going on here is an injustice of unprecedented proportions in the patent discipline


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