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

09.06.17

Juve Reveals That Ingve Stjerna is the ‘UPC Slayer’ While the EPO Continues to Lobby, Mislead

Posted in Europe, Patents at 5:17 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Ingve book cover

Summary: Dr. Ingve Björn Stjerna is publicly named as the person behind the UPC deadlock; the EPO is meanwhile pretending — as arrogantly as always — that no such deadlock exists and urges people to pretend it’s already a reality

THIS may be news to some (if not many). The main barrier to UPC (other than Brexit) is a complaint from Ingve Stjerna, a longtime watcher and critic of the UPC. For those who don’t know yet, the UPC is a scourge and a curse to Europe. It helps nobody but the litigation ‘industry’ (or those leaning to litigation for profit, notably patent trolls).

“It helps nobody but the litigation ‘industry’ (or those leaning to litigation for profit, notably patent trolls).”This post will not delve into the technicalities of the UPC or the legal impediment to implementation thereof. Instead, assuming many readers already heard the above news, we’ll go through some of the responses.

There is a battle right now; the battle happens — among other places — at the EPO. The litigation microcosm, which we often refer to as “Team UPC” (similar agenda to Team Battistelli), wants to sacrifice the entire continent for a quick buck (or euro). These people lie to the media about it and even hijack the voices of Europeans (individuals and businesses). This isn’t new. They have been doing this for nearly a decade. Battistelli has, at a personal capacity, been doing this since before he was EPO President (Ingve Stjerna covered that at the time and it’s in his latest book).

“Battistelli has, at a personal capacity, been doing this since before he was EPO President (Ingve Stjerna covered that at the time and it’s in his latest book).”Bech-Bruun’s Martin Dræbye Gantzhorn and Emil Bjerrum wrote and published this article earlier this week. It speaks about the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in the US and it strives to expand the scope of patents in Europe. While the EPO and SIPO (China’s, not Croatia’s) move towards granting patents on just everything, in the United States the courts say “No” to a growing number of US patents (a subject we shall cover later tonight in a separate post).

Here is a portion from the new article of Dræbye Gantzhorn and Emil Bjerrum:

A US District Court decision of 4 August 2017 reduced the chances of patenting diagnostic methods. This decision illustrates well the challenges of applying for a patent on medical devices for diagnostic methods in the USA and EU.

[...]

The EPO does not exercise the same restrictive approach of distinguishing an invention from discoveries. Instead, however, the applicant will have to make sure that the invention is not categorised as a diagnostic method, the description of which includes all of the four steps from examination, collection and testing of data to the attribution of the deviation to a particular clinical picture.

So patent maximalists led by Battistelli and Team UPC can simply mis-classify a patent application in an effort to get around the rules. Curiously enough, the judge who is on house ban at the EPO (against the rules) issued a ruling against something akin to the above; it was one of his latest decisions if not last decision. When people do their work properly at the EPO (namely scrutiny of patents) they tend to get punished. Such is the implicit policy of Battistelli: grant or perish.

“So patent maximalists led by Battistelli and Team UPC can simply mis-classify a patent application in an effort to get around the rules.”Now, about the UPC, Team UPC’s Fiona Nicolson (Bristows) would have us believe that there’s progress in the UK. Nothing can happen here (really!) because of Brexit, yet this article that’s promoted by Team UPC is titled “Draft UPC legislation laid in Scottish Parliament”.

I too could have something “laid” in the Scottish Parliament when I visited it 3 years ago; that does not imply anything is going to happen. Almost nobody from Team UPC even bothered mentioning that over a month ago UPC was dropped from the agenda of the English/British Parliament. How come?

Similarly, back when Germany and German politicians with financial stake in the UPC did nefarious things, Team UPC was either silent or lied about it. Bristows in particular did a whole marathon of hogwash. They didn’t want political riggers to get caught.

“Similarly, back when Germany and German politicians with financial stake in the UPC did nefarious things, Team UPC was either silent or lied about it.”Thankfully, Ingve Stjerna explained to the authorities what Team UPC had done. He even went through videos of a 1AM hearing to manually identify faces of a few dozen people among ~600 politicians. The latest article/paper from him explained what happened and it’s truly jaw-dropping that Germany would stoop to such a level; it makes even Volkswagen look honest!

It’s no longer a secret that Ingve Stjerna is the man behind the complaint. SUEPO was exceptionally quick to take note of it. Earlier today, within just hours of this original report, SUEPO took note of Mathieu Klos‏’s article. It’s all about Ingve Stjerna. He first tweeted this in German and later in English too. “Identity revealed,” it said, “author of Constitutional Court case against UPC is Düsseldorf lawyer Ingve Stjerna” (he also tweeted teasers about it, like: “More details about DE constitutional complaint soon on juve.de”)

Ingve Stjerna is a brave man; we already dropped some hints about it (as soon as the complaint had been filed), but now everybody knows.

From the original article: “Lange wurde spekuliert, wer Ende März das Beschwerdeverfahren gegen den UPC-Vertrag beim Bundesverfassungsgericht eingereicht hat. Wie JUVE nun aus Politikkreisen erfuhr, handelt es sich bei dem Beschwerdeführer um den Düsseldorfer Rechtsanwalt Dr. Ingve Stjerna.”

“Ingve Stjerna is a brave man; we already dropped some hints about it (as soon as the complaint had been filed), but now everybody knows.”We wish to caution EPO staff; Team UPC will target the individual, starting personal attacks as part of their lobbying campaign behind the scenes. Team UPC has always been nothing but a collective of thugs and liars. Just like Battistelli. Some of them already tried to compare me to “Daesh” or paint me as some kind of Russian stooge.

In reality, Ingve Stjerna is a friend of EPO examiners in the sense that he can redeem examination from the planned obsolescence/collapse of EPO (to make way for UPC and mass litigation).

Watch closely the behaviour of Team UPC in the coming few days or weeks. “What everybody thought” was the response of one German UPC booster (to the news about Ingve Stjerna).

“Duesseldorf-based Attorney at law Dr. Ingve Stjerna filed appeal against #UPC before German Constitutional Court… as I then speculated,” wrote another UPC booster.

“Watch closely the behaviour of Team UPC in the coming few days or weeks.”A longtime UPC critic, Francisco Moreno‏, said this to me in Spanish: “Sí, hay que ser valiente para poner en riesgo ingresos de tu gremio. No es casualidad que ejerza como abogado independiente (no en despacho)”

It means something like: “Yes, you have to be brave to put at risk your Guild.”

Someone who choose the Twitter handle “UPCtracker” (quite revealing of the bias) said: “This riddle out of the way, time to focus on the substance of the complaint, if any.”

So now starts the nitpicking, which will likely be accompanied by some personal attacks or scandalisation (same tactics used against Michelle Lee, PTAB and others).

“So now starts the nitpicking, which will likely be accompanied by some personal attacks or scandalisation (same tactics used against Michelle Lee, PTAB and others).”Translation of the above tweet, as I responded to UPCtracker, is: “we don’t care if UPC is a series of serious abuses, we just need it to profit from lawsuits!”

Meanwhile, the EPO acts as though it’s business as usual for the UPC. There’s an ongoing event about it in Munich, organised by Managing IP who told me today [1, 2]: “UPC judges: Last we heard – ‘recruitment process postponed’. NB: UPC Advisory & Administrative Committees responsible for appointments. [...] UPC judges: Administrative Committee (and others) established after UPC Agreement Protocol enters into force. Germany’s consent required.”

Nothing is happening any time soon. We wrote about it just over a week ago. There is no Unitary Patent, the UPC may already be a lame duck/dead, but watch what the EPO tweeted today: “What is the procedure for obtaining a #UnitaryPatent from the EPO? This guide explains it…”

“Stop advertising things that don’t exist,” I told them.

“Meanwhile, the EPO acts as though it’s business as usual for the UPC.”Remember when Team UPC advertised job openings for jobs that did not exist and probably never ever will exist? Will the EPO be taking payments for UPC-related services even though the UPC may never exist at all (anywhere)?

Also today the EPO was once again advertising a Margot Fröhlinger event that we mentioned before. “There’s still time to register for the #roadshow with @EPOorg,” it said. Why would anyone want to pay to be lied to by the EPO about the UPC? It beggars belief!

Managing IP‘s coverage from its event the other day said this: “Raimund Lutz says Germany’s Constitutional Court has asked for comments on the UPC lawsuit. #EUPatent2017 # unitary patent”

We wrote about it yesterday (specifically this tweet). UPCtracker (the real name is Thomas Adam by the way) responded with: “Q is: who was asked. If EPO (Mr Lutz’ employer) specifically, could imply structure of BoA relevant for DE constitutional cmplt after all?!”

“By all means notice how, even though great uncertainty looms over the UPC, the EPO and Managing IP (working together in Munich this week) carry on pretending it’s inevitable.”I told him that the “EPO is not a patent office but a lobbying operation that’s exempt from the law and commits crimes” (no accountability, so why not?)

Managing IP mentioned the UPC in another tweet from its event: “Final session: UPC’s ADR Centre & patent arbitration. @ClemensHeusch: CJEU in Huawei said 3rd party decision, so not mediation #EUPATENT2017 pic.twitter.com/lD1tzkjsMp”

By all means notice how, even though great uncertainty looms over the UPC, the EPO and Managing IP (working together in Munich this week) carry on pretending it’s inevitable. As Ingve Stjerna put it earlier this year, “the UPCA’s entry into force is not at all secured.”

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. “US Inventor” is a “Bucket of Deplorables” Not Worthy of Media Coverage

    Jan Wolfe of Reuters treats a fringe group called “US Inventor” as though it's a conservative voice rather than a bunch of patent extremists pretending to be inventors



  2. Team Battistelli's Attacks on the EPO Boards of Appeal Predate the Illegal Sanctions Against a Judge

    A walk back along memory lane reveals that Battistelli has, all along, suppressed and marginalised DG3 members, in order to cement total control over the entire Organisation, not just the Office



  3. PTAB is Safe, the Patent Extremists Just Try to Scandalise It Out of Sheer Desperation

    The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), which gave powers to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) through inter partes reviews (IPRs), has no imminent threats, not potent ones anyway



  4. Update on the EPO's Crackdown on the Boards of Appeal

    Demand of 35% increases from the boards serves to show that Battistelli now does to the 'independent' judges what he already did to examiners at the Office



  5. The Lobbyists Are Trying to Subvert US Law in Favour of Patent Predators

    Mingorance, Kappos, Underweiser and other lobbyists for the software patents agenda (paid by firms like Microsoft and IBM) keep trying to undo progress, notably the bans on software patents



  6. Patent Trolls Based in East Texas Are Affected Very Critically by TC Heartland

    The latest situation in Texas (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in particular), which according to new analyses is the target of legal scrutiny for the 'loopholes' it provided to patent trolls in search of easy legal battles



  7. Alice Remains a Strong Precedential Decision and the Media Has Turned Against Software Patents

    The momentum against the scourge of software patents and the desperation among patent 'professionals' (people who don't create/develop/invent) is growing



  8. Harm Still Caused by Granted Software Patents

    A roundup of recent (past week's) announcements, including legal actions, contingent upon software patents in an age when software patents bear no real legitimacy



  9. Links 18/11/2017: Raspberry Digital Signage 10, New Nano

    Links for the day



  10. 23,000 Posts

    23,000 blog posts milestone reached in 11 years



  11. BlackBerry Cannot Sell Phones and Apple Looks Like the Next BlackBerry (a Pile of Patents)

    The lifecycle of mobile giants seems to typically end in patent shakedown, as Apple loses its business to Android just like Nokia and BlackBerry lost it to Apple



  12. EFF and CCIA Use Docket Navigator and Lex Machina to Identify 'Stupid Patents' (Usually Software Patents That Are Not Valid)

    In spite of threats and lawsuits from bogus 'inventors' whom they criticise, EFF staff continues the battle against patents that should never have been granted at all



  13. The Australian Productivity Commission Shows the Correct Approach to Setting Patent Laws and Scope

    Australia views patents on software as undesirable and acts accordingly, making nobody angry except a bunch of law firms that profited from litigation and patent maximalism



  14. EPO 'Business' From the United States Has Nosedived and UPC is on Its Death Throes

    Benoît Battistelli and Elodie Bergot further accelerate the ultimate demise of the EPO (getting rid of experienced and thus 'expensive' staff), for which there is no replacement because there is a monopoly (which means Europe will suffer severely)



  15. Links 17/11/2017: KDE Applications 17.12, Akademy 2018 Plans

    Links for the day



  16. Today's EPO and Team UPC Do Not Work for Europe But Actively Work Against Europe

    The tough reality that some Europeans actively work to undermine science and technology in Europe because they personally profit from it and how this relates to the Unitary Patent (UPC), which is still aggressively lobbied for, sometimes by bribing/manipulating the media, academia, and public servants



  17. Links 16/11/2017: WordPress 4.9 and GhostBSD 11.1 Released

    Links for the day



  18. The Staff Union of the EPO (SUEPO) is Rightly Upset If Not Shocked at What Battistelli and Bergot Are Doing to the Office

    The EPO's dictatorial management is destroying everything that's left (of value) at the Office while corrupting academia and censoring discussion by threatening those who publish comments (gagging its own staff even when that staff posts anonymously)



  19. EPO Continues to Disobey the Law on Software Patents in Europe

    Using the same old euphemisms, e.g. "computer-implemented inventions" (or "CII"), the EPO continues to grant patents which are clearly and strictly out of scope



  20. Links 16/11/2017: Tails 3.3, Deepin 15.5 Beta

    Links for the day



  21. Benoît Battistelli and Elodie Bergot Have Just Ensured That EPO Will Get Even More Corrupt

    Revolving door-type tactics will become more widespread at the EPO now that the management (Battistelli and his cronies) hires for low cost rather than skills/quality and minimises staff retention; this is yet another reason to dread anything like the UPC, which prioritises litigation over examination



  22. Australia is Banning Software Patents and Shelston IP is Complaining as Usual

    The Australian Productivity Commission, which defies copyright and patent bullies, is finally having policies put in place that better serve the interests of Australians, but the legal 'industry' is unhappy (as expected)



  23. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Defended by Technology Giants, by Small Companies, by US Congress and by Judges, So Why Does USPTO Make It Less Accessible?

    In spite of the popularity of PTAB and the growing need/demand for it, the US patent system is apparently determined to help it discriminate against poor petitioners (who probably need PTAB the most)



  24. Declines in Patent Quality at the EPO and 'Independent' Judges Can No Longer Say a Thing

    The EPO's troubling race to the bottom (of patent quality) concerns the staff examiners and the judges, but they cannot speak about it without facing rather severe consequences



  25. The EPO is Now Corrupting Academia, Wasting Stakeholders' Money Lying to Stakeholders About the Unitary Patent (UPC)

    The Unified Patent Court/Unitary Patent (UPC) is a dying project and the EPO, seeing that it is going nowhere fast, has resorted to new tactics and these tactics cost a lot of money (at the expense of those who are being lied to)



  26. Links 15/11/2017: Fedora 27 Released, Linux Mint Has New Betas

    Links for the day



  27. Patents Roundup: Packet Intelligence, B.E. Technology, Violin, and Square

    The latest stories and warnings about software patents in the United States



  28. Decline of Skills Level of Staff Like Examiners and Impartiality (Independence) of Judges at the EPO Should Cause Concern, Alarm

    Access to justice is severely compromised at the EPO as staff is led to rely on deficient tools for determining novelty while judges are kept out of the way or ill-chosen for an agenda other than justice



  29. Links 14/11/2017: GNU/Linux at Samsung, Firefox 57 Quantum

    Links for the day



  30. Microsoft: Sheltering Oneself From Patent Litigation While Passing Patents for Trolls to Attack GNU/Linux

    Another closer look at Provenance Asset Holdings and what exactly it is (connection to AST, part of the cartel Microsoft subsidises to shield itself)


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