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

09.07.17

Personal Attacks, Censorship of Comments and More Nefarious Tricks Expected in the Wake of UPC Panic

Posted in Europe, Patents at 1:58 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Reactions from blogs occupied by Team UPC to the identity of the complainant in Germany, namely Dr. Ingve Björn Stjerna

THE summer is over and the EPO scandals resume; in our next post we’ll show how the EPO keeps lobbying for the UPC even though (or because) the UPC is stuck in the middle of nowhere.

“As longtime readers already know, censorship of comments is nothing new at IP Kat, including (notably) comments about the UPC.”The latest development was covered here last night. Dr. Ingve Björn Stjerna, whom we humorously dubbed “UPC slayer”, is in the headlines of patents-centric blogs today; we are anticipating personal attacks from Team UPC (however subtle) and so far we are seeing all sorts of other nefarious behaviour. It’s only to be expected from Team UPC; they have been consistent in that regard.

As longtime readers already know, censorship of comments is nothing new at IP Kat, including (notably) comments about the UPC. We gave some examples before. “This comment has been removed by a blog administrator,” said this comment when we checked in the evening, but the Internet never forgets. There are caches, for instance (at several different levels/layers).

Kluwer Cat

See the above screenshot and notice how this post and comment section have developed since then. Mark Schweizer’s article no longer has the above comment. See the text of it; these people don’t care about legality, ethics, economics etc. (the common good); they’re just corrupting the entire system and then attack those who ‘dare’ point that out and do something about it.

The next comment (not deleted) alludes to the above (deleted) and says:

IPkat = CopyKat? Not nice for the mice.

A German minister had to resign as big chunks of his PhD Thesis were copied……

And then someone wrote: “Leaves me wondering whether some like-minded principled person is going to have the guts/money/determination to file a case in the hope of a referral by the Supreme Court in the UK as to the competence of the EUCJ over UK court decisions with regard to the UPC…any takers ?”

Yes, here in the UK the UPC is stuck as well. And it should be pulled down for similar reasons, ranging from nefarious lobbying to lack of public consultation.

Here is what the next comment said:

What kind of legal challenge were you envisaging?

Perhaps a potential litigant might want to consider raising the protection of legitimate expectations as a ground of objection. That might have some mileage, especially given the rather troubling decision to write the UP Regulation in such a way that it applies new / different laws of infringement to pre-existing situations. I am pretty sure that there ought to be at least something in the UK’s “constitution” that prevents a legal sanction being imposed in respect of acts that were perfectly legal at the time they were committed – which is a principle that the UP Regulation completely fails to respect.

“Quite clear that the UPC is excluded from consideration,” said another comment today, “since it is not mentioned in the list of relevant rights.” This comment was left in a short blog post, titled “Brexit: European Commission publishes guiding principles on Intellectual Property” [sic]

“…it should be pulled down for similar reasons, ranging from nefarious lobbying to lack of public consultation.”What’s interesting is that none of the above IP Kat blog posts came from Bristows (at least not directly). Bristows’ Annsley Merelle Ward barely writes there anymore and instead she wrote (for the first time in a long time) in her employer’s blog (the employer then promoted it). Here is what she wrote:

Dr Stjerna is a Düsseldorf intellectual property law attorney and his publications include The European Unified Patent Court: what can still go wrong? and The Parliamentary UPCA ratification proceedings in Germany (this article opening with ‘The Parliamentary proceedings on the ratification of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (“UPCA”) in Germany have revealed a state of political affairs which should cause concern to each citizen’).

It’s not quite an attack on him (at least not yet). We are aware of additional complaints/input/comments being pursued this week (details will be published at a later date). Not only Team UPC should be asked for participation in the process of judgment, for obvious reasons.

“Not only Team UPC should be asked for participation in the process of judgment, for obvious reasons.”As usual, Team UPC wants us to believe that nothing will come out of it; optimism for self-serving purposes (self-fulfilling prophecies and more selling of services) is the same old habit, so Ulrich Blumenröder of Grünecker, who is not a judge, decided that “there’s nothing to see here, move along” (something to that effect). As if he already knows the outcome of the case. Bristows did the same thing without even knowing the nature of the complaint!

As Managing IP put it a short while ago, “Ulrich Blumenröder of Grünecker has read the #upc constitutional challenge & predicts it will be resolved by end of 2017.”

They’re now on a showcase for the EPO and the UPC (Munich, Paris). Managing IP acts like some kind of “media partner”, which is a weasel term used by the EPO for cooperative ‘journalism’ (journalists who receive expensive gifts).

Mathieu Klos‏, who has been covering the UPC saga for quite some time, said about the interventions: “Not a surprise. @BVerfG requested German Bundestag to comment on the complaint as well #UPC…

Managing IP acts like some kind of “media partner”, which is a weasel term used by the EPO for cooperative ‘journalism’ (journalists who receive expensive gifts).”It has become a political circle’s circus, driven by financial agenda of very few malicious actors. All they care about is how much they can profit from lawsuits, not who will be hurt by these lawsuits.

For those who wonder what Kluwer has written (for IP Kat to copy), here it is, taking stock of who is involved in commenting (the patent microcosm for the most part). It looks like Bristows has gone anonymous in this blog after several scandals (like deleting readers’ comments) and now links to its own site to give an illusion of UPC progress at the end (even though it’s about something from 2 months ago). Here is the relevant part (to us):

In answer to questions of Kluwer IP Law, a spokesperson of the Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection confirmed that the German Government was ‘approached by the Constitutional Court on August the 23rd with the opportunity to submit its observations in this matter’. The UPC Preparatory Committee was not contacted by the Court and the EPO couldn’t immediately react on the matter. According to the German legal website JUVE, the German Bar Association DAV and the European Patent Lawyers Association EPLAW were approached by the Constitutional Court as well.

In Twitter they said: “Court asks for comments on German complaint against Unified Patent Court Agreement; #stjerna plaintiff.”

We shall see if the Court will accept input from parties other than Team UPC and/or the patent microcosm. There have been contact attempts which we’ll cover in the future (once the outcome is known). The poor handling of this whole situation — from start to finish — does not bode well for the government (Stjerna named the parties to blame) ahead of the general election later this month.

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