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

10.21.17

Anonymous Professionals Speak of Benoît Battistelli’s Destruction of the EPO, But Why Does the Media Turn a Blind Eye?

Posted in Europe, Patents at 3:20 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

It’s almost as though media owners have an agenda or get paid not to care

UIMP event and FTI Consulting

Summary: Everyone in the circles of EPO staff and EPO stakeholders knows that dysfunction has become the norm; European media, however, remains suspiciously silent about what otherwise would be a major European scandal (bigger than FIFA or Dieselgate)

THERE seems to be some happiness among EPO staff knowing that the UPC is going nowhere. Nobody really wants the UPC except the people who plotted the UPC (we refer to them collectively as “Team UPC”).

Last night we wrote about an additional 2 months delay and IAM, which is close to the EPO’s management and was paid to promote the UPC, said that the “German constitutional court delays the UPC until the second half of 2018 at the earliest, but quite possibly much later.”

“Put another way,” I told them, “one must not assume that UPC is an inevitability and maintain this dangerous illusion…”

The situation at the EPO is pretty bad. We often refer back to this article from Dr. Glyn Moody, who wrote: “When asked by Ars, the EPO’s spokesperson mentioned the imminent arrival of the unitary patent system as an important reason for revising the EPO’s internal rules…”

“No appeals, no thorough examination, just lots and lots of lawsuits. This should be mortifying to anyone who understands the original (and true) purpose of patents.”Yes, a lot of what Benoît Battistelli has been doing is geared toward a litigation scenario; it’s not about patent quality anymore. No appeals, no thorough examination, just lots and lots of lawsuits. This should be mortifying to anyone who understands the original (and true) purpose of patents.

Earlier today we saw a couple of copies of a new press release [1, 2] regarding Professor Daryl Lim, who is described as an “IP Center Director”. Certainly he should know that Battistelli is a crook and the EPO is a rogue organisation, yet that doesn’t stop him from going to Munich. It says “EPO representatives will include President Benoît Battistelli and senior members of the EPO staff. Lim will also meet with members of the EPO Board of Appeals, and attend a dinner hosted by President Battistelli along with the U.S. delegation. As in past years, the agenda is expected to cover EPO initiatives and other issues of contemporary relevance to U.S. businesses and patent practice and end with a presentation of U.S. developments by the visiting delegates.”

Will these “members of the EPO Board of Appeals” have the courage to tell him what’s going on? Also, why does the US tell the EPO what to do? Who does the EPO work for or is attempting to serve?

“…why does the US tell the EPO what to do? Who does the EPO work for or is attempting to serve?”Sadly, as many people have already come to realise, Battistelli’s French successor is unlikely to turn things around. Sure, some people keep their hopes up (too optimistic in our view) and choose to believe that because the job description spoke of diplomacy António Campinos will somehow be very different and even friendly towards SUEPO. Never mind if management around Campinos will still be Team Battistelli (and historically close to Campinos), including people with criminal charges against them…

Yesterday, WIPR published this article titled “SUEPO offers olive branch to EPO management” (not that Campinos has extended anything in return; he’s totally silent on the matter and the same goes for his upcoming ‘boss’, Dr. Ernst). To quote WIPR:

A staff union at the European Patent Office (EPO) has written to António Campinos, the next president of the organisation, saying his appointment shows a desire to re-establish harmonious conditions with management.

The letter, from the Staff Union of the European Patent Office’s (SUEPO) Hague branch, was sent to all members of what is SUEPO’s second biggest unit. The Hague committee said it is “ready to embark on a road to fruitful cooperation”.

Such a cooperation is unlikely to bring back staff which was illegally dismissed or bring back to life people who were driven to suicide. Justice cannot be restored, there are no reparations anywhere over the horizon, and a lot of European media is still indebted to the EPO (which threw money its way), so it may never cover these issues properly.

“This should have been a massive scandal, but Dutch media is not covering it. The EPO dedicated a lot of money to influencing/controlling the Dutch media.”The “first steps undertaken by the current President was to remove any kind of independent oversight of the EPO’s financial dealings,” said the following comment from yesterday. We remind readers that Battistelli essentially (mis)used EPO budget to ‘bribe’ the media; some allege that he also used that money to ‘buy’ votes for himself. We may never know the true/full scale of it because there’s no financial transparency. It was also alleged that he used money destined for EPO contractors in the Netherlands in order to build himself a ‘penthouse’ in Munich [1, 2]. This should have been a massive scandal, but Dutch media is not covering it. The EPO dedicated a lot of money to influencing/controlling the Dutch media.

“Of course,” the following comment notes, “the disinterest of the media is not only unhelpful but also (especially in Germany) slightly suspicious.”

That’s an important point which is made once again later on in this thread. IP Kat is part of this problem now. Just look at the post this entire thread is attached to. It’s a puff piece for António Campinos and Benoît Battistelli. For all we know, the pseudonym “Merpel” might just be Stephen from CIPA right now. The old “Merpel” is a dead cat.

Anyway, here is the full comment:

Whilst things may look very dark indeed, I am of the opinion that perseverance will see us through. This is not based upon blind optimism but rather a recognition that, in the end, we are dealing with politicians. This means that generation and application of appropriate “political” pressure ought to be more than capable of leading to a satisfactory outcome.

The complete silence and disengagement of the UK and German delegations to the AC are obviously a barrier to generating the necessary political pressure. However, the UK and German associations of professional representatives ought to be able to do something about that. CIPA, PAK, epi: this means you! Where is your voice? Are you not obliged to defend the interests of your members here (in view of the threat to the integrity and reputation of the patent system, as well as to the business that your members do with SMEs)?

Of course, the disinterest of the media is not only unhelpful but also (especially in Germany) slightly suspicious. What is needed here is a “hook” for a story that the media can run. This is where it may help to recall that one of the first steps undertaken by the current President was to remove any kind of independent oversight of the EPO’s financial dealings. It therefore stands to reason that, if there is any “dirt” to be found, it will be uncovered by looking into in those dealings. We all know how certain sections of the media love stories about financial wrongdoing, especially within the privileged and elite world of Eurocrats.

None of this will be easy, especially for those inside of the EPO who are suffering right now (and who can be forgiven for giving up hope in the face of seemingly relentless and overwhelming force). But what we do at this critical time will determine the kind of European patent ecosphere that we will get for many decades. Do we want Europe-wide patent monopolies being handed out by an office whose governance has been completely corrupted, and where the concept of meaningful quality has been abandoned? What will happen to the economies of Europe if this continues? The stakes are simply too high to give up now.

The next comment says that the “EPO can be technically described as matching the description of a true authoritarian regime” and here’s the explanation of why (naming “Battistelli, VP4, VP5, Bergot and her management”):

your diagnostic is correct, factually what you present is right. All that happens at EPO can be technically described as matching the description of a true authoritarian regime under which violating the rights of individuals and acting rogue has become the norm. If this would happen in western EU countries the decision takers (Battistelli, VP4, VP5, Bergot and her management) would have been brought to courts and sentenced, no doubts.

This being said what will happen in the future at EPO is unknown. Nothing is carved in stone one way or another. It can be the same, better even worse.

Currently it seems that the public (IP media at least) seems to start realising that Germany (via the excellent Dr Ernst) is selling the EPO in exchange for a soon-to-become-available-VP5-position-at-epo (in which he will probably double his income).

Public interests some said in the room ? very drole.

What will Campinos do? perhaps follow the path of Battistelli perhaps also not. We should not charge him as guilty before he has even arrived at EPO. We know who he is and what he did but not what he will do.

Future will tell, soon. Do not forget that Campinos will also have to live with Battistelli’s toxic legacy and it is likely that more social casualties happen when he arrives since the camel’s back is close to broken and the number of strained staff far too high for too long (do not forget that suicide nr 7th was avoided 3 weeks ago in The Hague).

At some point (suicide nr 8, 9, 15 perhaps) they will have to do something. The terrible thing is both the apathy of EPO staff most of whom live in denial (maybe as a form of protection but still) and that of middle management (always prone to follow orders no matter how noxious HR policies may be).

As as to the quality of patent: well no one cares so why should you !

“Also,” says the next comment, “the disappearing presumption of validity of EPO grants is something that suits Big Corp.”

This is about patent quality (or lack thereof) and what it means for SMEs:

The itinerant (citizen of nowhere) and sociopathic volume users of the EPO, the multi-national corporations, the Global Titans, they pay virtually no taxes anywhere. So, of course, the EPC Member States tax them through EPO fees.

Big Corp is happy to pay. Those outrageous EPO fees deter the pesky SME’s from filing.

Also the disappearing presumption of validity of EPO grants is something that suits Big Corp. It renders it all but impossible for an SME to use a patent against a volume user.

Also labour rights at the EPO. Sociopaths don’t give a fig about any abuses.

So what to expect from the AC, the new Chair and the new EPO President? More of the same, as you surmise. Proud to be European? Not so much, these days. Will nobody in a position of responsibility defend any longer human rights and the Rule of Law? Or do we have to lose these precious things before we realise what we have squandered?

“I am proud to be member of SUEPO,” the next comment says in relation to SUEPO’s approach to Campinos:

Article about the official position of SUEPO on the election of Mr Campinos

http://patentblog.kluweriplaw.com/2017/10/19/heavy-task-lies-ahead-of-antonio-campinos-as-future-epo-president/

As one will see the Battistelli’s legacy Mr Campinos will have to deal with is heavy and toxic. This being as a professional social partner SUEPO shows here what can be qualified as a pragmatic and reasonable approach: first pose a diagnosis, then indicate possible ways to mitigate and most of all give Campinos the benefit of the doubt as to his intentions and future actions.

Thanks for having had the guts to take such position under the current circumstances. I am proud to be member of SUEPO.

Again the media gets brought up: “disinterest of the media is more than slightly suspicious. Journalists who wrote about the EPO were changed posts.”

This is partly true and we know of examples. We know of people who used to cover EPO scandals and got in trouble with the publisher/editor (they told us about it).

Here is the full comment:

The disinterest of the media is more than slightly suspicious. Journalists who wrote about the EPO were changed posts.

As to what will happen to the economies of Europe, we know from what happened to the economy of the USA 10-15 years ago. Small and medium enterprises disappeared, the economy concentrated into an ever dwindling number of hands and production of goods moved to China. Then they elected Trump. Patents are only a little part of that story of course and yes, it is worth fighting for, but how? And what are we exactly fighting against?

Battistelli is a freemason, just look at the ring he wears. Did you know that Campinos is a freemason as well?

We don’t want to entertain that sort of aspect. Some anonymous commenters say that the next President of the EPO is “a freemason as well” as Battistelli, but all we know about Battistelli is that he’s ENA — by insiders’ estimation a vastly more powerful network than “freemasonry” or whatever (the French President, for example, is also from ENA). We were told about this several years ago. This sort of angle was further entertained in the next comment:

It is perhaps possible that the involvement of freemasonry can provide an explanation for some of the curious things that have happened in (or in connection with) the EPO. However, that is no reason to get disheartened. There is a difficulty faced by any organisation that tries (covertly) to manipulate events against the public interest. That is, there are more of “us” than there are of “them”… meaning that, ultimately, “they” cannot keep a determined “us” down.

Then came a sobering pinch of salt:

I realise, Pink, one must be cautious about “conspiracy theories” but on the subject of the USA you have to wonder about some of the provisions implemented in the AIA, and whether they benefit Big Corp or the SME’s.

Consider for example what constitutes the prior art.

Everything unpublished at the date of the claim, but filed earlier, anywhere in the world, in whatever language, is available for both novelty and obviousness attacks on that claim. Everything, that is, except your own earlier filings. They are exempt.

Thus, bulk filers, the Goliaths of the patent world, can build up impenetrable thickets of overlapping patent rights.

And Little David? Everything he files gets whacked as obvious by all the stuff the volume filers filed already, right up to one day before.

How long before the EPC Member States change the EPC in the same way, at the behest of the lobbyists?

Has it not started already. Consider: Prof Dr Willem Hoyng, that very prominent patent litigator, is saying that Art 54(3) has to be strengthened, its scope widened, to embrace more than strict novelty.

The above speaks of AIA — a subject we intend to cover later this weekend.

All in all, we urge readers to spot the sharp difference/contrast between this IP Kat post and the comments. It’s like the media simply does not care about what’s true anymore; it was almost always the case as far as UPC goes. Now it’s the same when it comes to the EPO.

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 19/6/2019: Linux Mint Vs Vista 10, Qt 5.13 Released

    Links for the day



  2. The Linux Foundation's Business Model

    The Linux Foundation's plan, illustrated



  3. Links 18/6/2019: i386 Abandoned by Canonical and a New osquery 'Community'

    Links for the day



  4. Indifference or Even Hostility Towards Patent Quality Results in Grave Injustice

    The patent extravaganza in Europe harms small businesses the most (they complain about it), but administrative staff at patent offices only cares about the views of prolific applicants rather than the interests of citizens in respective countries



  5. Links 18/6/2019: CentOS 8 Coming Soon, DragonFly BSD 5.6 Released

    Links for the day



  6. 'AI Taskforce' is Actually a Taskforce for Software Patents

    The mainstream media has been calling just about everything "HEY HI!" (AI), but what it typically refers to is a family of old algorithms being applied in possibly new areas; patent maximalists in eastern Asia and the West hope that this mainstream media's obsession can be leveraged to justify new kinds of patents on code



  7. Patent Maximalism is Dead in the United States

    Last-ditch efforts, or a desperate final attempt to water down 35 U.S.C. § 101, isn't succeeding; stacked panels are seen for what they really are and 35 U.S.C. § 101 isn't expected to change



  8. Links 18/6/2019: Linux 5.2 RC5 and OpenMandriva Lx 4

    Links for the day



  9. Weaponising Russophobia Against One's Critics

    Response to smears and various whispering campaigns whose sole purpose is to deplete the support base for particular causes and people; these sorts of things have gotten out of control in recent years



  10. When the EPO is Run by Politicians It's Expected to Be Aggressive and Corrupt Like Purely Political Establishments

    António 'Photo Op' Campinos will have marked his one-year anniversary in July; he has failed to demonstrate morality, respect for the law, understanding of the sciences, leadership by example and even the most basic honesty (he lies a lot)



  11. Links 16/6/2019: Tmax OS and New Features for KDE.org

    Links for the day



  12. Stuffed/Stacked Panels Sent Back Packing After One-Sided Patent Hearings That Will Convince Nobody, Just Preach to the Choir

    Almost a week ago the 'world tour' of patent lobbyists in US Senate finally ended; it was an utterly ridiculous case study in panel stacking and bribery (attempts to buy laws)



  13. 2019 H1: American Software Patents Are as Worthless as They Were Last Year and Still Susceptible to Invalidation

    With a fortnight left before the second half of the year it seems evident that software patents aren't coming back; the courts have not changed their position at all



  14. As European Patent Office Management Covers up Collapse in Patent Quality Don't Expect UPC to Ever Kick Off

    It would be madness to allow EPO-granted patents to become 'unitary' (bypassing sovereignty of nations that actually still value patent quality); it seems clear that rogue EPO management has, in effect, not only doomed UPC ambitions but also European Patents (or their perceived legitimacy, presumption of validity)



  15. António Campinos -- Unlike His Father -- Engages in Imperialism (Using Invalid Patents)

    Despite some similarities to his father (not positive similarities), António Campinos is actively engaged in imperialistic agenda that defies even European law; the EPO not only illegally grants patents but also urges other patent offices to do the same



  16. António Campinos Takes EPO Waste and Corruption to Unprecedented Levels and Scale

    The “B” word (billions) is thrown around at Europe’s second-largest institution because a mischievous former EUIPO chief (not Archambeau) is ‘partying’ with about half of the EPO’s all-time savings, which are supposed to be reserved for pensions and other vital programmes, not presidential palaces and gambling



  17. Links 15/6/2019: Astra Linux in Russia, FreeBSD 11.3 RC

    Links for the day



  18. Code of Conduct Explained: Partial Transcript - August 10th, 2018 - Episode 80, The Truth About Southeast Linuxfest

    "Ask Noah" and the debate on how a 'Code of Conduct' is forcibly imposed on events



  19. Links 14/6/2019: Xfce-Related Releases, PHP 7.4.0 Alpha

    Links for the day



  20. The EPO is a Patent Troll's Wet Dream

    The makers of software and games in Europe will have to spend a lot of money just keeping patent trolls off their backs — a fact that seems to never bother EPO management because it profits from it



  21. EPO Spreading Patent Extremists' Ideology to the Whole World, Now to South Korea

    The EPO’s footprint around the world's patent systems is an exceptionally dangerous one; The EPO amplifies the most zealous voices of the patents and litigation ‘industry’ while totally ignoring the views and interests of the European public, rendering the EPO an ‘agent of corporate occupation’



  22. Guest Post: Notes on Free Speech, and a Line in the Sand

    We received this anonymous letter and have published it as a follow-up to "Reader's Claim That Rules Similar to the Code of Conduct (CoC) Were 'Imposed' on LibrePlanet and the FSF"



  23. Links 13/6/2019: CERN Dumps Microsoft, GIMP 2.10.12 Released

    Links for the day



  24. Links 12/6/2019: Mesa 19.1.0, KDE neon 5.16, Endless OS 3.6.0 and BackBox Linux 6

    Links for the day



  25. Leaked Financial 'Study' Document Shows EPO Management and Mercer Engaging in an Elaborate “Hoax”

    How the European Patent Office (EPO) lies to its own staff to harm that staff; thankfully, the staff isn't easily fooled and this whole affair will merely obliterate any remnants of "benefit of the doubt" the President thus far enjoyed



  26. Measuring Patent Quality and Employer Quality in Europe

    Comparing the once-famous and respected EPO to today's joke of an office, which grants loads of bogus patents on just about anything including fruit and mathematics



  27. Granting More Fundamentally Wrong Patents Will Mean Reduced Certainty, Not Increased Certainty

    Law firms that are accustomed to making money from low-quality and abstract patents try to overcome barriers by bribing politicians; this will backfire because they show sheer disregard for the patent system's integrity and merely lower the legal certainty associated with granted (by greedy offices) patents



  28. Links 11/6/2019: Wine 4.10, Plasma 5.16

    Links for the day



  29. Chapter 10: Moving Forward -- Getting the Best Results From Open Source With Your Monopoly

    “the gradual shift in public consciousness from their branding towards our own, is the next best thing to owning them outright.”



  30. Chapter 9: Ownership Through Branding -- Change the Names, and Change the World

    The goal for those fighting against Open source, against the true openness (let's call it the yet unexploited opportunities) of Open source, has to be first to figuratively own the Linux brand, then literally own or destroy the brand, then to move the public awareness of the Linux brand to something like Azure, or whatever IBM is going to do with Red Hat.


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