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

11.09.17

Consensus Around the High Likelihood That the Unitary Patent (UPC) is Dead and Backlash Against Deniers of It

Posted in Europe, Patents at 7:59 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Wouter Pors

Summary: Online discussions about the UPC have rapidly shifted to assume, quite correctly in fact, that the UPC is facing mortal danger from which it may never recover

THE EPO was almost single-handedly destroyed by a terror-inflicting tyrant who was in charge for seven years. He tried hard, in vain, to ‘reform’ the Office and instead he broke everything. He even broke the governance of the entire Organisation, thanks in part to a Dane who has just joined the private sector.

The excuse the EPO likes to use for these chaotic changes is the UPC. “The final countdown,” however — as a reader just put it — looks not like a countdown for the UPC but for Battistelli’s departure. He was an utter failure and a disgrace who will be mentioned in the corridors for decades to come. “In addition to the Luther’s 95 theses,” the reader continued, “here are some personal considerations about EPO matters [notably] UPC.”

To quote:

you don’t need to worry, the UPC will never happen. Apart from legal issues linked to Brexit and the possible constitutional deficiencies in Germany, the UPC will not happen because Germany doesn’t want it to happen and will never ratify. You need to deeply understand the German mind to apprehend what is going on in Germany about this. Basically the EPC system, with search and examination/opposition, was copied from or based on the German intellectual property system (DPA). A system that had contributed to the success of German SME. The same cannot be said about the French patent system which were granted SGDG – sans garantie du gouvernement, that is without any governmental guaranty. Valid patents are valuable to German industrials. Now consider that last elections in Germany with a massive entry of the right extremist party AfD in the assembly. What does all this means? It is a serious warning that the Germans are not willing to transfer more power to a supranational institution, the EU. I suppose Ms. Merkel has understood the signals and is willing to send the UPC ad patres. I see another typical German behaviour in the way these matter are dealt with. Germans like Japanese don’t like to say no, it is undiplomatic. They say “may be” even if they think it is a ” no” and they prefer to let others do the dirty job. In this case for instance the Brits with Brexit should have killed the UPC not the Germans. As a safeguard a constitutional appeal and a lengthy procedure are the keys to the failure of the UPC. And Germany would say UPC didn’t happen leider.

The death of the UPC has become common knowledge. Even insiders dare say so. Days ago we started a #upcIsDead hashtag and earlier today even IAM, previously paid to promote the UPC, almost admitted this too. It said that “UPC falters” (to quote today’s headline).

This is as real as it gets. To quote the blog post:

These days one could be forgiven for questioning the significance of the European Commission’s ongoing public consultation on the potential creation of a single, EU-wide supplementary protection certificate (SPC). First proposed in late 2015, the consultation was initially intended to clear up the last remaining problems with a unitary patent regime whose arrival was regarded as imminent. However, the emergence of serious threats to the proposed Unified Patent Court regime mean that the SPC question may now be purely hypothetical.

The Commission is seeking comments on whether a unitary SPC should be created to accompany Europe’s new patent system – a question left unanswered by the Unitary Patent Court agreement. In its Single Market Strategy communication of October 2015, the Commission identified this question as one of the few issues left to be resolved in establishing the UPC.

[...]

The more pressing question now, though, is not what the EU Commission’s policy on SPCs will be, but whether the whole issue has been made irrelevant by recent developments in the UK and Germany. Put simply, the significance of the consultation has changed. No longer the means to providing the final piece to the UPC puzzle, it has become part of background efforts to keep the show on the road while more decisive issues play out elsewhere.

“Everything back to normal,” said a reader about Kluwer Patent Blog, or so “it seems.” This reader wanted to draw our attention to this older post from Kluwer Patent Blog, saying quite correctly, “you appear to have missed this new piece.”

Yes, we did miss that. This blog keeps publishing for firms like Bristows (as recently as days ago), so we typically don’t watch it closely, but days ago Wouter Pors (whose UPC propaganda we criticised before [1, 2]) did exactly what is takes to reinforce our perception of him. He has come up with an attack/discreditisation plan which focuses on the messenger in the complaint. He blames attorneys or “fearful lawyers” who merely “have a theoretical interest”.

Apropos, another UPC booster has just said: “The non-official German Bar Association wants to establish Germany as an international litigation venue after #Brexit. Germany is, of course, already a very important venue for international #patent #litigation.”

For them, it’s all about money through increased litigation. We know at whose expense/cost.

The post from Pors is a pleasure to read just because of the comments, of which they are plenty. He did ad hominem and it bounces back at him. “Reading this,” one person said, “it seems that Mr Pors has meanwhile found out what an ad hominem attack is and how to put it in practice.”

“As a “critic” of the UPC,” said another person, “I have to say that I find the general tone of Mr Pors’ comments to be unpleasant, verging on ignorant.”

Also: “I found this an interesting read in the sense that I saw only old arguments, which have already been countered, repeated and referred to, but no countering the counterarguments. It also showed me how making propaganda works by repetition of the same arguments over and over again.”

Here’s “UPC is dead,” echoing what we’ve been saying for a while. To quote: “Even smart people seem to slowly understand that the UPC is dead, which makes them somehow loose countenance.”

Another example among many: “The supporters of the constitutional complaint should welcome unreflected statements like those by Mr Pors as they facilitate presenting him and his ilk to the court as what they are: Self-centered and arrogant opportunists willing to sacrifice almost anything, in particular truth and decency, and to take any view if only it helps serving their agenda, which is filling their coffers in the UPC system of their design. It would be fun seeing similiar interviews with Mr Mooney, Mr Hoyng or Mr Tilmann and see how they rid themselves of the last little bit of credibility they still have left, just as Mr Pors has done here.”

Just about every comment there antagonises the UPC. MaxDrei wrote:

How? By lobbying Brussels with their “40 years of failure” mantra. What a travesty! Look at the EPO White Book of the established caselaw of the EPO’s DG3. For me, (and I started in the profession long before 1978), this is not failure but “40 years of Brilliant Success”.

Meanwhile, Berlin (and Karlsruhe) has just woken up to the cunning French plan to strip Germany of its leading role in patent litigation and ship it all, instead, to Paris. How else to understand the Constitutional challenge to the UPC in Germany?

It is good to see the consensus shifting against the UPC’s chances and desirability (lack thereof). Stick a fork in it. It’s done.

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

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

What Else is New


  1. Chinese Patent Policy Continues to Mimic All the Worst Elements of the American System

    China is becoming what the United States used to be in terms of patents, whereas the American system is adopting saner patent policies that foster real innovation whilst curtailing mass litigation



  2. Links 20/11/2017: Why GNU/Linux is Better Than Windows, Another Linus Torvalds Rant

    Links for the day



  3. “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



  4. 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



  5. 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



  6. 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



  7. 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



  8. 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



  9. 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



  10. 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



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

    Links for the day



  12. 23,000 Posts

    23,000 blog posts milestone reached in 11 years



  13. 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



  14. 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



  15. 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



  16. 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)



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

    Links for the day



  18. 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



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

    Links for the day



  20. 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)



  21. 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



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

    Links for the day



  23. 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



  24. 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)



  25. 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)



  26. 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



  27. 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)



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

    Links for the day



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

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



  30. 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


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