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

12.03.17

IAM in Think Tank Mode Promotes Patent Maximalism, Characteristically Sponsored by the Patent Microcosm

Posted in Asia, Australia, Patents at 1:52 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

IPBC Australasia

Summary: Another week of IAM lobbying for patent maximalism in the United States, Australia and Asia, as well as the obligatory promotion and whitewashing of large patent trolls

IAM never gets tired because it’s being paid to press on with its agenda in its capacity as lobbyist/think tank. More sites out there ought to rebut the weak arguments made by IAM, but as we’ve stated for years, coverage regarding patents is largely controlled by the patent microcosm. They even infiltrate the mainstream media, which either quotes uncritically or hands over the platform (for lack of proficient journalists who grasp patent law). This is a very serious problem.

Last week IAM organised another lobbying event, obviously funded exclusively by the patent microcosm (see list of sponsors) and stacked in the panel sense with the patent microcosm. Those attending (again, the patent microcosm) will only hear what they want to hear (and tell officials), so in effect it’s another echo chamber where the patent microcosm preaches to the choir and maybe some public officials in Australia and Asia. Among those speaking? Shelston IP, which we covered last month and also last year (on several occasions). It’s lobbying both Australia and New Zealand for software patents, thankfully to no avail.

“Corporates from Australia and New Zealand ignore IP issues in Asia’s developing countries at their peril,” IAM wrote, “delegates to IPBC Australasia heard today.”

‘Delegates’…

The whole thing was a charade and a lobbying opportunity, facilitated as usual by IAM and sponsored by those who have plenty to gain. IAM has basically just given a lobbying platform to malicious and parasitic firms like Shelston IP which push an extremist agenda.

To quote a portion:

Of course there was also no shortage of discussion of the local IP dynamics facing Australian and New Zealand companies. The recent IP policy recommendations made by the Australian government elicited strong debate on both sides, particularly over the usefulness of the second-tier innovation patent, which the government plans to abolish. For moderator Grant Shoebridge of Shelston IP, it was a reminder that what he called an “anti-innovation mindset” can create its own species of IP risk, much closer to home.

Shelston IP as a moderator? Seriously?!

Shortly beforehand IAM resumed its lobbying against the USPTO, where software patents had been severely weakened. With Andrei Iancu sounding almost like a ‘mole’ of the patent microcosm inside the USPTO, IAM must feel emboldened. Here is what it said: (it mentions David Kappos, a lobbyist, as well as Coons, a politician for patent trolls)

In response to a question from Senator Coons, Iancu admitted that he was well aware of some of the strident criticisms levelled against the post-issuance review process – a particular sore point for some patent owners – and admitted that, in some cases, those criticisms were justified. “It’s true that the system is heavily criticised and that’s important to note because if the inventor community does not have confidence in the IP system then investments do not get made and inventions slow down and the economy doesn’t benefit,” he commented. He took a similar line when asked about patent eligibility in the wake of the recent string of Supreme Court cases which have thrown the issue into some level of confusion – particularly with regard to medical diagnostic and computer implemented inventions.

[...]

Just two senators, committee chairman Senator Grassley and Senator Coons, the author of the STRONGER Patents Act and one of the few legislators with a keen interest in the functioning of the patent system, remained to ask questions. That apparent lack of interest from many committee members and the relatively benign questions that Iancu faced suggest that his confirmation should be straightforward. The job awaiting him is anything but.

The STRONGER Patents Act (last mentioned by us last month as it’s pretty much dead and barely even mentioned by anyone any longer) will hopefully receive a cold shoulder from Iancu and the likes of him (although it’s not for him to decide on). Those who still mention the STRONGER [sic] Patents Act are those who try to promote it. Expect no mention of it next year. It’s a lame duck, more so than the UPC.

Last but not least, watch how IAM interacts directly with and props up a patent troll, Provenance Asset Group [1, 2]. This is why we started referring* to IAM as the “patent trolls’ lobby”. Inadvertently, IAM has become a valuable source to those who try to keep abreast of patent trolls and their activity. Provenance Asset Group CEO Dan McCurdy is referred to as some kind of expert rather than a troll. IAM amplifies apologists of patents trolls, so why not quote him and others as follows?

As well as McCurdy’s comments about why the Yahoo! assets had so far failed to find a buyer, the panel discussion also looked at a range of other reasons for why patent deals fall apart. Friedman pointed out that deals often face competition from other assets such as real estate, which might be more appealing and perhaps better understood than an IP transaction. Plus dealmakers in the IP space still run up against a familiar narrative which can turn investors off. “The zeitgeist on Wall Street is that anyone who asserts a patent is a troll,” Friedman commented. “We’ve had deals fall apart because an investor has this irrational fear of assertion.” Creating a competitive dynamic for patent assets with that kind of concern is still a huge challenge for dealmakers. Just ask Yahoo!.

The above contains a falsehood. People allude to entities which create nothing (like Provenance Asset Group) and “assert a patent” (euphemism for lawsuits/extortion) as trolls. Is Friedman one of those people who fail to grasp the simple fact that entities which sue and make absolutely nothing are by definition trolls? Nobody wants to be called a “troll”, so they just lie to themselves about what they do and what they really are. Even IAM, which hides behind euphemisms such as “asset management”, is little more than a facilitator or enabler of patent trolls.
_____
* We also call Watchtroll that. Watchtroll is such an utterly dumb site that it not only lobbies for patent trolls but also said “Pirated Free Software” yesterday. Fredrik Ohrstrom actually alluded to Minix. It’s not an issue if BSD-licensed (like Minix), yet he used that to fling a lot of FUD at “Free Software”. Watchtroll is a premiere source of misinformation, albeit misinformation which comforts the patent microcosm.

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. Appalling Patent Quality at the European Patent Office, More Lies About the Unified Patent Court (UPC), and Assault on Those Who Warned About It All Along

    The EPO's management prioritises the litigation 'industry' and promotes its interests at the expense of those of science, technology, health and so on; in the meantime it also attacks scientists whom it employs or employed as examiners while severely harming their health



  2. Germany Likes EPO in Munich, Litigation Factory in Düsseldorf and Mannheim (Like Eastern District of Texas)

    The architectural design of Germany as Europe's patents capital, with billions of euros flowing into the pockets of German law firms, more so with a defunct and unjust Unitary Patent (UPC), which is unconstitutional



  3. Links 19/11/2018: Linux 4.20 RC3, New Fedora ISO, GNU OrgaDoc 1.0

    Links for the day



  4. A Fresh Look at Recent 35 U.S.C. § 101 Cases Reveals Rapid Demise of Software Patents Even in District (Lower) Courts

    Contrary to narratives that are being spread by the patents and litigation 'industry', there's anything but a resurgence of patents on algorithms; in the United States they're almost always rejected by courts at all levels



  5. All the Usual Suspects Are Still Working Hard to Harm the Legitimacy if Not Existence of Patent Quality Control

    With David Ruschke out of his role and other former judges leaving the Office one wonders if the new Office leadership is just scheming to hide a decline in patent quality by simply removing quality assessors



  6. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Must Be Based on Justice, Not Profits

    With obviousness grounds, prior art and tests for how abstract ideas may be, there's no excuse left for patent maximalism; will patent offices listen to courts or defy caselaw (in pursuits of fulfilling greed)?



  7. The European Patent Office is Attracting Patent Trolls

    Enforcement of software patents in Europe by the large patent troll (disguised as a pool) MPEG-LA means that European software developers cannot develop software with full multimedia support (not without sudden disruption to their peace)



  8. Patent Maximalists Are Still Upset at the US Supreme Court (Over Alice) and the US Patent Office Carries on As Usual

    In spite of the courts’ continued rejection of software patents — perfectly in line with what the high courts are saying — abstract ideas are still being covered by newly-granted patents



  9. Links 18/11/2018: Cucumber Linux 2.0 Alpha and Latest Outreachy

    Links for the day



  10. The European Patent Office Comes up With a Plethora of New Buzzwords by Which to Refer to Software Patents

    The permissive attitude towards software patents in Europe is harmful to software developers in Europe; the officials, who never wrote a computer program in their entire life, pretend this is not the case by adopting marketing techniques and surrogate terms



  11. Patent Maximalists in Europe Keep Mentioning China Even Though It Barely Matters to European Patents

    EPO waves a "white flag" in the face of China even though Chinese patents do not matter much to Europe (except when the goal is to encourage low patent quality, attracting humongous patent trolls)



  12. Team UPC Has Been Reduced to Lies, Lies, and More Lies about the Unified Patent Court Agreement

    With the Unified Patent Court Agreement pretty much dead on arrival (an arrival that is never reached, either) the UPC hopefuls -- those looking to profit from lots of frivolous patent litigation in Europe -- resort to bald-faced lying



  13. Links 17/11/2018: Mesa 18.3 RC3, Total War: WARHAMMER II, GNOME 3.31.2

    Links for the day



  14. Links 16/11/2018: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 Beta, Mesa 18.2.5, VirtualBox 6.0 Beta 2

    Links for the day



  15. Berkheimer or No Berkheimer, Software Patents Remain Mostly Unenforceable in the United States and the Supreme Court is Fine With That

    35 U.S.C. § 101, which is based on cases like Alice and Mayo, offers the 'perfect storm' against software patents; it doesn't look like any of that will change any time soon (if ever)



  16. Ignoring and Bashing Courts: Is This the Future of Patent Offices in the West?

    Andrei Iancu, who is trying to water down 35 U.S.C. § 101 while Trump ‘waters down’ SCOTUS (which delivered Alice), isn’t alone; António Campinos, the new President of the EPO, is constantly promoting software patents (which European courts reject, citing the EPC) and even Australia’s litigation ‘industry’ is dissenting against Australian courts that stubbornly reject software patents



  17. Patent Maximalists Are Still Trying to Figure Out How to Stop PTAB or Prevent US Patent Quality From Ever Improving

    Improvements are being made to US patents because of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), which amends/culls/pro-actively rejects (at application phases) bad patents; but the likes of Andrei Iancu cannot stand that because they're patent maximalists, who personally gain from an over-saturation of patents



  18. Links 15/11/2018: Zentyal 6.0, Deepin 15.8, Thunderbird Project Hiring

    Links for the day



  19. A Question of Debt: António Campinos, Lexology, Law Gazette, and Sam Gyimah

    Ineptitude in the media which dominates if not monopolises UPC coverage means that laws detrimental to everyone but patent lawyers are nowadays being pushed even by ministers (not just those whose clandestine vote is used/bought to steal democracy overnight)



  20. Science Minister Sam Gyimah and the EPO Are Eager to Attack Science by Bringing Patent Trolls to Europe/European Union and the United Kingdom

    Team UPC has managed to indoctrinate or hijack key positions, causing those whose job is to promote science to actually promote patent trolls and litigation (suppressing science rather than advancing it)



  21. USF Revisits EPO Abuses, Highlighting an Urgent Need for Action

    “Staff Representation Disciplinary Cases” — a message circulated at the end of last week — reveals the persistence of union-busting agenda and injustice at the EPO



  22. Links 14/11/2018: KDevelop 5.3, Omarine 5.3, Canonical Not for Sale

    Links for the day



  23. Second Day of EPOPIC: Yet More Promotion of Software Patents in Europe in Defiance of Courts, EPC, Parliament and Common Sense

    Using bogus interpretations of the EPC — ones that courts have repeatedly rejected — the EPO continues to grant bogus/fake/bunk patents on abstract ideas, then justifies that practice (when the audience comes from the litigation ‘industry’)



  24. Allegations That António Campinos 'Bought' His Presidency and is Still Paying for it

    Rumours persist that after Battistelli had rigged the election in favour of his compatriot nefarious things related to that were still visible



  25. WIPO Corruption and Coverup Mirror EPO Tactics

    Suppression of staff representatives and whistleblowers carries on at WIPO and the EPO; people who speak out about abuses are themselves being treated like abusers



  26. Links 13/11/2018: HPC Domination (Top 500 All GNU/Linux) and OpenStack News

    Links for the day



  27. The USPTO and EPO Pretend to Care About Patent Quality by Mingling With the Terms “Patent” and “Quality”

    The whole "patent quality" propaganda from EPO and USPTO management continues unabated; they strive to maintain the fiction that quality rather than money is their prime motivator



  28. Yannis Skulikaris Promotes Software Patents at EPOPIC, Defending the Questionable Practice Under António Campinos

    The reckless advocacy for abstract patents on mere algorithms from a new and less familiar face; the EPO is definitely eager to grant software patents and it explains to stakeholders how to do it



  29. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is Working for Patent Trolls and Patent Maximalists

    The patent trolls' propagandists are joining forces and pushing for a patent system that is hostile to science, technology, and innovation in general (so as to enable a bunch of aggressive law firms to tax everybody)



  30. Team UPC, Fronting for Patent Trolls From the US, is Calling Facts “Resistance”

    The tactics of Team UPC have gotten so tastelessly bad and its motivation so shallow (extortion in Europe) that one begins to wonder why these people are willing to tarnish everything that's left of their reputation


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