12.12.17
Gemini version available ♊︎The European Patent Organisation Refrains (For Nearly a Week) From Speaking About Battistelli’s Abuses as Judged by ILO Tribunal
When they have nothing good to say it seems they’ll say nothing and instead pay the media to say something positive
Summary: The EPO’s silence on the matter of Patrick Corcoran is deafening; to make matters worse, the EPO continues to pollute media and academia with money of stakeholders, with the sole intention of lobbying and misleading news coverage (clearly a disservice to these stakeholders)
THE European Patent Office (EPO) is moving from one scandal to another and from one embarrassment to the next. There is, however, a PR/media strategy.
“Not a single word from EPO (at least not yet) about the epic ILO loss or even the UPC setbacks.”Yesterday, for example, the EPO continued with its #IPforSMEs charade (latest tweets to that effect [1, 2]), which is based on a lie because the EPO got caught discriminating against SMEs and they found out.
There was also this puff piece (warning: epo.org link) and accompanying tweet about more bogus ‘studies’ (commissioned by the EPO, as usual, as if it’s a lobbying organisation).
Not a single word from EPO (at least not yet) about the epic ILO loss or even the UPC setbacks. The EPO just simply ignores anything it does not wish applicants to be aware/informed of. This is a symptom of authoritarian regimes, incapable of self-assessment and honesty.
“The EPO just simply ignores anything it does not wish applicants to be aware/informed of.”The latest ‘study’ continues a disturbing pattern. The EPO keeps passing money to media and academia, essentially corrupting both at the expense of applicants. The so-called ‘study’ was done “in co-operation with Handelsblatt Research Institute,” the EPO wrote. We don’t suppose that Handelsblatt (news site which covered EPO scandals in the past) will be covering the latest real news then. The EPO has already passed money to many more publishers (we showed examples and even extracted admissions from journalists).
What a waste of budget. So EPO management pays for some bogus ‘study’, in order to ‘create’ puff pieces about it from WEF; yesterday the EPO retweeted this and linked to this puff piece; as far as we’re aware, William New is the only other person who wrote a puff piece about (or for) this. It’s basically a salad of buzzwords, as usual.
“Is the EPO a real patent office or just a mouthpiece for Battistelli?”It’s worth noting that the EPO has officially said absolutely nothing about the dispute with the judge. Nothing!
It found time to write about the last Patent Information Newsflash webinar, it pushed the UPC ‘study’ at around lunchtime (Monday), and it said that “EPO offices [would be] closed from 23.12.2017 to 1.1.2018,” citing this page (warning: epo.org link) which said: “Please note that all our offices will be closed over the holiday period from 23 December 2017 and will open again on 2 January 2018. During this time no user support will be available, but you may continue to use our contact form to send us an enquiry.”
Well, the EPO already canceled so many holidays this year (at least 3, to take effect soon), so will Christmas be recognised next year? If so, how many days off will staff be given? What kind of break will they receive? The above makes it sound as though staff will get only 6 (working) days off. That’s very little compared to ‘industry standards’. It gets worse over time.
Either way, we still patiently wait for the Office to make any statement whatsoever regarding ILO. It did this before (when it got its way), so why not now? Is the EPO a real patent office or just a mouthpiece for Battistelli? █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA