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

01.01.18

How Institut International des Brevets (IIB), INPADOC and Other Historic Endeavours Relate to EPO and DG1/DG2

Posted in Europe, Patents at 7:51 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Not much public information/online literature about it (not anymore)

Institut International des Brevets (IIB)

Summary: The roots of the Dutch/German-centric EPO and the lesser-discussed points/questions which these roots may bring up

LAST NIGHT we wrote about the EPO being a cash cow of Germany. A lot of this money comes from outside Europe to mostly enrich the German economy (for patents with European — and beyond — scope).

“EPO staff representatives have, over the years, written a lot about the issue of impunity/immunity in international organisations.”The FFII’s President then told me he “heard the money goes into the Ministry of Justice, and if that’s the case, they also decide on UPC, so there might be a serious conflict of interest there. During the swpat [software patents] directive, competence was transferred from the ministry of economics to the ministry of justice.”

Germany’s role in the EPO and the roots of EPO structures are worth recalling. We studied the subject a long time ago (when Germany blatantly refused to enforce German law against the EPO’s management), but we never published anything about it. Whose European Patent Office is it anyway? “I’m not at all into social media, but I just had a look at their EPO Twitter feed,” said former EPO staff. “What a crock! Do they sub-contract to the Pyongyang People’s daily?”

No, it’s based in Germany. A lot of the EPO is based there. It should certainly not be a taboo subject to highlight this fact. It’s not a protest against the European Union or against Germany itself.

“Let’s not forget the element which emerged later: an ‘unwanted’ DG (DG3) was sent to Haar.”“The reference to Art. 5(2) illustrates a profound asymmetry,” one person told me when the EPO threatened to sue me. “The EPO claims immunity in all matters whenever it suits them. But then they turn around and cries “but, hey, please, I’m a real person!” when it also suits them. I’m not sure whether the drafters of the EPC had such a monstrous outcome in mind.”

EPO staff representatives have, over the years, written a lot about the issue of impunity/immunity in international organisations. It is, indeed, quite a monstrosity.

Citing several pages of a 1990s law treatise, one reader of ours said that “[t]here is at least one chapter specifically dealing with the EPO. A mere few lines describe a case which happened in Austria sometimes in the 1980s which I found rather egregious.”

This, in turn, leads back to EPO history (which might be poorly or inaccurately recalled). To quote:

IIRC, the EPO took over a commercial company, and made it an integral part of organisation.

If memory serves me right, the company wasn’t named, but it could only have been INPADOC, the patent information service. The Vienna agency is now in charge of the production of the EPO’s own patent information, the publication of EPO patent-related documents, and gathers patent information worldwide for inclusion in EPO databases, which are also sold.

Again, inferring from the few details given, the company must have had a long term lease for their office space, but the EPO moved the operation to new premises, and simply walked out of the old contract.

The landlord sued for the unpaid rent, considering that the office took over the obligations of the former entity, but the EPO pulled the “IMMUNITY” trump card, and the judge obliged!!!

Now, Art. 5 was obviously designed to allow the EPO to sue, say, plumbers who botch their work.

But a competent plumber whose bill wasn’t paid by the EPO must also be able to sue, isn’t it?

I don’t know what kind of impression 30-year old continental case law would make on an English judge.

I would be rather surprised if the Derbyshire council, or any other one, wouldn’t be allowed in matters of commercial law. A parallel could be drawn.

BTW, this was the Vienna office which Battistelli want[ed] to swap with DG3.

How about a triangular exchange? DG3 to Vienna, Vienna to Berlin, and Berlin to Munich… The more, the merrier.

We often wondered why DGs came about at all. What was the historic significance of these? Here’s a possible explanation:

The EPO was built on two pillars:

1) The IIB, “Institut International des Brevets”, which was a pre-existing institution founded around 1947 based at The Hague. It was designed to supply prior-art searches to a number of countries, for the eventual determination of patent validity strictly under national laws. In essence it was a big library with a lot of librarians. It was merged into the EPO as its “Directorate General 1″ – DG1. [And IIB staff weren't too happy about that, but that's another story.]

2) The DG2 in Munich which opened its doors in 1978, for performing the substantive examination assessing patentability according to the law defined in the EPC, based on documentary evidence located by DG1.

[The distinct DG1 and DG2 have now disappeared and merged into a new "DG1"]

The IIB had been mostly an affair of French, Benelux and Latin countries in the early 20th century, of which Germany had been excluded.

I would have to find absolute proof of that, and visit archives, but it seems from the circumstantial evidence that this project was intimately connected to an humanist dream of a world documentation center for gathering and organising all forms of human intellectual production.

The early history of concept of DG2 is more sinister, and if I were Battistelli, I would avoid using the “nazi” label to smear my opponents… quite a bit of stuff in German from 1940-1945 is quite uncomfortable to read, as it looks like a virtual blueprint for the structure of the 1973 EPC…

Is this the kind of history you had in mind?

The miracle in my eyes is how an humanist endeavor [DG1] and a corporate wet dream [DG2] came to be merged into one project as a part of “European Construction”.

Let’s not forget the element which emerged later: an ‘unwanted’ DG (DG3) was sent to Haar. Poetic?

“Back around 2010 we wrote many articles about the vision of a global patent system, based largely on leaked material which came to be known as Cablegate.”“I’ve been interested for a long time in the early history of the EPO,” one person once told us, “a topic on which not that much has been written. By “history” I mean, real work by historians analyzing the motivations of the negotiating parties, and on the “proto-history” of the institution. The quest for an international patent system has been ongoing for at least the last 140 years, and the EPO undoubtedly isn’t the final episode.”

Think of the UPC, among other things, maybe even WIPO’s ambitions and IP5. Back around 2010 we wrote many articles about the vision of a global patent system, based largely on leaked material which came to be known as Cablegate.

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 3/4/2020: Ubuntu Beta, GNOME 3.36.1, ExTiX LXQt Mini, NetBSD 8.2 Released

    Links for the day



  2. Digital Communication, Digitalisation and Videogaming Among the EPO's Latest Smokescreens for Illegal and Abstract Patents on Algorithms

    The EPO keeps liaising with the EU to promote patents which EU officials have themselves said were illegal; to make matters worse, the EPO's violations of its own laws inspire the United States to do the same



  3. Emotional Blackmail for Illegal Software Patents

    Semantic tactics the European Patent Office (EPO) uses to promote software patents in Europe and may theoretically use in the future (satire)



  4. Clear Linux is to GNU/Linux What Clearly Defined is to Open Source

    The idea that we need Intel to take GNU/Linux ‘mainstream’ is ludicrous; as OSDL co-founder (now succeeded in the flesh of the Corporate Linux Foundation), Intel is more about Linux (with DRM, “secure boot” and everything that lets it be remotely controlled) than about GNU and it’s not too keen on GPL (copyleft), either



  5. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, April 02, 2020

    IRC logs for Thursday, April 02, 2020



  6. Links 2/4/2020: Linux 5.6.2, Qt Creator 4.11.2, LineageOS ROM Based on Android 10

    Links for the day



  7. OIN in 2020 Resembles Linux Foundation in 2020 (Corporate Front Group Piggybacking the Linux Brand)

    We regret to say that the Open Invention Network seems not to care at all about Software Freedom; to make matters worse, it is a proponent of software patents and a voice for companies like IBM and Microsoft, not the "Community" it fancies misrepresenting



  8. Inside the Free Software Foundation (FSF) - Part IX: Semi-Happy Ending

    Richard Stallman is here to stay and the FSF will let him stay (as chief of GNU); we want to close the series on a positive note



  9. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, April 01, 2020

    IRC logs for Wednesday, April 01, 2020



  10. Upcoming Articles and Research Areas

    Although we've failed to write as much as usual, we're still preparing some in-depth articles and maintaining Daily Links (in spite of unforeseen ordeals like a forced laptop migration)



  11. Links 2/4/2020: ProtonMail Bridge for Linux, GTK 3.98.2 and Red Hat DNF 4.2.21

    Links for the day



  12. Links 1/4/2020: Linux 5.7 Merges, Qt 5.14.2, GhostBSD 20.03, Linux Mint 20 Ulyana Plans, WordPress 5.4 “Adderley”

    Links for the day



  13. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, March 31, 2020

    IRC logs for Tuesday, March 31, 2020



  14. Techrights to Delete Articles From All Past Years to Save Disk Space

    What if we deleted over 25,000 posts?



  15. IRC Proceedings: Monday, March 30, 2020

    IRC logs for Monday, March 30, 2020



  16. Links 30/3/2020: GNU Linux-libre 5.6, WireGuard 1.0.0

    Links for the day



  17. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, March 29, 2020

    IRC logs for Sunday, March 29, 2020



  18. Links 30/3/2020: Linux 5.6, Nitrux 1.2.7, Sparky 2020.03.1

    Links for the day



  19. The Fall of the UPC - Part IX: Campinos Opens His Mouth One Week Later (and It's That Hilarious Delusion Again)

    Team Campinos said nothing whatsoever about the decision of the FCC until one week later, whereupon Campinos leveraged some words from Christine Lambrecht to mislead everybody in the EPO's official "news" section



  20. Pretending EPO Corruption Stopped Under António Campinos When It is in Fact a Lot Worse in Several Respects/Aspects (Than It Was Under Benoît Battistelli)

    Germany's eagerness to keep Europe's central patent office in Munich (and to a lesser degree in Berlin) means that politicians in the capital and in Bavaria turn a blind eye to abuses, corruption and even serious crimes; this won't help Germany's image in the long run



  21. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, March 28, 2020

    IRC logs for Saturday, March 28, 2020



  22. Links 28/3/2020: Wine 5.5 Released, EasyPup 2.2.14, WordPress 5.4 RC5 and End of Truthdig

    Links for the day



  23. IRC Proceedings: Friday, March 27, 2020

    IRC logs for Friday, March 27, 2020



  24. The Fall of the UPC - Part VIII: Team UPC Celebrates Death, Not Life

    Team UPC plays psychological games now; it is trying to twist or spin its defeat as good news and something to be almost celebrated; it is really as illogical (and pathetic) as that sounds



  25. Links 27/3/2020: GNU/Linux Versus COVID-19 and Release of GNU Guile 3.0.2

    Links for the day



  26. When Your 'Business' is Just 'Patent Portfolio'

    Hoarding loads of patents may seem impressive, but eating them to survive is impossible if not impermissible



  27. LOT Network is a One-Man (Millionaire's) Operation and Why This Should Alarm You

    The ugly story of Open Invention Network (OIN) and LOT; today we take a closer look at LOT and highlight a pattern of 'cross-pollination' (people in both OIN and LOT, even at the same time)



  28. Faking Production With Fake Patents on Software

    The EPO with its illegal guidelines (in violation of the EPC) can carry on churning out millions of fake patents that European courts would only waste time on and small companies be blackmailed with (they cannot afford legal battles)



  29. With the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Out of the Way Focus Will Return to EPO Corruption

    Expect the European Patent Office (EPO) to receive more negative attention now that the ’cause’ of UPC is lost and there’s no point pretending things are rosy



  30. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, March 26, 2020

    IRC logs for Thursday, March 26, 2020


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