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

03.17.18

The Patent ‘Printing Machine’ of the EPO Will Spawn Many Lawsuits and Extortions (Threats of Lawsuits), in Effect Taxing Europe

Posted in Europe, Patents at 9:56 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

The EPO is flooding the market with bad patents that should never have been granted (or ‘printed’), in essence making it a parasite rather than a public service to Europe

Bureau of Engraving and Printing
Reference: Bureau of Engraving and Printing

Summary: The money-obsessed, money-printing patent office, where the assembly line mentality has been adopted and patent-printing management is in charge, is devaluing or diluting the pool of European Patents, more so with restrictions (monetary barriers) to challenging bad patents

A FEW months ago EPO staff complained that the bosses treat the Office not like a patent office (which needs to be careful and selective in granting monopolies) but like a cash cow or investment bank that’s now essentially printing patents like some shady central banks print money. The USPTO now better understands the importance of scarcity in patents (expect grants to decline this year); people whom I speak to (professors nearby) joke about how rubbish (low-quality) patents they managed to sneak into the US. Even patents on purely fictional things.

“It’s another very considerable increase (not the first) that can discourage appeals, whereas applications got cheaper so as to help Battistelli game the numbers (after they declined).”We assume that pretty much everyone at the EPO (except Team Battistelli) would agree that patent quality is declining at the Office, which now strives only to enrich itself (at least in the short term) rather than deal with proper patent examination. Staff that does not agree gets punished.

Yesterday we saw this new article from Sanam Habib and Hazel Ford of Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP (Finnegan for short). Finnegan and IAM work together towards patent maximalism; they’re patent maximalists, so surely they see nothing wrong with the EPO’s approach. More litigation is something they would profit from. This means that they would rather deal with bad patents in the courtrooms, not at the Office.

We recently wrote about an increase from €1880 to €2255 for appeals. It’s another very considerable increase (not the first) that can discourage appeals, whereas applications got cheaper so as to help Battistelli game the numbers (after they declined). It echoes a similar move in the US, which very recently adapted fee hikes for IPRs at PTAB (the number of filings still increases nonetheless, as we noted a few days ago).

The changes are due in 2 weeks and here is what Finnegan wrote:

The EPO has announced a number of changes in its official fees, mostly having effect from 1 April 2018. The majority of the fees remain unchanged; however, Applicants will see a mixture of increases and decreases amongst the selected changes. Some of the more important changes are reviewed below.

[...]

As of 1 April 2018, the EPO’s appeal fee will increase from €1,880 to €2,255 for larger companies. However, the current, lower fee amount will still apply if the appeal is filed by an individual, small or medium sized enterprise, university, public research organisation, or non-profit organisation.

The other article spoke about paying in advance (also “with effect from 1 April 2018″):

As part of the maintenance of pending European patent applications, annual renewal fees are charged by the EPO. These fees are due at the end of the month containing the anniversary of the filing date. The first fee to be paid is the third year renewal fee, due at the end of the month containing the second anniversary of the filing date.

Since 2009, the EPO has not permitted renewal fees to be paid more than three months before the due date. Payments made earlier are not valid and will be refunded by the EPO, except when paid shortly before the permissible prepayment period. For Euro-PCT applications, it has therefore been common for the third year renewal fee payment window to open after the 31 month time limit for entering the European regional phase. This restriction is applied by the EPO to prevent Applicants from making multiple payments in advance thereby avoiding future increases in fees.

However, with effect from 1 April 2018, the payment window for the third year renewal fee is being extended. It will now be possible for Applicants to pay the third year renewal fee up to six months before it falls due. This change means that, in most cases, Applicants will now have the opportunity to pay the third year renewal fee at the same time they bring a PCT application into the regional phase in the EPO.

This must be some sort of a joke, not just because it’s effective from April first. Finnegan and firms like it must be pleased because it helps the EPO’s management pretend that it’s doing well financially (borrowing from the future) while making its staff redundant and passing billions in damages to the public (defendants and lawyers’ billing).

“…the management of the EPO commits institutional suicide; it makes patents cheaper while making examinations a lot poorer (in terms of quality) and makes appeals a lot more expensive in order to leave bogus patents in tact, in effect masking the effect of quality declines.”Battistelli is passing the cost to the public by allowing mass-granting of patents in error. Where is the uproar? Basically, litigation like this would be a tax on everyone; sometimes threats of litigation alone (the modus operandi of patent trolls).

In our view (which is shared among many EPO employees), the management of the EPO commits institutional suicide; it makes patents cheaper while making examinations a lot poorer (in terms of quality) and makes appeals a lot more expensive in order to leave bogus patents in tact, in effect masking the effect of quality declines.

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. Patents Roundup: Patent Litigation is Down and Seems to Have Shifted Away From Software Patents

    A roundup of recent patent cases of interest and what can be deduced from them, especially but not exclusively in the United States



  2. Half a Year Later the Patent Microcosm is Still 'Pulling a Berkheimer' in Vain

    Earth-shattering changes are being insinuated by people who are in the business of ‘selling’ services around patents, never mind if 35 U.S.C. § 101 remains unchanged and Federal Circuit caselaw suggests likewise



  3. The World Has Moved on and Beyond Software Patents, But Buzzwords and Hype Provide Workarounds

    A look at the status quo of software patents and some of the past week's reports, which still disguise such patents as "financial"



  4. Links 23/7/2018: Linux 4.18 RC6, Plans for Next KDE

    Links for the day



  5. 'Efficiency' in Action: António Campinos is Sending Jobs Abroad, Then Gagging Critics

    Campinos criticised for the decision to outsource EUIPO IT maintenance services to India as he starts blocking blog comments to muzzle his critics



  6. Cherry-Picking Dissenting Opinions on Patent Cases the Last/Latest Resort for Patent Maximalists

    Patent maximalists have run out of substantial things to celebrate, seeing that PTAB and CAFC aren't too interested in looking more deeply at abstract patents, such as software patents



  7. Can Trade Secrets Litigation Replace (in Part) Patent Litigation?

    Seeing DTSA as an opportunity to combat their competition, more firms now choose to file trade secret cases whereas patent cases continue their sharp decline



  8. Links 22/7/2018: Neptune 5.4, NetBSD 8.0

    Links for the day



  9. The EPO (European Patent Office) Under António Campinos is Just Another Battistelli EPO; Still UPC and Software Patents Lobbying

    Campinos has done pretty much nothing but a single blog post since taking Office; it makes one wonder what he's doing all day and whether he ever intends to tackle all the abuses that compelled the Council to replace Battistelli



  10. Cisco v Arista Networks is a Stain on the Reputation of the US International Trade Commission (ITC) and It's Beginning to Recognise This

    Cisco is leveraging software patents which PTAB deemed to be invalid against a much smaller firm (revenue ~30 times smaller), demanding an embargo and bypassing the ordinary routes of justice by turning to the ITC



  11. Openet Has Been Intimidated by Amdocs Using Another Patent Infringement Lawsuit

    Amdocs is still engaging in legal intimidation and litigious bullying against its much smaller rivals/competitors; Openet is the latest reminder of it, having paid an undisclosed amount of money to end the dispute



  12. Federal Circuit Judges Moore, Dyk and Reyna Tell Allergan That It is Not Above the Law

    Allergan and a Native American tribe have lost their ridiculous case; after swapping tens of millions of dollars in pursuit of immunity for patents they've lost again (in what's likely their last resort/appeal); expect the patent microcosm to attempt to distract from it (like they did Oil States)



  13. Links 20/7/2018: MusicBrainz is Back, Microsoft Pushing .NET Through Canonical

    Links for the day



  14. Some US Patents' Quality is So Low That There's a Garden Clearance/Fire Sale

    Rather than shoot worthless patents into orbit where they belong the Allied Security Trust (AST), collector of dubious patents, will try to sell them to gullible opportunists and patent trolls (even if the said patents would likely perish in courts)



  15. When Amplifying the Message of 'Global Innovation Index 2018' IP Watch Sounds Like WIPO and IP Watchdog (Watchtroll)

    In addition to senatorial efforts and misleading debates about patents, we now contend with something called “Global Innovation Index 2018," whose purpose appears to be similar to the debunked Chamber of Commerce's rankings (quantifying everything in terms of patents)



  16. Erosion of Patent Justice in Europe With Kangaroo Courts and Low-Quality European Patents

    The problematic combination of plaintiff-friendly courts (favouring the accuser, just like in Eastern Texas) and low-quality patents that should never have been granted



  17. Mafia Tactics in Team UPC and Battistelli's Circle

    Mafia-like behaviour at the EPO and the team responsible for the Unified Patent Court (UPC); appointments of loyal friends and family members have become common (nepotism and exchange of favours), as have threats made towards critics, authorities, and the press



  18. Australia Says No to Software Patents

    Rokt is now fighting the Australian patent office over its decision to reject software patents; Shelston IP, an Australian patent law firm (originally from Melbourne), already meddles a great deal in such policies/decisions, hoping to overturn them



  19. Links 19/7/2018: Krita 4.1.1, Qt Creator 4.7.0, and Microsoft-Led Lobby Against Android in EU

    Links for the day



  20. IAM is Pushing SEPs/FRAND Agenda for Patent Trolls and Monopolists That Fund IAM

    The front group of patent trolls, IAM, sets up an echo chamber-type event, preceded by all the usual pro-FRAND propaganda



  21. “Trade Secrets” Litigation Rising in the Wake of TC Heartland, Alice, Oil States and Other Patent-Minimising Decisions

    Litigation strategies are evolving in the wake of top-level decisions that rule out software patents, restrict venue shifting, and facilitate invalidation of patents even outside the courtroom



  22. The EPO -- Like the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and Unitary Patent System -- is an Untenable Mess

    The António Campinos-led EPO, nearly three weeks under his leadership, still fails to commit to justice (court rulings not obeyed), undo union-busting efforts and assure independence of judges; this, among other factors, is why the Office/Organisation and the UPC it wants to manage appear more or less doomed



  23. Links 18/7/2018: System76's Manufacturing Facility, Microsoft-Led Lobby for Antitrust Against Android

    Links for the day



  24. What Patent Lawyers Aren't Saying: Most Patent Litigation Has Become Too Risky to be Worth It

    The lawyers' key to the castle is lost or misplaced; they can't quite find/obtain leverage in courts, but they don't want their clients to know that



  25. Software Patents Royalty (Tax) Campaign by IBM, a Serial Patent Bully, and the EPO's Participation in All This

    The agenda of US-based patent maximalists, including patent trolls and notorious bullies from the United States, is still being served by the 'European' Patent Office, which has already outsourced some of its work (e.g. translations, PR, surveillance) to the US



  26. The European Council Needs to Check Battistelli's Back Room Deals/Back Door/Backchannel With Respect to Christian Archambeau

    Worries persist that Archambeau is about to become an unworthy beneficiary (nepotism) after a Battistelli setup that put Campinos in power, supported by the Belgian delegation which is connected to Archambeau, a national/citizen of Belgium



  27. PTAB and § 101 (Section 101) Have Locked the Patent Parasites Out of the Patent System

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs) have contributed a great deal to patent quality and have reduced the number of frivolous patent lawsuits; this means that firms which profit from patent applications and litigation hate it with a passion and still lobby to weaken if not scuttle PTAB



  28. Patents on Computer Software and Plants in the United States Indicative of Systemic Error

    The never-ending expansion of patent scope has meant that patent law firms generally got their way at the patent office; can the courts react fast enough (before confidence in patents and/or public support for patents is altogether shattered)?



  29. Yesterday's Misleading News From Team UPC and Its Aspiring Management of the Unified Patent Court (UPC)

    The Unified Patent Court (UPC) enthusiasts — i.e. those looking to financially gain from it — continue to wrestle with logic, manipulate words and misrepresent the law; yesterday we saw many law firms trying to make it sound as though the UPC is coming to the UK even though this isn’t possible and UPC as a whole is likely already dead



  30. Time for the European Commission to Investigate EPO Corruption Because It May be Partly or Indirectly Connected to EU-IPO, an EU Agency

    The passage of the top role at the EU-IPO from António Campinos to Christian Archambeau would damage confidence in the moral integrity of the European Council; back room deals are alleged to have occurred, implicating corrupt Battistelli


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