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

04.16.18

The European Patent Office Will Never Hold Its Destroyers Accountable

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 6:59 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

It rewards them with a bonus equivalent to two years of work as EPO President!

Blatterstelli and FBI

Summary: With only one in seven EPO stakeholders believing that Battistelli’s pick (António Campinos) will turn things around for the better, it certainly does not seem like people are happy and there’s no real hope that Battistelli will ever be held accountable for his abuses after his immunity expires

THE staff union of the EPO (SUEPO) has been quiet lately. Very quiet. Maybe they just wait for Battistelli to leave. He has less than 2.5 months left. Then a fellow Frenchman, whose job application he promoted, will inherit the penthouse with the pub.

“Maybe they just wait for Battistelli to leave. He has less than 2.5 months left. Then a fellow Frenchman, whose job application he promoted, will inherit the penthouse with the pub.”We are constantly being told and reminded by people who are familiar with these matters that the successor (Campinos) won’t change anything. All evidence we’ve seen so far suggests so too. In fact, we expect Battistelli to still participate remotely (through Campinos). Battistelli is not retiring, only hibernating in CEIPI (swapping a chair with Campinos). As a reminder see the following older posts:

It’s hard to simply accept that Battistelli goes unpunished; he will walk free. Many EPO employees will be very upset. Who’s to blame? European politicians? German politicians? Dutch politicians? Delegates who mostly come from NPOs (national patent offices)? Probably all the ‘above’… there’s a chain of complicity and coverup. It makes Europe look unjust or rather a place where people can get away with serious abuses as long as they invoke diplomatic immunity.

“All these cowards from large law firms never want to talk about EPO corruption.”There’s another element of complicity in the mix.

All these cowards from large law firms never want to talk about EPO corruption. Very few of them ever did. We could count them on one hand. Complicity by oversight? Apathy? Cowardice?

“The Enlarged Board of Appeal and other Boards are not enjoying any independence upon which sound judgments are to be based.”Look at EPO news these days. Absolutely nothing about scandals. It’s like scandals never happened. They don’t matter. Not even multi-euro 'heists' that are about to happen within weeks. The media, which is paid to participate, isn’t interested in journalism but in pure PR. Battistelli pays them for it (at the expense of the EPO of course).

Bardehle Pagenberg’s Rudolf Teschemacher has just written about “recent developments in EPO case law,” but what about the Boards upon which he bases his entire article? The Enlarged Board of Appeal and other Boards are not enjoying any independence upon which sound judgments are to be based. It’s a massive crisis. The whole EPC is now an ignored piece of paper. EPO is therefore defunct and debased, technically detached from its very founding document. This is what Teschemacher had to say:

Recent decisions passed by three different instances of the EPO have significant effects on the patentability of inventions under European patent law. All of them concerned the validity of patents to be assessed in opposition proceedings. Applicants should be aware of the consequences of these decisions. Avoidable mistakes when filing a European patent application and even previously may later result in the loss of the patent.

No mention of the Patrick Corcoran ‘affair’ and the Boards’ own complaints. To people like Teschemacher it pays more to simply pretend nothing is amiss. How about FRKelly’s Alan Casey? He published this a few hours ago. The EPO is making it more expensive to appeal/object to bogus patents that the Office keeps granting in order to ‘fake’ “success” and make staff redundant. Here’s the key part:

A lower level of appeal fee of €1880 will apply for appeals filed by natural persons and entities referred to in Rule 6(4) EPC, i.e. small and medium-sized enterprises, non-profit organisations, universities and public research organisations. An increased appeal fee of €2255 will apply to all other entities.

We already wrote about this several times before. It’s designed to encourage focus on the ‘patent-granting (or patent-printing) machine’ rather than quality assurance.

“It’s designed to encourage focus on the ‘patent-granting machine’ rather than quality assurance.”Last but not least, hours ago came out this article from August Debouzy (Gregoire Desrousseaux, François Pochart and Geoffroy Thill). They boast about PACE-type programmes and contrariwise slowdowns of the process.

The main problem is that the EPO is running out of work, out of skills, and out of reputation. Not that it bothers law firms. They cash in on trouble. To quote their conclusions:

The new optional postponement procedure of the examination goes against the decreasing duration of the search, examination and opposition procedures initiated during the last few years in the EPO. However, the procedure reveals manifold advantages for applicants. They could maintain a pending application with a broad scope of protection for 3 more years while keeping the opportunity to request an accelerated examination at any time. The applicants shall be able to accelerate or delay the granting procedure of their patents.

This has no impact on quality of underlying assessment (examination); it just means they can metaphorically press “pause”, that’s all.

Is it not curious that not even one law firm bothered mentioning the petition signed by a quarter of examiners to bemoan departure from the EPC and declining patent quality? Only 3 sites that are English-speaking covered it and one that speaks German. As long as nobody is willing enough to bring up these matters in the patent microcosm there’s no hope of resolving the biggest issues. This basically sums up why nothing will change under Campinos, as we explained a week ago. In fact, according to this new article [PDF], when asked whether “António Campinos is the right person to solve the EPO’s problems” only 14.7% of the respondents (patent professionals) said “Yes”. It’s just slightly more than one in seven!

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 13/12/2018: IRS Migration, GNOME 3.31.3 Released

    Links for the day



  2. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions Still Uncontroversial Unless One Asks the Patent Maximalists

    Contrary to what the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has claimed, PTAB is liked by companies that actually create things and opposition to PTAB comes from power brokers of the Koch brothers, law firms, and trolls (including those who foolishly repeat them)



  3. Latest Talk From IBM’s Manny Schecter Shows That IBM Hasn't Changed and After the Red Hat Takeover It'll Continue to Promote Software Patents

    IBM's hardheaded attitude and patent aggression unaffected by its strategic acquisition of a company that at least claimed to oppose software patents (whilst at the same time pursuing them)



  4. The European Patent Troll Wants as Much Litigation as Possible

    Patent quality is a concept no longer recognisable at the European Patent Office; all that the management understands is speed and PACE, which it conflates with quality in order to register as much cash as possible before the whole thing comes crashing down (bubbles always implode at the end)



  5. António Campinos Turns His 'Boss' Into His Lapdog, Just Like Battistelli and Kongstad

    The European Patent Organisation expects us to believe that Josef Kratochvíl will keep the Office honest while his predecessor, the German who failed to do anything about Battistelli's abuses, becomes officially subservient to António Campinos



  6. Links 12/12/2018: Mesa 18.3.1 Released, CNCF Takes Control of etcd

    Links for the day



  7. EPO Trust, Leadership and Commitment

    "Trust, leadership and commitment" is the latest publication from EPO insiders, who in the absence of free speech and freedom of association for the union/representation are an essential spotlight on EPO abuses



  8. Links 11/12/2018: Tails 3.11, New Firefox, FreeBSD 12.0

    Links for the day



  9. Number of Filings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Highest in Almost Two Years

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs), which [cref 113718 typically invalidate software patents by citing 35 U.S.C. § 101], are withstanding negative rhetoric and hostility from Iancu



  10. With 'Brexit' in a Lot of Headlines Team UPC Takes the Unitary Patent Lies up a Notch

    Misinformation continues to run like water; people are expected to believe that the UPC, an inherently EU-centric construct, can magically come to fruition in the UK (or in Europe as a whole)



  11. The EPO Not Only Abandoned the EPC But Also the Biotech Directive

    Last week's decision (T1063/18, EPO Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.04) shows that there's still a long way to go before the Office and the Organisation as a whole fulfil their obligation to those who birthed the Organisation in the first placeLast week's decision (T1063/18, EPO Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.04) shows that there's still a long way to go before the Office and the Organisation as a whole fulfil their obligation to those who birthed the Organisation in the first place



  12. Patents on Abstract Things and on Life (or Patents Which Threaten Lives) Merely Threaten the Very Legitimacy of Patent Offices, Including EPO

    Patent Hubris and maximalism pose a threat or a major risk to the very system that they claim to be championing; by reducing the barrier to entry (i.e. introducing low-quality or socially detrimental patents) they merely embolden ardent critics who demand patent systems as a whole be abolished; the EPO is nowadays a leading example of it



  13. Links 10/12/2018: Linux 4.20 RC6 and Git 2.20

    Links for the day



  14. US Courts Make the United States' Patent System Sane Again

    35 U.S.C. § 101 (Section 101), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and other factors are making the patent system in the US a lot more sane



  15. Today's USPTO Grants a Lot of Fake Patents, Software Patents That Courts Would Invalidate

    The 35 U.S.C. § 101 effect is very much real; patents on abstract/nonphysical ideas get invalidated en masse (in courts/PTAB) and Director Andrei Iancu refuses to pay attention as if he's above the law and court rulings don't apply to him



  16. A Month After Microsoft Claimed Patent 'Truce' Its Patent Trolls Keep Attacking Microsoft's Rivals

    Microsoft's legal department relies on its vultures (to whom it passes money and patents) to sue its rivals; but other than that, Microsoft is a wonderful company!



  17. Good News: US Supreme Court Rejects Efforts to Revisit Alice, Most Software Patents to Remain Worthless

    35 U.S.C. § 101 will likely remain in tact for a long time to come; courts have come to grips with the status quo, as even the Federal Circuit approves the large majority of invalidations by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) panels, initiated by inter partes reviews (IPRs)



  18. Florian Müller's Article About SEPs and the EPO

    Report from the court in Munich, where the EPO is based



  19. EPO Vice-President Željko Topić in New Article About Corruption in Croatia

    The Croatian newspaper 7Dnevno has an outline of what Željko Topić has done in Croatia and in the EPO in Munich; it argues that this seriously erodes Croatia's national brand/identity



  20. The Quality of European Patents Continues to Deteriorate Under António Campinos and Software Patents Are Advocated Every Day

    The EPC in the European Patent Office and 35 U.S.C. § 101 in the USPTO annul most if not all software patents; under António Campinos, however, software patents are being granted in Europe and the USPTO exploits similar tricks



  21. Team UPC is Still Spreading False Rumours in an Effort to Trick Politicians and Pressure Judges

    Abuses at the European Patent Office, political turmoil and an obvious legislative coup by a self-serving occupation that produces nothing have already doomed the Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court (UPC); so now we deal with complete fabrications from Team UPC as they're struggling to make something out of nothing, anonymously smearing opposition to the UPC and anonymously making stuff up



  22. Patents on Life and Patents That Kill the Poor Would Only Delegitimise the European Patent Office

    After Mayo, Myriad and other SCOTUS cases (the basis of 35 U.S.C. § 101) the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is reluctant to grant patents on life; the European Patent Office (EPO), however, goes in the opposite direction, even in defiance of the European Patent Convention



  23. EPO 'Untapped Potential'

    "Campinos is diligently looking for ways to further increase the Office’s output without increasing the number of examiners," says the EPO-FLIER team



  24. Links 9/12/2018: New Linux Stable Releases (Notably Linux 4.19.8), RC Coming, and Unifont 11.0.03

    Links for the day



  25. Links 8/12/2018: Mesa 18.3.0, Mageia 7 Beta, WordPress 5.0

    Links for the day



  26. The European Patent Organisation is Like a Private Club and Roland Grossenbacher is Back in It

    In the absence of Benoît Battistelli quality control at the EPO is still not effective; patents are being granted like the sole goal is to increase so-called 'production' (or profit), appeals are being subjected to threats from Office management, and external courts (courts that assess patents outside the jurisdiction of the Office/Organisation) are being targeted with a long-sought replacement like the Unified Patent Court, or UPC (Unitary Patent)



  27. Links 7/12/2018: GNU Guix, GuixSD 0.16.0, GCC 7.4, PHP 7.3.0 Released

    Links for the day



  28. The Federal Circuit's Decision on Ancora Technologies v HTC America is the Rare Exception, Not the Norm

    Even though the PTAB does not automatically reject every patent when 35 U.S.C. § 101 gets invoked we're supposed to think that somehow things are changing in favour of patent maximalists; but all they do is obsess over something old (as old as a month ago) and hardly controversial



  29. The European Patent Office Remains a Lawless Place Where Judges Are Afraid of the Banker in Chief

    With the former banker Campinos replacing the politician Battistelli and seeking to have far more powers it would be insane for the German Constitutional Court to ever allow anything remotely like the UPC; sites that are sponsored by Team UPC, however, try to influence outcomes, pushing patent maximalism and diminishing the role of patent judges



  30. Many of the Same People Are Still in Charge of the European Patent Office Even Though They Broke the Law

    "EPO’s art collection honoured with award," the EPO writes, choosing to distract from what actually goes on at the Office and has never been properly dealt with


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