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

05.17.18

Rise in Patent Trolls’ Activity in Germany Noted Amid Declining Patent Quality at the EPO

Posted in Europe, Patents at 10:22 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

And even without/before something like the Unified Patent Court (UPC) is introduced to augment their scope of damage

Europe-Asia in globe of Earth

Summary: The UPC would turn Europe into some sort of litigation ‘super-state’ — one in which national patent laws are overridden by some central, immune-from-the-law bureaucracy like the EPO; but thankfully the UPC continues its slow collapse

BATTISTELLI has failed miserably as head of the European Patent Office (EPO), which he ran a lot longer than usual and then left in the hands of a fellow Frenchman, whose appointment he lobbied for. Here we are in 2018 and there’s no Unified Patent Court (UPC) and the European Patent Convention (EPC) is severely violated. The EPO is a pariah institution unable to attract any talent and Britain seems to be moving away from the European Court of Justice (ECJ), rendering the UPC moot. As for Germany, seeing violations of the EPC (big part of the constitutional complaint), it can’t go on; do not expect it to ratify anything. It will just hope that people forget about the whole thing while it rots away. They won’t want to admit culpability, including 'banana republic' German politics at 2 AM in the morning (we covered this utterly embarrassing episode several times before and Bristows deliberately mischaracterised it time after time).

“They won’t want to admit culpability, including ‘banana republic’ German politics at 2 AM in the morning (we covered this utterly embarrassing episode several times before and Bristows deliberately mischaracterised it time after time).”Bristows’s latest UPC propaganda (for the first time in weeks) came out thrice in one day. That was yesterday. Nothing from Germany, which is where the main question/barrier lies, just some fluff about the Preparatory Committee, the Hungarian political/court system, and also the Bulgarian one. Those countries don’t really matter to the fate of the UPC; it’s France, Germany and the UK that matter because their signature is imperative. Britain cannot participate and Germany may take a number of years to decide on the constitutional complaint, so don’t expect any developments in this space any time soon. Battistelli is leaving next month. Even IAM, which his PR firm paid for UPC promotion, no longer seems to believe that UPC will ever materialise. Hours ago it wrote from an IAM-run event covering UPC among other things (patents in cars): “UPC – if it happens – will make little difference at first. Why would you use it, when you can go to a German court and get an injunction in less than 12 months? Hogan Lovells partner Benjamin Schroer…”

“It would be overwhelmingly negative for people of Europe and firms of Europe — a fact that Team Battistelli and Team UPC passionately deny or lie about.”UPC would be good for litigation firms and some foreign (non-EU) firms. It would be overwhelmingly negative for people of Europe and firms of Europe — a fact that Team Battistelli and Team UPC passionately deny or lie about. The UPC would be fantastic to patent trolls and the demise of patent quality at the EPO already contributes to this.

A few hours ago IAM tweeted that “Germany is becoming more and more attractive to NPEs [patent trolls]. Maybe Ray should be more worried than he is! – Wilmer Hale partner Justin Watts,” tying this to another tweet quoting Volvo (Sweden): “Up to now 100% of our NPE exposure has been in the US. NPEs in Europe do not keep me awake at night – Millien, Volvo [] Don’t underestimate China, says Volvo’s Millien. I talk to chief IP counxel there who put many chief IP counsel in Europe and US to shame…”

Remember that IAM still denies that trolls even exist, not only that they're a problem. Germany is becoming more and more attractive to patent trolls, says Wilmer Hale, who reaffirmed what IP2Innovate keeps saying, backed by hard numbers.

I responded to IAM with: “But how can this be? IAM wrote long 'articles' (propaganda) denying what IP2Innovate had shown about patent trolls in Europe (did IAM lie?)” (IAM knows who its sponsors are).

“UPC’s intended effect is to override national patent laws and courts, basically enforcing even software patents in nations that strictly forbid these.”Remember that IAM will soon have Battistelli as a keynote speaker. He will be promoting software patents under the guise of “4IR” — a relatively new buzzword/term the EPO invented and promoted by paying the media (corrupting journalism basically). Hours ago it tweeted: “We looked at #4IR from the perspective of patented inventions. Here are the results: http://bit.ly/4IR_findings #wef4ir #ioT #AI #fourthindustrialrevolution”

IAM quoted from its event: “Currently about 10% of a car is composed of software. In the future that will be 30%, says Volvo’s Millien. The risk is that this will lead to patent litigation…”

“This is seductive to law firms.”Only if Battistelli, IAM and others like them succeed in bringing software patents to Europe. They have been working towards that for years. UPC’s intended effect is to override national patent laws and courts, basically enforcing even software patents in nations that strictly forbid these. This is seductive to law firms.

Found via Team UPC and Prospect a few hours ago is this new article, mostly behind paywall about the “farce” which is the “European patent court”. To quote:

This is the business end of Brexit, when all the contradictory promises and impossible dreams come face-to-face with legal reality. Usually we only notice this when it’s about trade, but the same is happening all over society, from security to rules around food recipes. This is the tawdry story of what the government did—and didn’t do—with patents, and why it is now stuck with a series of mutually incompatible promises which are about to collide headlong into one another.

It starts with Theresa May saying one thing and then proceeding to do exactly the opposite. In October 2016, she told the Conservative Party conference that Britain would leave the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). Then, the next month, the government confirmed that in fact it would do the opposite. The first statement was made in the full glare of media attention at a key event in the political calendar. The second was made away from journalists, in a quiet announcement on a departmental website noticed by just a handful of lawyers and nerds.

The rest is behind a paywall, but Team UPC treats that as further evidence that UPC cannot really happen, especially not in the UK. One pro-UPC person wrote: “Will contradiction Brexit -RemainUPC be resolved by merely limiting the announced retreat from reach of CJEU to “direct” CJEU jurisdiction (whatever that may mean)?”

There’s no such thing. To even suggest such a thing is to insinuate that the laws (and even constitutions) can just be violated for the “greater good” which is facilitating the business model of Team UPC, namely litigation boon.

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. Language Patent Lawyers Are Using to Warp the Debate and Decrease Public Understanding of Patents

    The patent microcosm, trying to get the public all baffled/confused about the patent system, continues (mis)using words to convey things in misleading ways



  2. USPTO FEES ACT Makes the US Patent Office a Money-Making Machine That Systematically Disregards Patent Quality

    The lingering issues with patent assessment at the US patent office, which unlike US courts isn't quite so impartial an actor (it benefits more from granting than from rejecting)



  3. Guest Post on Ronan Le Gleut and Benalla at the French Senate (in Light of Battistelli's Epic Abuses)

    Thoughts on the possibility that Battistelli will belatedly be held accountable for his abuses, knowing that a senator representing French Citizens residing Abroad comes from the EPO



  4. A Lot of US Patents Are Entirely Bogus, But Apple Was Willing to Pay for Them

    Apple's resistance to Qualcomm's patent aggression was preceded by very heavy ("thermonuclear" by Steve Jobs' description/words) patent wars against Android and even legitimisation of clearly bogus software patents from Amazon



  5. 'Owning' Nature, Thanks to Patent Insanity and People Who Profit From That

    Questionable patents on things that always existed and are merely being explained or reassembled; those sorts of patents typically serve to merely discredit the patent system and courts too increasingly reject such patents (e.g. SCOTUS on Mayo Collaborative Services and Myriad Genetics, Inc.)



  6. Patents Stranger Than Fiction and 'Protection' From Fictional Things

    Fictional things are being treated like "inventions" and insurance companies now look to exploit fear of fictional things (man-made concepts), such as ownership of mere ideas or words



  7. Benoît Battistelli Refuses to Talk to the Media About Bringing Firearms to the EPO

    Benoît Battistelli's highly aggressive approach has attracted the attention of French media; Battistelli has reportedly refused to comment on that matter, knowing that he lacks a defense (same thing happened after he had hauled millions of EPO euros to his other employer)



  8. Patent Law Firms Have Become More Like Marketing Departments With an Aptitude for Buzzwords

    What we're observing, without much reluctance anymore, is that a lot of patent lawyers still push abstract software patents, desperately looking for new trendy terms or adjectives by which to make these seem non-abstract



  9. Interlude: The Need to Counter Misinformation From the Patent and Litigation 'Industry'

    24,500 posts reached; so we pause and reflect, seeing that many sites/blogs of patent maximalists gradually ebb away



  10. Advocacy of the Unitary Patent System Has Become Almost Identical to the 'Leave' (Brexit) Campaign

    The charades of Team UPC carry on in Kluwer Patent Blog — a blog which for a very long time served no purpose other than Unified Patent Court (UPC) advocacy



  11. Open Invention Network is Rendered Obsolete in the Wake of Alice and It's Not Even Useful in Combating Microsoft's Patent Trolls

    Changes at the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and in US courts' outcomes may have already meant that patent trolls rather than software patents in general are a growing threat, including those that Microsoft is backing, funding and arming to put legal pressure on GNU/Linux (and compel people/companies to host GNU/Linux instances on Azure for patent 'protection' from these trolls)



  12. Bogus Patents Which Oughtn't Have Been Granted Make Products Deliberately Worse, Reducing Innovation and Worsening Customers' Experience

    How shallow patents — or patent applications that no patent office should be accepting — turn out to be at the core of multi-billion-dollar cases/lawsuits, with potentially a billion people impacted (their products made worse to work around such questionable patents)



  13. EPO is Like a Patent Litigation (Without Actual Trial) Office, Not a Patent Examination Office

    Examination of patent applications isn't taken seriously by an office whose entire existence was supposed to be about examination; bureaucracy at the top of this office has apparently decided that the sole goal is to create more demand (i.e. lawsuits) for the litigation 'industry'



  14. Philippe Cadre From the French National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) Wants to Join António Campinos

    Yet another example of INPI's creeping influence if not 'entryism' at the EPO and this time too patent quality isn't a priority



  15. Links 22/9/2018: Mesa 18.2.1, CLIP OS, GPL Settlement in Artifex/First National Title Insurance Company

    Links for the day



  16. Links 21/9/2018: Cockpit 178, Purism 'Dongle'

    Links for the day



  17. Criticism of Unitary Patent (UPC) Agreement Doomed the UPC and Patent Trolls' Plan -- Along With the Litigation Lobby -- for Unified 'Extortion Vector'

    The Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court (UPC) was the trolls' weapon against potentially millions of European businesses; but those businesses have woken up to the fact that it was against their interests and European member states such as Spain and Poland now oppose it while Germany halts ratification



  18. It Wasn't Judges With Weapons in Their Office, It Was Benoît Battistelli Who Brought Firearms to the European Patent Office (EPO)

    The EPO scandals deepen in light of a very major scandal which has occupied the French media for a couple of months



  19. Links 20/9/2018: 2018 Linux Audio Miniconference and Blackboard's Openwashing

    Links for the day



  20. Links 19/9/2018: Chromebooks Get More DEBs, LLVM 7.0.0 Released

    Links for the day



  21. Links 18/9/2018: Qt 5.12 Alpha , MAAS 2.5.0 Beta, PostgreSQL CoC

    Links for the day



  22. Today's European Patent Office (EPO) Works for Large, Foreign Pharmaceutical Companies in Pursuit of Patents on Nature, Life, and Essential/Basic Drugs

    The never-ending insanity which is patents on DNA/genome/genetics and all sorts of basic things that are put together like a recipe in a restaurant; patents are no longer covering actual machinery that accomplishes unique tasks in complicated ways, typically assembled from scratch by humans; some supposed 'inventions' are merely born into existence by the natural splitting of organisms or conception (e.g. pregnancy)



  23. The EPO Has Quit Pretending That It Cares About Patent Quality, All It Cares About is Quantity of Lawsuits

    A new interview with Roberta Romano-Götsch, as well as the EPO's promotion of software patents alongside CIPA (Team UPC), is an indication that the EPO has ceased caring about quality and hardly even pretends to care anymore



  24. Qualcomm's Escalating Patent Wars Have Already Caused Massive Buybacks (Loss of Reserves) and Loss of Massive Clients

    Qualcomm's multi-continental patent battles are an effort to 'shock and awe' everyone into its protection racket; but the unintended effect seems to be a move further and further away from 'Qualcomm territories'



  25. Links 17/9/2018: Torvalds Takes a Break, SQLite 3.25.0 Released

    Links for the day



  26. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Helps Prevent Frivolous Software Patent Lawsuits

    PTAB with its quality-improving inter partes reviews (IPRs) is enraging patent maximalists; but by looking to work around it or weaken it they will simply reduce the confidence associated with US patents



  27. Abstract Patents (Things One Can Do With Pen and Paper, Sometimes an Abacus) Are a Waste of Money as Courts Disregard Them

    A quick roundup of patents and lawsuits at the heart of which there's little or no substance; 35 U.S.C. § 101 renders these moot



  28. “Blockchain” Hype and “FinTech”-Like Buzzwords Usher in Software Patents Everywhere, Even Where Such Patents Are Obviously Bunk

    Not only the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) embraces the "blockchain" hype; business methods and algorithms are being granted patent 'protection' (exclusivity) which would likely be disputed by the courts (if that ever reaches the courts)



  29. Qualcomm's Patent Aggression Threatens Rationality of Patent Scope in Europe and Elsewhere

    Qualcomm's dependence on patent taxes (so-called 'royalties' associated with physical devices which it doesn't even make) highlights the dangers now known; the patent thicket has grown too "thick"



  30. Months After Oil States the Patent Maximalists Are Still Desperate to Crush PTAB in the Courts, Not Just in Congress and the Office

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs) improve patent quality and are therefore a threat to those who profit from spurious feuding and litigation; they try anything they can to turn things around


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