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

06.15.18

The ‘Artificial Intelligence’ (AI) Hype, Propped Up by Events of the European Patent Office (EPO), is Infectious and It Threatens Patent Quality Worldwide

Posted in America, Deception, Europe, Patents at 1:43 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Same for “4IR”: EPO-Funded Propaganda for Software Patents Reaches as Far as East Asia and the EPO Then Brags About That

EPO gazette

Summary: Having spread surrogate terms like “4IR” (somewhat of a 'mask' for software patents, by the EPO's own admission in the Gazette), the EPO continues with several more terms like “ICT” and now we’re grappling with terms like “AI”, which the media endlessly perpetuates these days (in relation to patents it de facto means little more than “clever algorithms”)

TECHRIGHTS routinely comments, sometimes quite harshly, about the EPO and USPTO not because it opposes patents but because it opposes patent maximalism. The same can be said for copyrights and trademarks; we’re in favour of both, but in moderation. We need policy that actually reflects societal needs rather than a meta-industry saturated by lawyers. None of this is new of course; copyright maximalists typically receive most of the attention in the media (e.g. this story that’s circulating this week [1, 2]) and we feel like there’s a lack of sceptics when it comes to patent maximalism. Some sites are against patents altogether, but we’re not among them.

“Some sites are against patents altogether, but we’re not among them.”As we noted the other day, there’s this new example of patents being used to reach a deal over patents. These are not software patents and IPPro Patents makes is sound like an amicable agreement rather than a lawsuit or even a threat of lawsuit.

Global Graphics Software is licensing three patents covering inventions by Mitchell Bogart, the inventor and managing member of Rampage LLC.

The company plans to utilise the methods alongside its own software solutions for inkjet and to pass on the benefits exclusively to its original equipment manufacturer (OEM) customers.

The three patents are US patent numbers. 9,053,410, 9,734,440, and 9,278,566, which cover the Quantone processing methods of screening and compensation for multiple gray-level digital presses and automatic print head registration.

Sadly, the media does not have many stories like the above. We typically read and hear only about lawsuits. Sometimes we see press releases about newly-granted patents. Patent maximalists like the patent trolls’ lobby (IAM) obsess over the number of patents (this one is from yesterday), not the quality. Why not just automatically generate and then grant a billion patents overnight. Would that make them happy?

“Only crazy patent fans who make a living from an overabundance of patents (irrespective of their quality) actually keep track of the number and salivate over US patent number 10 million. That’s IAM anyway.”Given the low quality of IAM’s own reporting (accuracy/fact-checking) or even the utter lack of objectiveness at this patent trolls’ megaphone, what makes us think/believe they don’t also fabricate so-called ‘benchmarks’ and surveys? It seems like what they call “quality” has nothing whatsoever to do with the quality of patents; it’s about how many patents are granted and how quickly (known as “timeliness”).

The above post, titled “Celebrating US patent number 10,000,000,” is similar to many posts we saw before (this one is from Timothy Au, who several times earlier this month acted as Battistelli’s agent of Big Lies, namely the “quality” lie). The number of patents or mere quantity (lawsuits, patents) does not indicate level of innovation but of friction. Only crazy patent fans who make a living from an overabundance of patents (irrespective of their quality) actually keep track of the number and salivate over US patent number 10 million. That’s IAM anyway. Each newly-granted patent is another potential lawsuit (or several). Lawsuits are only/mostly fun for lawyers.

Having just finished an anti-§ 101 lobbying event in the United States, IAM must be very proud of itself (Microsoft was AI-washing software patents in there). It helped crooked Benoît Battistelli and Andrei Iancu. They’re both patent maximalists. A press release has just been issued by the USPTO to say:

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) hosted the annual meeting of the heads of the world’s five largest intellectual property offices, commonly referred to as the IP5. In addition to the USPTO, the members of the IP5 include the European Patent Office (EPO), the Japan Patent Office (JPO), the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), and the State Intellectual Property Office of the People’s Republic of China (SIPO). Together, the five offices handle approximately 80 percent of the world’s patent applications.

They are already calling software patents “AI” in order to make software seem patentable (if judges actually ‘buy’ that). As IP Watch has just noted (hours ago): “World’s 5 Largest IP Offices Name Artificial Intelligence A Top Strategic Priority [...] The heads of the patent offices of China, Europe, Korea, Japan and the United States met today and declared artificial intelligence one of the top strategic priorities for them as a group. Other efforts included work on harmonising patent practices, the Global Dossier program, classification of new technologies, and patents and standards, according to a release.”

“More buzzwords like “fintech” (similar to “blockchain” in the contextual sense) are nowadays appearing as a pretext for software patenting.”And from the press release (as above) “In addition to USPTO Director Iancu, meeting participants included Benoît Battistelli, President of the EPO [...] The impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on the patent system was identified as one of the main IP5 strategic priorities to be the subject of common reflection.”

Dennis Crouch soon amplified this as well. Over the past month we wrote quite a few articles about this “AI” hype, which the EPO dedicated a whole pro-software patents event to. The EPO also uses terms like ICT, CII, and 4IR. It’s almost always about software.

More buzzwords like “fintech” (similar to “blockchain” in the contextual sense) are nowadays appearing as a pretext for software patenting. Here’s Tech Wire Asia on Singapore, having published this article only hours ago. Mind this part, which speaks more explicitly about software:

How Singapore’s fast-track patents will help fintech innovations

[...]

Unlike copyright, which in the case of software protects the code itself, patents protect the concept or functionality available on the software.

This means that a third party who replicate a similar function, even if using a totally different set of code, would be in violation of your patent. Patents tend to last for 20 years from the date of filing.

For businesses, this is crucial for distinguishing your offerings from others. If you are selling a piece of software or a service with a particularly unique feature, patents prevent other companies from copying it.

Another typical loophole for software patents? Calling things “fintech”, “blockchain” and whatever buzzword/hype du jour catches one’s eye?

“The EPO needs to watch out because large law firms are noticing the decline in patent quality (no matter what lies IAM is disseminating for Battistelli). They argue that this may result in significant decline in applications, necessitating layoffs and further fee reductions (to spur if not fake ‘demand’).”We recently wrote about Qualcomm‘s dubious patents, European Patents from the EPO included, as we noted earlier this month and last month [1, 2]. Josh Landau from the CCIA says* that the ITC might soon get involved and he notes that “Qualcomm has already dropped several patents from this case and in a companion European case admitted that some of its patents are of questionable validity.”

The EPO needs to watch out because large law firms are noticing the decline in patent quality (no matter what lies IAM is disseminating for Battistelli). They argue that this may result in significant decline in applications, necessitating layoffs and further fee reductions (to spur if not fake ‘demand’).
____
* Landau’s new post may be the subject of later reporting as it involves antitrust aspects too. To quote: “The first Apple/Qualcomm International Trade Commission (ITC) case is about to kick into high gear, with the prehearing conference scheduled for Friday and the hearing (essentially the equivalent of a trial in the ITC) opening next week. Qualcomm has already dropped several patents from this case and in a companion European case admitted that some of its patents are of questionable validity. Setting aside the merits of the patents in the ITC case, why is Qualcomm using the ITC as part of their litigation strategy?”

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. Science Minister Sam Gyimah and the EPO Are Eager to Attack Science by Bringing Patent Trolls to Europe/European Union and the United Kingdom

    Team UPC has managed to indoctrinate or hijack key positions, causing those whose job is to promote science to actually promote patent trolls and litigation (suppressing science rather than advancing it)



  2. USF Revisits EPO Abuses, Highlighting an Urgent Need for Action

    “Staff Representation Disciplinary Cases” — a message circulated at the end of last week — reveals the persistence of union-busting agenda and injustice at the EPO



  3. Links 14/11/2018: KDevelop 5.3, Omarine 5.3, Canonical Not for Sale

    Links for the day



  4. Second Day of EPOPIC: Yet More Promotion of Software Patents in Europe in Defiance of Courts, EPC, Parliament and Common Sense

    Using bogus interpretations of the EPC — ones that courts have repeatedly rejected — the EPO continues to grant bogus/fake/bunk patents on abstract ideas, then justifies that practice (when the audience comes from the litigation ‘industry’)



  5. Allegations That António Campinos 'Bought' His Presidency and is Still Paying for it

    Rumours persist that after Battistelli had rigged the election in favour of his compatriot nefarious things related to that were still visible



  6. WIPO Corruption and Coverup Mirror EPO Tactics

    Suppression of staff representatives and whistleblowers carries on at WIPO and the EPO; people who speak out about abuses are themselves being treated like abusers



  7. Links 13/11/2018: HPC Domination (Top 500 All GNU/Linux) and OpenStack News

    Links for the day



  8. The USPTO and EPO Pretend to Care About Patent Quality by Mingling With the Terms “Patent” and “Quality”

    The whole "patent quality" propaganda from EPO and USPTO management continues unabated; they strive to maintain the fiction that quality rather than money is their prime motivator



  9. Yannis Skulikaris Promotes Software Patents at EPOPIC, Defending the Questionable Practice Under António Campinos

    The reckless advocacy for abstract patents on mere algorithms from a new and less familiar face; the EPO is definitely eager to grant software patents and it explains to stakeholders how to do it



  10. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is Working for Patent Trolls and Patent Maximalists

    The patent trolls' propagandists are joining forces and pushing for a patent system that is hostile to science, technology, and innovation in general (so as to enable a bunch of aggressive law firms to tax everybody)



  11. Team UPC, Fronting for Patent Trolls From the US, is Calling Facts “Resistance”

    The tactics of Team UPC have gotten so tastelessly bad and its motivation so shallow (extortion in Europe) that one begins to wonder why these people are willing to tarnish everything that's left of their reputation



  12. The Federal Circuit Bar Association (FCBA) Will Spread the Berkheimer Lie While Legal Certainty Associated With Patents Remains Low and Few Lawsuits Filed

    New figures regarding patent litigation in the United States (number of lawsuits) show a decrease by about a tenth in just one year; there's still no sign of software patents making any kind of return/rebound in the United States, contrary to lies told by the litigation 'industry' (those who profit from frivolous lawsuits/threats)



  13. Links 12/11/2018: Linux 4.20 RC2, Denuvo DRM Defeated Again

    Links for the day



  14. Automation of Searches Will Not Solve the Legitimacy Problem Caused by Patents Lust

    The false belief that better searches and so-called 'AI' can miraculously assess patents will simply drive/motivate bad decisions and already steers bad management towards patent maximalism (presumption of examination/validation where none actually exists)



  15. The Federal Circuit and PTAB Are Not Slowing Down; Patent Maximalists Claim It's 'Harassment' to Question a Patent's Validity

    There’s no sign of stopping when it comes to harassment of judges and courts; those who make a living from patent threats and litigation do anything conceivable to stop the ‘bloodbath’ of US patents which were never supposed to have been granted in the first place



  16. Patent Maximalists Will Latch Onto Return Mail v US Postal Service in an Effort to Weaken or Limit Post-Grant Reviews of US Patents

    An upcoming case, dealing with what governments can and cannot do with/to patents (specifically the US government and US patents), interests the litigation 'industry' because it loathes reviews of low-quality and/or controversial patents (these reviews discourage litigation or stop lawsuits early on in the cycle)



  17. Guest Post: EPO Spins Censorship of Staff Representation

    Another concrete example of Campinos' cynical story-telling



  18. Andrei Iancu and Laura Peter Are Two Proponents of Patent Trolls at the Top of the USPTO

    Patent offices do not seem to care about the law, about the courts, about judges and so on; all they care about is money (and litigation costs) and that’s a very major problem



  19. The Patent 'Industry' Wants Incitations and Feuds, Not Innovation and Collaboration

    The litigation giants and their drones keep insisting that they're interested in helping scientists; but sooner or later the real (productive) industry learns to kick them to the curb and work together instead of suing



  20. EPO 'Outsourcing' Rumours

    The EPO advertises jobs in Prague and Lisbon; this leads to speculations less than a year after António Campinos sent EU-IPO jobs to India (for cost reduction)



  21. Links 11/11/2018: Bison 3.2.1 and FreeBSD 12.0 Beta 4

    Links for the day



  22. Pro-Litigation Front Groups Like CIPA and Team UPC Control the EPO, Which Shamelessly Grants Software Patents

    With buzzwords and hype like "insurtech", "fintech", "blockchains" and "AI" the EPO (and to some degree the USPTO as well) looks to allow a very wide range of software patents; the sole goal is to grant millions of low-quality patents, creating unnecessary litigation in Europe



  23. Latest Loophole: To Get Software Patents From the EPO One Can Just Claim That They're 'on a Car'

    The EPO has a new 'study' (accompanied by an extensive media/PR campaign) that paints software as "SDV" if it runs on a car, celebrating growth of such software patents



  24. The Huge Cost of Wrongly-Granted European Patents, Recklessly Granted by the European Patent Office (EPO)

    It took 4 years for many thousands of people to have just one patent of Monsanto/Bayer revoked; what does that say about the impact of erroneous patent awards?



  25. Links 10/11/2018: Mesa 18.3 RC2, ‘Linux on DeX’ Beta and Windows Breaking Itself Again

    Links for the day



  26. Unified Patents Takes Aim at Velos Media SEPs, Passed From Patent Aggressor Qualcomm

    The latest endeavour from Unified Patents takes aim at notorious standard-essential patents (SEPs), which are not compatible with Free/Open Source software and are typically invalid as per 35 U.S.C. § 101 as well



  27. Stacked Panels of Front Groups Against PTAB and in Favour of Patents on Life/Nature

    So-called 'panels' where the opposition is occluded or excluded try to sell the impression that greatness comes from patent maximalism (overpatenting) rather than restriction based on merit and rational scope



  28. With Patent Trolls Like Finjan and Blackbird Tech out There, Microsoft in OIN Does Not Mean Safety

    With many patent trolls out there (Microsoft’s Intellectual Ventures alone has thousands of them) it’s not at all clear how Microsoft can honestly claim to have reached a “truce”; OIN deals with issues which last manifested/publicly revealed themselves a decade ago (Microsoft suing directly, not by proxy)



  29. Links 9/11/2018: Qt 5.12.0 Beta 4, Ubuntu On Samsung Galaxy Devices, Rust 1.30.1

    Links for the day



  30. Microsoft is Supporting Patent Trolls, Still. New Leadership at USPTO Gives Room for Concern.

    New statements from Microsoft's management (Andersen) serve to show that Microsoft hasn't really changed; it's just trying to sell "Azure IP Advantage", hoping that enough patent trolls with their dubious software patents will blackmail GNU/Linux users into adopting Azure for 'protection'


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