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

07.11.18

The Lack of Genuine, Honest Discussion About Patent Quality Means That Under António Campinos Software Patents Will Continue to be Granted, Campinos Strives to Make Them ‘Unitary’

Posted in Europe, Patents at 2:01 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Still basking in and glorifying Battistelli’s “Quality Report 2017″ rather than what examiners say

Napoleonic cannon
The Napoleonic President just wanted lots of patent wars in Europe

Summary: The agenda of the litigation ‘industry’ is still being served by the existing EPO administration; this is a problem because not only do they grant patents on just about anything but they also attempt to broaden litigation jurisdiction

THE EPO appears to be changing its management (not just António Campinos), but will it change its policies too? So far, judging by the first week of Campinos, it doesn’t seem so because they actively deny the decline in patent quality and still viciously pursue ‘unitary’ effect, effectively spreading low-quality patents and rulings about them to the whole of Europe in defiance of local patent laws, constitutions etc.

“Several times yesterday Boult Wade Tennant was acting like a mouthpiece for Battistelli and his team, parroting whatever it takes to distract from EPO crises (such as patent quality plunging).”Will the EPO mention the apparent collapse of Team Battistelli or leave that ‘buried’ in the “Jobs” section while posting fluff like this? Battistelli’s corruption isn’t forgotten/forgettable, nor is the role of his enablers.

Several times yesterday Boult Wade Tennant was acting like a mouthpiece for Battistelli and his team, parroting whatever it takes to distract from EPO crises (such as patent quality plunging). Matthew Ridley posted this thing in Lexology, noting: “My guess is that many users of the patent system would much prefer to see the quality of granted European patents increase rather than see further increases in the speed of grant or rejection.”

Also in Lexology his colleague Phil Merchant (Boult Wade Tennant) cited Battistelli’s “Quality Report 2017,” missing the point that the EPO now fakes ‘quality’ by conflating it with speed, or “timeliness”. To quote Merchant:

As those familiar with the experience will attest, applying for a patent is often not a quick process. It takes time for a patent office to process an application, perform a search on relevant prior art and conduct an examination on whether an invention should be granted a patent. This delay can be frustrating for applicants, who would prefer to be able to commercialise their Intellectual Property as soon as possible.

In recognition of applicants’ desires, the European Patent Office (EPO) launched the ‘Early Certainty’ initiative in 2014 to attempt to speed up the patent granting process – initially to speed up delivery of search results, but revised in 2016 to speed up substantive examination and opposition. The EPO’s Quality Report 2017 (found here), published this week, reports on the progress towards achieving these goals.

[...]

The Quality Report 2017 provides some reassurance that the EPO is taking such concerns seriously, including positive steps toward quality assurance. We in the profession are therefore hopeful that the progress in timeliness at the EPO can continue to be made without sacrificing the high quality for which it is well respected across the world.

António Campinos just kept repeating the word "quality" and, as expected, a roundup of this spiel of his was written up at the end (warning: epo.org link, via Twitter).

“The EPO pretends that the ‘epoch’ was 8 years ago. It’s always 8 years. Always Battistelli. They still pretend it was some kind of “golden era” rather than the collapse of the EPO.”The EPO has also just mentioned the Boards of Appeal (page contents repeated in Twitter yesterday), making it all about Battistelli. To reproduce their own words (warning: epo.org link): “In the past eight years the event has attracted more than 1.400 participants to attend and engage with Boards of Appeal members and each other on key topics relating to Boards of Appeal decisions.”

The EPO pretends that the ‘epoch’ was 8 years ago. It’s always 8 years. Always Battistelli. They still pretend it was some kind of “golden era” rather than the collapse of the EPO. What happened to patent quality? What happened to staff quality? What happened to the EPO’s reputation? How about the death of the UPC? The vision of ‘unitary’ patents is dead and only Bristows is still delusional enough (or sufficiently self-deluding) to speak about the CMS that will never be used. Yesterday it wrote this:

Over the last nine months, various members of the judiciary, their clerks, lawyers (including our own Luke Maunder), and others have been engaged in user acceptance testing (UAT) of the ‘sunrise’ version of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Case Management System (CMS) test site.

It’s never going to be used. They might as well call off development, having wasted a lot of money and time on this unconstitutional pile of rubbish. UPC was never desirable; it’s a patent trolls’ fantasy, which is being promoted by sites that support patent trolls. Mind Watchtroll’s EPO interview from yesterday and mention of a new lawsuit in Eastern Texas, which typically attracts patent trolls. “U.S. Patent No. 10,000,000 just issued June 19, 2018,” it said, “and already a patent in the 10 million series is being enforced. On July 3, 2018, the day the patent issued, Whirlpool Corporation filed a patent infringement lawsuit in the United States Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.”

“It ought to be noted that the EPO too has been promoting software patents; is this what Battistelli had in mind for ‘unitary’ patents? Abstract ideas as monopolies EU-wide?”The vision/purpose of ‘unitary’, low-quality European Patents was supposed to attract much of such litigation to Germany, causing a headache to a lot of companies for the sake of the litigation ‘industry’.

The patent trolls’ lobby, IAM, meanwhile reports another new lawsuit in Eastern Texas. Richard Lloyd wrote about the former owner of SUSE (UK-based with German pedigree) getting sued in the patent trolls-friendly courts. To quote:

Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) and British software company Micro Focus have been accused of infringing three patents relating to the development of mobile applications in a pair of lawsuits filed last week in the Eastern District of Texas. The plaintiff, which is demanding damages of at least $400 million, is listed on the court filing as Wapp Tech Limited Partnership and Wapp Tech Corp, although the three patents in question were developed and are owned by inventor Donavan Paul Poulin.

These are software patents. This is why they target the courts in Texas. It ought to be noted that the EPO too has been promoting software patents; is this what Battistelli had in mind for ‘unitary’ patents? Abstract ideas as monopolies EU-wide?

“The EPO (in collaboration with IAM) has already admitted this is about software patents…”Yesterday we noticed that the University of Detroit Mercy promotes buzzwords which Battistelli and the EPO used to promote/popularise even in the US, notably “Fourth Industrial Revolution” or “4IR” (“Industry 4.0″), adding to other (older) buzzwords, e.g. “ICT”, “CII”, “AI” and so on.

Wissam Aoun (University of Detroit Mercy’s School of Law) wrote this abstract:

During the first Industrial Revolution, the patent system developed in an era of democratized invention. Individual inventors dominated patent filings and helped create a narrative surrounding the transformative impact of the patent system on the lives of inventors and society. Existing scholarship often overlooks the role of patent agents, those individuals who assisted inventors in securing patent rights, during this era. Industrial Revolution era patent agency was broad and indiscrete compared to its current form, which was largely a product of the needs of individual inventors and a pre-professionalization view of the discipline. As corporatization slowly replaced the individual inventor and professionalization began to dominate many occupational fields, the professional patent agent materialized. However, the emergence of disruptive technologies in our new Fourth Industrial Revolution may be reversing both of these trends, with the re-emergence of democratized invention and challenging the discretization of many fields of professional service.

The EPO (in collaboration with IAM) has already admitted this is about software patents and here is how they excuse this internally in the Gazette.

Software patents in Europe

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

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

What Else is New


  1. 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



  2. 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



  3. 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



  4. 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)



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

    Links for the day



  6. 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)



  7. 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)



  8. 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



  9. 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



  10. 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



  11. 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



  12. 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



  13. “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



  14. 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



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

    Links for the day



  16. 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



  17. 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



  18. 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



  19. 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



  20. 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)?



  21. 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



  22. 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



  23. Links 17/7/2018: Catfish 1.4.6 Released, ReactOS 0.4.9, Red Hat's GPL Compliance Group Grows

    Links for the day



  24. Links 16/7/2018: Linux 4.18 RC5, Latte Dock v0.8, Windows Back Doors Resurface

    Links for the day



  25. Alliance for US Startups and Inventors for Jobs (USIJ) Misleads the US Government, Pretending to Speak for Startups While Spreading Lies for the Patent Microcosm

    In the United States, which nowadays strives to raise the patent bar, the House Small Business Committee heard from technology firms but it also heard from some questionable front groups which claim to support "startups" and "jobs" (but in reality support just patents on the face of it)



  26. 'Blockchain', 'Cloud' and Whatever Else Gets Exploited to Work Around 35 U.S.C. § 101 (or the EPC) and Patent Algorithms/Software

    Looking for a quick buck or some low-quality patents (which courts would almost certainly reject), opportunists carry on with their gold rush, aided by buzzwords and hype over pretty meaningless things



  27. PTAB Defended by the EFF, the R Street Institute and CCIA as the Number of Petitions (IPRs) Continues to Grow

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs) come to the rescue when patently-bogus patents are used, covering totally abstract concepts (like software patents do); IPRs continue to increase in number and opponents of PTAB, who conveniently cherry-pick Supreme Court (SCOTUS) decisions, can't quite stop that



  28. IAM/Joff Wild May Have Become a de Facto Media Partner of the Patent Troll iPEL

    Invitation to trolls in China, courtesy of the patent trolls' lobby called "IAM"; this shows no signs of stopping and has become rather blatant



  29. Cautionary Tale: ILO Administrative Tribunal Cases (Appeals) 'Intercepted' Under António Campinos

    The ILO Administrative Tribunal (ILO-AT) is advertised by the EPO's management as access to justice, but it's still being undermined quite severely to the detriment of aggrieved staff



  30. Asking the USPTO to Comply With 35 U.S.C. § 101 is Like Asking Pentagon Officials to Pursue Real, Persistent Peace

    Some profit from selling weapons, whereas others profit from patent grants and litigation; what's really needed right now is patent sanity and adherence to the public interest as well as the law itself, e.g. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) decisions


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