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

09.18.18

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

Posted in Europe, Patents at 4:50 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Dark clouds over every legitimate (practicing) company in Europe

Dark clouds

Summary: 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

TODAY’S EPO is nothing like your father’s and grandfather’s EPO. It has become a lot more like the USPTO (one decade ago, predating much-needed reforms in the US).

“They conflate application pendency with patent quality and staff (as in patent examiners) isn’t happy about this lie.”The EPO’s Roberta Romano-Götsch, who will attend an event in Chicago in which the EPO (per its own words) will promote software patents under the guise of “automobiles” innovation, has done an interview with Gene Quinn (Watchtroll). The second part was published yesterday. It’s an event they organise with IPO, the pressure group of the litigation ‘industry’ (which also lobbies quite ferociously for software patents). EPO promoted this and “stay classy, EPO” was my response to them. “Associating with patent zealots who attack judges just like Battistelli did…”

Regular readers of ours are probably familiar with the tone and the agenda of Watchtroll. From the interview:

We then move on to discuss what the term “quality” means to the EPO, and then pivot into discussing the EPO’s upcoming Automotive and Mobility Seminar, which will take place in Chicago from September 26-27, 2018.

As usual, we prefer not to quote much — or anything at all — from Watchtroll because the site uses misleading terms like “efficient infringers” and insults those who stand for science. The interview reinforces the perception that what EPO means by “quality” is how fast it grants a patent! That’s it. Even if wrongly. They conflate application pendency with patent quality and staff (as in patent examiners) isn’t happy about this lie. Not even stakeholders are happy because what good are patents that would be rendered invalid if brought into a courtroom? The patent microcosm doesn’t care so much because it profits by the number of applications and any visit to the court is very “big money”, irrespective of the outcome of cases (frivolous or not).

We are very concerned that António Campinos is nothing but an extension of Team UPC because his first step as President, on his second day in Office, was UPC boosting. Campinos competed for the job with an actual judge (one who values justice and sports decades of experience, including at the ICC), but Battistelli intervened and stacked the deck as he always does. So now we have another ‘flavour’ of Battistelli — a quieter and more subtle one. “President @EPOorg António Campinos gives a master class to the new civil servant graduates of the #SPTO on IP future challenges,” the EPO quoted another account as saying yesterday. At least we now know how Campinos uses his time. So I asked them: “Did he teach them how to illegally sack workers like he does at the EPO?”

“Campinos competed for the job with an actual judge (one who values justice and sports decades of experience, including at the ICC), but Battistelli intervened and stacked the deck as he always does.”I cited this recent example of what he did at the EU-IPO although there are more recent examples from the EPO.

In another EPO tweet there was yet more of the usual advocacy of software patents — something that the EPO does 2-4 times per day (weekdays). This one explicitly names “computer-implemented inventions” (CII means exactly the same as software patents) and speaks of some “free-of-charge” brainwash from CIPA. To quote: “What’s the EPO’s approach to computer-implemented inventions? Daniel Closa, one of our senior experts, will explain at this free-of-charge seminar in London” (where such patents aren’t allowed “as such”).

The EPO’s liaison with CIPA is a subject we recently covered. The EPO typically associates with IPO, CIPA and Watchtroll these days. In other words, it’s all about the litigation ‘industry’.

“The EPO typically associates with IPO, CIPA and Watchtroll these days. In other words, it’s all about the litigation ‘industry’.”Speaking of this litigation ‘industry’, Managing IP is a site which targets it. It is a pro-UPC publisher (that organised lobbying events for UPC, sometimes directly connected to the EPO). Some media companies are lobbyists and think tanks disguised as “news” and Managing IP is a living reminder of this. Yesterday it published “CIPA urges UK government to stay in EUIPO after Brexit” and then tweeted “CIPA has sent a letter to the UK prime minister asking the government to negotiate continued participation in the EU trade marks and designs system after #Brexit” (Managing IP is being a megaphone of CIPA, as usual).

Even though this has nothing to do with the UPC (which is dead anyway) Team UPC tried to interject things. Thomas Adam wrote on Twitter: “CIPA trying to set an example for continued UPC participation of UK after Brexit?!”

“It’s like the main aim is to ‘generate’ more business for litigators rather than serve the public or acknowledge real innovation.”No, the article doesn’t even mention the UPC. Also published yesterday was this article from Rachel Havard (AA Thornton & Co) titled “Brexit: Considerations for European Union Trade Marks and Registered Community Designs” (UPC not mentioned here either).

The bottom line is that today’s EPO, more so with António Campinos in charge, is little more than an extension in cahoots with the litigation pipeline. It’s like the main aim is to ‘generate’ more business for litigators rather than serve the public or acknowledge real innovation. In our previous post we showed how a European Patent had been used by a notorious bully in Germany (the bully is from the US). No wonder examiners, who are basically scientists, are royally pissed off.

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. Weaponising Russophobia Against One's Critics

    Response to smears and various whispering campaigns whose sole purpose is to deplete the support base for particular causes and people; these sorts of things have gotten out of control in recent years



  2. When the EPO is Run by Politicians It's Expected to Be Aggressive and Corrupt Like Purely Political Establishments

    António 'Photo Op' Campinos will have marked his one-year anniversary in July; he has failed to demonstrate morality, respect for the law, understanding of the sciences, leadership by example and even the most basic honesty (he lies a lot)



  3. Links 16/6/2019: Tmax OS and New Features for KDE.org

    Links for the day



  4. Stuffed/Stacked Panels Sent Back Packing After One-Sided Patent Hearings That Will Convince Nobody, Just Preach to the Choir

    Almost a week ago the 'world tour' of patent lobbyists in US Senate finally ended; it was an utterly ridiculous case study in panel stacking and bribery (attempts to buy laws)



  5. 2019 H1: American Software Patents Are as Worthless as They Were Last Year and Still Susceptible to Invalidation

    With a fortnight left before the second half of the year it seems evident that software patents aren't coming back; the courts have not changed their position at all



  6. As European Patent Office Management Covers up Collapse in Patent Quality Don't Expect UPC to Ever Kick Off

    It would be madness to allow EPO-granted patents to become 'unitary' (bypassing sovereignty of nations that actually still value patent quality); it seems clear that rogue EPO management has, in effect, not only doomed UPC ambitions but also European Patents (or their perceived legitimacy, presumption of validity)



  7. António Campinos -- Unlike His Father -- Engages in Imperialism (Using Invalid Patents)

    Despite some similarities to his father (not positive similarities), António Campinos is actively engaged in imperialistic agenda that defies even European law; the EPO not only illegally grants patents but also urges other patent offices to do the same



  8. António Campinos Takes EPO Waste and Corruption to Unprecedented Levels and Scale

    The “B” word (billions) is thrown around at Europe’s second-largest institution because a mischievous former EUIPO chief (not Archambeau) is ‘partying’ with about half of the EPO’s all-time savings, which are supposed to be reserved for pensions and other vital programmes, not presidential palaces and gambling



  9. Links 15/6/2019: Astra Linux in Russia, FreeBSD 11.3 RC

    Links for the day



  10. Code of Conduct Explained: Partial Transcript - August 10th, 2018 - Episode 80, The Truth About Southeast Linuxfest

    "Ask Noah" and the debate on how a 'Code of Conduct' is forcibly imposed on events



  11. Links 14/6/2019: Xfce-Related Releases, PHP 7.4.0 Alpha

    Links for the day



  12. The EPO is a Patent Troll's Wet Dream

    The makers of software and games in Europe will have to spend a lot of money just keeping patent trolls off their backs — a fact that seems to never bother EPO management because it profits from it



  13. EPO Spreading Patent Extremists' Ideology to the Whole World, Now to South Korea

    The EPO’s footprint around the world's patent systems is an exceptionally dangerous one; The EPO amplifies the most zealous voices of the patents and litigation ‘industry’ while totally ignoring the views and interests of the European public, rendering the EPO an ‘agent of corporate occupation’



  14. Guest Post: Notes on Free Speech, and a Line in the Sand

    We received this anonymous letter and have published it as a follow-up to "Reader's Claim That Rules Similar to the Code of Conduct (CoC) Were 'Imposed' on LibrePlanet and the FSF"



  15. Links 13/6/2019: CERN Dumps Microsoft, GIMP 2.10.12 Released

    Links for the day



  16. Links 12/6/2019: Mesa 19.1.0, KDE neon 5.16, Endless OS 3.6.0 and BackBox Linux 6

    Links for the day



  17. Leaked Financial 'Study' Document Shows EPO Management and Mercer Engaging in an Elaborate “Hoax”

    How the European Patent Office (EPO) lies to its own staff to harm that staff; thankfully, the staff isn't easily fooled and this whole affair will merely obliterate any remnants of "benefit of the doubt" the President thus far enjoyed



  18. Measuring Patent Quality and Employer Quality in Europe

    Comparing the once-famous and respected EPO to today's joke of an office, which grants loads of bogus patents on just about anything including fruit and mathematics



  19. Granting More Fundamentally Wrong Patents Will Mean Reduced Certainty, Not Increased Certainty

    Law firms that are accustomed to making money from low-quality and abstract patents try to overcome barriers by bribing politicians; this will backfire because they show sheer disregard for the patent system's integrity and merely lower the legal certainty associated with granted (by greedy offices) patents



  20. Links 11/6/2019: Wine 4.10, Plasma 5.16

    Links for the day



  21. Chapter 10: Moving Forward -- Getting the Best Results From Open Source With Your Monopoly

    “the gradual shift in public consciousness from their branding towards our own, is the next best thing to owning them outright.”



  22. Chapter 9: Ownership Through Branding -- Change the Names, and Change the World

    The goal for those fighting against Open source, against the true openness (let's call it the yet unexploited opportunities) of Open source, has to be first to figuratively own the Linux brand, then literally own or destroy the brand, then to move the public awareness of the Linux brand to something like Azure, or whatever IBM is going to do with Red Hat.



  23. Links 10/6/2019: VLC 3.0.7, KDE Future Plans

    Links for the day



  24. Patent Quality Continues to Slip in Europe and We Know Who Will Profit From That (and Distract From It)

    The corporate media and large companies don't speak about it (like Red Hat did before entering a relationship with IBM), but Europe is being littered and saturated with a lot of bogus software patents -- abstract patents that European courts would almost certainly throw out; this utter failure of the media to do journalism gets exploited by the "big litigation" lobby and EPO management that's granting loads of invalid European Patents (whose invalidation goes underreported or unreported in the media)



  25. Corporate Front Groups Like OIN and the Linux Foundation Need to Combat Software Patents If They Really Care About Linux

    The absurdity of having groups that claim to defend Linux but in practice defend software patents, if not actively then passively (by refusing to comment on this matter)



  26. Links 9/6/2019: Arrest of Microsoft Peter, Linux 5.2 RC4, Ubuntu Touch Update

    Links for the day



  27. Chapter 8: A Foot in the Door -- How to Train Sympathetic Developers and Infiltrate Other Projects

    How to train sympathetic developers and infiltrate other projects



  28. Chapter 7: Patent War -- Use Low-Quality Patents to Prove That All Software Rips Off Your Company

    Patents in the United States last for 20 years from the time of filing. Prior to 1994, the patent term was 17 years from when the patent was issued.



  29. The Linux Foundation in 2019: Over 100 Million Dollars in Income, But Cannot Maintain Linux.com?

    Today’s Linux Foundation gets about 0.1 billion dollars per year (as explained in our previous post), so why can’t it spend about 0.1% of that money on people who write for and maintain a site that actually promotes GNU/Linux?



  30. Microsoft and Proprietary Software Vendors a Financial Boon for the Linux Foundation, But at What Cost?

    The Linux Foundation is thriving financially, but the sources of income are diversified to the point where the Linux Foundation is actually funded by foes of Linux, defeating the very purpose or direction of such a nonprofit foundation (led by self-serving millionaires who don't use GNU/Linux)


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

Recent Posts