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

10.06.18

The European Patent Office Has Assaulted Patent Quality While Trying to Distract From That

Posted in Europe, Patents at 4:44 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

German Tornado

Summary: The EPO’s lack of interest in the merit of patents that it is granting poses a grave threat to Europe; the ‘patent lust’ of EPO management is helping nobody, definitely not patent examiners (who are the very core and heart of the Office)

MANAGEMENT of the European Patent Office (EPO) — like the new Director of the USPTO — has lost sight of the importance of patent quality and patent judges. Judges are treated like enemies because they guard patent quality (they refuse to accept wrongly-granted patents, based on the respective laws).

“Examiners constantly complain that they can no longer perform their job like they’re supposed to (as per the EPC).”Buried under a load of puff pieces, like the UPC nonsense we've just mentioned, is press coverage about decrease in patent quality. SUEPO has just cited one article to that effect (list updated yesterday). “New EPO messages reveal quality decline and ‘confuse’ staff,” the headline says. The EPO’s management would prefer nobody to see this. Instead, see the JD Supra press release that’s an EPO puff piece from Barley Snyder. From his opening paragraphs:

During my time in Germany, I have learned and discussed with colleagues differences between American and European patent laws ranging from the nuanced to the more pronounced, and the differences in argument strategies corresponding to these legal distinctions.

But one of the commonalities between the patent laws and processes has recently become especially clear.

The patent process, by its nature, requires a patent examiner to conduct legal analyses regarding technology, including proverbially stepping into the shoes of a person “with ordinary skill in the art” at the time the patent application was filed, to determine whether written claim language of the present application is sufficiently different from the prior technology to issue a patent. This determination necessarily involves varying degrees of judgment based on experience. Critical points of understanding can depend on small variations in language. An examiner’s decision in a patent application is necessarily colored by his or her own opinions, personality and understanding of both the application and prior art.

Or, as things stand at the moment, demands and ‘targets’ from above. Examiners constantly complain that they can no longer perform their job like they’re supposed to (as per the EPC).

Hogan Lovells has a new essay on the EPO allowing software patents in Europe (so-called ‘computer-implemented inventions’ or ‘CII’) through misuse of broad and vague buzzwords like “AI”. Published on Friday, it said this:

Earlier this year the European Patent Office (“EPO”) held its first ever conference on patenting artificial intelligence (“AI”). Following intensive discussions on the impact of AI in the patents sector, the EPO promised to update its Guidelines for Examination, to provide specific guidance on the examination of AI applications under existing computer-implemented inventions (“CII”) practice and case law.

The EPO has delivered on its promise. A preview-version of the new Guidelines is now available on its website. These Guidelines are set to take effect on 1 November 2018. Plot spoiler alert – the new section on AI and machine learning now appears in section 3.3.1 of Part G of the Guidelines. Those of you who are familiar with the Guidelines will immediately spot that this new section on AI and machine learning has been inserted under the part of the guidelines that deals with mathematical methods.

We wrote about this as recently as yesterday when we also mentioned patents on life in light of this hearing, as covered yesterday by IPPro Patents. Ben Wodecki (of IPPro Patents) called these patents on nature “unlawful” in the headline (quoting those who judged them):

The European Patent Office (EPO) has reduced the scope of a patent granted to Carlsberg and Heineken related to conventionally-bred barley.

The decision was made during a public hearing in Munich, where examiners found that the patent, which covered conventionally-bred barley, its usage in brewing and the resulting beer, is now restricted to plants with a specific mutation which can influence the content of these flavours.

Originally, the patent covered all plants with a reduced content of some undesirable flavours.

The No Patents on Seeds pressure group said that it plans to appeal the decision as it is “only a partial success” and has called on politicians to take action.

The group had called on European politicians to speak out against companies abusing the patent system so that the EPO “will once again be reminded of their continuing responsibility to protect the common good”.

The EPO’s Web site has not said a word about it. The Twitter account of the EPO did not mention it either. Yesterday the EPO instead chose to belatedly post this nonsense: (warning: epo.org link)

The 58th series of Meetings of the Assemblies of the member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), which took place from 24 September to 2 October 2018, provided a unique opportunity to take stock of the progress in co-operation activities, and to define future directions. The EPO agenda included over 45 official meetings with national patent offices from other regions.

The meetings aimed to further strengthen relations with a number of strategic partners; these take the form of comprehensive co-operation plans which aim to streamline patenting procedures while building up national capacities, and to deliver high-quality training and assistance to the partner offices.

IP Australia officially joined the Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) family by signing Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on the CPC together with a comprehensive biannual work plan. This brings to 28 the number of offices classifying their patent documentation using this highly refined system. Other important developments were the signing of MoUs on co-operation with the National Institute for the Defense of Free Competition and the Protection of Intellectual Property of Peru (INDECOPI), the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), and the Eurasian Patent Office (EAPO). The EPO also renewed its MoU on co-operation with the Superintendence of Industry and Commerce of Colombia, a user of EPOQUE Net.

Seeing the European Patent Office in bed with WIPO (whose abuses can be similar at times) is hardly surprising. Both institutions are patent maximalists who more or less disregard science for the sake of lawyers. Patent offices were never meant to be pipelines for litigation; that kind of changed when a patent lawyer was put in charge of the USPTO, whereas the EPO got itself a politician in charge (and now a former banker).

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 17/2/2019: Compiz 0.9.14.0, Geary 0.13.0, GNU FreeDink 109.6, Debian 9.8, Texinfo 6.6

    Links for the day



  2. Amazon's Patent Policy Should be Enough of a Reason to Boycott Amazon and AWS

    There are many things to criticise Amazon and its founder for; but rarely does the mainstream media bring up the company's appalling patent policy



  3. Don't Use Cloudflare Because You Impose This on People Who Least Want It

    Reasons to stop making the World Wide Web so heavily dependent on some dubious companies like Cloudflare, which already has a worrisome track record



  4. How Many/Most EPO Examiners View 'President' António Campinos

    Based on what readers/insiders have told us, there’s a prevalent perception that António Campinos is afraid of (thus controlled/directed by) Bergot, who is still doing Battistelli’s biddings at the European Patent Office (EPO)



  5. Techrights' Priorities Over the Years

    An old priority of ours, eliminating software patents in the United States, is no longer quite so relevant because such patents are perishing in US courts, with or without outside intervention such as activism



  6. Courts in Disagreement: Warning on Wrongly-Granted European Patents and the Looming Collapse of All Software Patents in Europe

    By devaluing patents and reducing their perceived worth (as is happening in China and Europe) patent offices risk decreasing participation in the very system they fundamentally depend on



  7. Computing Will Not Necessarily Make the World a Better Place

    The vision of "happy world" (because each person has a so-called 'smart' 'phone') is a yuppie delusion that overlooks business models and corporate interests



  8. EPO Grants Fake European Patents -- Including Software Patents -- and European Courts Keep Rejecting These

    The demise of the legitimacy or perceived validity of European Patents is measurable and the system isn't the same anymore; the EPO makes no effort to change this for the better, either



  9. Nobody But Patent Trolls and Litigators Will Benefit From the Corruption of the European Patent Office

    IAM, EPO leadership, Iancu and the rest of these raiders are enabling corruption and facilitating or supporting a racket; that money they collect comes at the expense of future victims of their "clients" or "customers" (that's what they call applicants, to whom they grant dubious monopolies as a matter of urgency)



  10. WSL is a Misleading Acronym/Name Because There's No Linux in It, It's Just Windows

    When Microsoft says "Linux" (as in "Microsoft loves Linux") what it actually means is Windows and/or Azure



  11. Links 16/2/2019: Ubuntu 18.04.2 LTS, PyCharm 2019.1 EAP 4

    Links for the day



  12. Outline/Index of the Alexandre Benalla/Battistelli Scandal

    Our writings about the scandals implicating Benalla and the European Patent Office (EPO)



  13. Reading Techrights on a Mobile Device Running Android

    A new Android app for reading this site is being tested



  14. Links 14/2/2019: “I Love Free Software Day” and Mesa 19.0 RC4 Released

    Links for the day



  15. “EPO Lawlessness Again”

    Blackberry uses bogus European Patents (on software) for lawsuits; "all of them pure software patents. Patents on programs for computers as such," as Müller puts it



  16. Unitary Patent (UPC) is All About Imposing Patent Maximalists' Ideology of Greed and Self Interest on Courts in the Name of 'Unification' or 'Consistency' or 'Community'

    Pushers of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) are upset that they don’t always get their way when independent judges get to decide; as it turns out, many European Patents are just fake patents, more so under António Campinos



  17. Battistelli's Bodyguard, Part V: Mediapart Explains the 'Raid' Attempt, Reporters Without Borders Involved

    Mediapart, an investigative site that unearths a lot of incriminating things about Battistelli's former bodyguard Alexandre Benalla, was the target of a raid attempt some weeks ago



  18. Links 13/2/2019: Tails 3.12.1, MongoDB Being Dumped

    Links for the day



  19. Battistelli's Bodyguard, Part IV: Suspected Offenses of Forgery and Possible Falsification

    In a very underworld fashion, Benalla continues to break the law and create yet more scandals



  20. Battistelli's Bodyguard, Part III: Mars, France Close Protection (Benalla's Family), and Russian Oligarchy

    An article which examines the business background of Benalla, the outrageous salaries, the severance indemnity pay, and contract with a Russian oligarch close to Vladimir Putin



  21. Links 13/2/2019: Plasma 5.15.0 and a Look at Linux Mint Debian Edition Cindy

    Links for the day



  22. Battistelli's Bodyguard, Part II: Fishing Expedition for Sources in the Alexandre Benalla 'Underworld' Scandal

    An utter lack of respect for the privacy of the media and of its sources, in the name of protecting the privacy of those convicted of crimes, as seen in France just like the European Patent Office



  23. Innovating the Idea That Software Patents (Monopolies on Algorithms) Are Covering 'Artificial' 'Intelligence' (AI and ML as Loopholes)

    Patent law firms around the world love this new trick, which is framing software that makes decisions as "AI" (magically rendering it patent-eligible only in offices but not in courts, which the EPO hopes to replace/override anyway)



  24. Battistelli's Bodyguard, Part I: Destruction of Evidence by Alexandre Benalla

    The Alexandre Benalla scandal carries on, deepening even further than before and causing raids of the media; will the EPO be implicated and held accountable too?



  25. Links 12/2/2019: PyPy 7.0.0, HHVM 4.0.0 and CVE-2019-5736

    Links for the day



  26. USPTO Director Iancu Works for Anti-SCOTUS (Against Section 101) Lobbyists

    The United States Patent and Trademark Office Director Andrei Iancu is becoming to the patent system what Ajit Pai is to the FCC or to the broadband industry; there appears to be intentional vandalism and total disregard for the rule of law



  27. Gross Violations of the EPC at the European Patent Office as Principal Priority Turns Against Science and Technology

    What good is the law if violation of the European Patent Convention (EPC) is so routine at today’s European Patent Office (EPO), which exploits its immunity to operate outside the rule of law and pursue nothing but cash (selling patents/monopolies that are invalid in courts)?



  28. European Patent Office's Exploitation of the 'AI' Catchphrase/Buzzword to Grant Patents on Algorithms in Defiance of the Rules, the Law, and Common Sense

    In clear violation of the EPC (i.e. more of the same from the EPO) software patents are being actively promoted and law being bypassed or worked around



  29. Microsoft's Patent Trolls Are Still Suing Microsoft's Rivals to Help Sell Microsoft

    The ‘new’ Microsoft boils down to the patent equivalent of the copyright case of SCO (funded by Microsoft)



  30. The American Software Patents Lobby Has Died

    Voices of US law firms (i.e. patent maximalists) have become quieter and rarer; applications for US patents have decreased in number, patent litigation numbers have collapsed entirely, and patent maximalists have moved on


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