03.08.19
Gemini version available ♊︎António Campinos Will Not Tackle Any of the Lingering Issues at the European Patent Office
Summary: A man of his war (or his master’s war) rather than his word, Mr. Campinos makes it abundantly clear that patent quality issues are off the agenda and corruption persists without it ever being tackled
SOFT-SPOKEN EPO President António Campinos has just been to Bucharest, where Ben Wodecki of IPPro Magazine saw him speak. It was an EU event. Wodecki noted that this happened after “patentability of plants obtained by essentially biological processes [had been questioned] following several high profile invalidation cases.” We wrote about it earlier this morning as it signifies the decline in quality (of European Patents). To quote:
European Patent Office president António Campinos emphasised the need for “a strong partnership and results-oriented co-operation” at the EU Presidency conference in Bucharest.
Campinos called for all EPO member states to cooperate within a globally relevant European Patent Network.
Representatives from all EPO member states met recently to discuss the patentability of plants obtained by essentially biological processes following several high profile invalidation cases.
[...]
The event was hosted by Romania’s State Office for Inventions and Trademarks (OSIM). It was attended by almost 100 national, European and international IP stakeholders.
IPPro Magazine wrote yet more. In a new article titled “EPO users want greater flexibility in examination” Wodecki looks at what EPO management claims the findings of a survey to be, having surveyed self-selecting people (only a minuscule 600 folks participated in this EPO survey). The set of questions, as noted months ago, was designed to not talk about corruption and quality, instead on timing (which the management maliciously conflates with quality). To quote:
A majority of users at the European Patent Office (EPO) want greater flexibility in the timing of examination, according to a survey.
In a survey of 627 EPO users, more than 300 said they would be in favour of a procedural option for postponing examination of a European patent application in order to increase flexibility.Respondents in favour of a procedural option commented on the need to allow time for examination results to return from other countries, more time to assess the commercial value of an invention and better alignment of the timing of examination with long product development cycles and regulatory approval procedures.
Respondents also noted that a postponement of examination could optimise resources by postponing the prosecution and/or validation costs, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises.
Notice how they dodge discussion about patent quality and EPO corruption. They’re not interested in tacking any of the problems introduced by Battistelli. SUEPO has linked to neither of the above articles and EPO staff (or staff representatives) weren’t contacted for their side of the story. To IPPro Magazine‘s credit, it does routinely seek their opinion.
The bottom line is, as even SUEPO alleged a week ago, Campinos is just another Battistelli. It’s all promises, but no actions, just stonewalling and occasional tantrums. █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA