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

04.04.19

EPO Management is Knowingly and Consciously Granting Invalid European Patents, Including Patents on Life and Nature

Posted in Europe, Patents at 7:23 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Anything to fake so-called ‘production’

3 pears

Summary: A “patents on everything, just apply today at the EPO!” attitude has tarnished the reputation of the EPO; it’s abundantly clear that the EPC is being routinely violated because all that matters to the EPO is money from applications and renewals (milking cows)

IT IS everything but amusing to see the attitude of Iancu at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and António Campinos at the European Patent Office (EPO). They disregard the law, they mock judges. They grant software patents which they know would not be upheld in courts. As a patent maximalist put it yesterday in relation to the USPTO: “the agency was refusing to issue patents that it saw as crossing-the-eligibility-line. However, the new statements by Dir. Iancu go the other-way, with the USPTO creating a policy of issuing patents that the courts would find invalid (if given the opportunity). The statement from the court here is important although buried in a non-precedential opinion. One reason for its importance is its clear tension with the Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Natural Alternatives that called for Skidmore deference to be given to the PTO statement on eligibility.”

The subject is important enough that, even though we refuse to cover pertinent US patent cases, we wrote about it yesterday. The same thing is going to happen in Europe. To a certain degree, it is already happening. We wrote about it last week and the week before that after the UK Supreme Court had dealt with such a matter (after they had thrown out yet another European Patent). At Lexology, Gowling WLG’s Gordon Harris and Paul Inman wrote about the UK Supreme Court in relation to the EPO as recently as yesterday (“The UK Supreme Court review of the law of obviousness”), so people aren’t forgetting just yet. There’s a growing sense of tension between courts/judges and the EPO — similar to what we see in the Federal Circuit and SCOTUS (US).

“There’s a growing sense of tension between courts/judges and the EPO — similar to what we see in the Federal Circuit and SCOTUS (US).”We keep exploring various new decisions and grants, only to find a rather consistent pattern. Those who are inside the EPO are inclined to do what Campinos wants (maybe fearing for their livelihood), whereas outside the EPO we keep seeing European Patents invalided aplenty. Is the Opposition Division free to rule as it sees fit? Without fear from management, which is a pack of patent maximalists? Is the Opposition Division any more independent than the Boards of Appeal? No, neither is independent. So here’s one newly-announced outcome which pertains to mass litigation in Düsseldorf:

Visual technology market leader RealD Inc. announced today that the European Patent Office’s (EPO) Opposition Division has upheld the validity of another one of the Company’s key patents for light-doubling 3D cinema projection systems. As a result, RealD’s European patent that covers triple-beam 3D cinema projection systems (EP2846180) remains in full force.

RealD announced on December 18, 2017 the filing of a complaint with the District Court in Düsseldorf, Germany, alleging that Volfoni SAS, Volfoni GmbH and CinemaNext Deutschland Gmbh have infringed three of RealD’s European patents by the importation, sale, or offer for sale of the Volfoni SmartCrystal Diamond cinema systems in Germany. In the complaint, RealD requested an injunction banning the sale of the infringing devices and sought financial damages.

By the sound of it, the patents might still not be valid, but it remains to be decided by someone outside the EPO, which is managed by patent maximalists. Watch what they wrote yesterday about “medtech” (their new buzzword and hashtag for algorithms that are used in a medical context). They also used the hashtag “biotech” and the term "life sciences" (bogus nonsense, used more often than not to describe life and nature as patent-worthy man-made 'inventions'). To quote yesterday’s tweet: “Do you work in life sciences? Eight of the EPO’s top ten applicants for #biotech #patents came from Europe.”

Like what, patents on genetics? Vegetables? Seeds? Pigs?

The EPO is granting patents on life. Patents on nature, too. When do we get to see patents on religions and superstition too? Is “God” patented yet? All the “Gods”?

Global Banking And Finance Review has this new press release about genetics being patented in spite of the CRISPR controversy (Opposition Division). In their own words:

ERS Genomics Limited announced today that the European Patent Office (EPO) has issued a new patent to Dr. Emmanuelle Charpentier, The Regents of the University of California and University of Vienna. EPO Patent No. 3,401,400 claims methods and compositions of using CRISPR/Cas9 to modify DNA and regulate gene activity in eukaryotic cells, including kits to carry out such work. ERS Genomics provides broad access to these and other foundational CRISPR/Cas9 patents co-owned by Dr. Emmanuelle Charpentier.

Great! European Patents on genetics! Yet again.

EPO management keeps pretending that it’ll tackle the legality of it with respect to the EPC, but watch what Jim Robertson has just said:

The only legally “clean” way for this to be resolved is for the Biotech Directive 98/44/EC to be amended – at that point the AC could use Art 33(1)(b) EPC to amend Art 53(b) EPC to bring it into line with the amended Biotech Directive. That does, however, requires unanimity of all EPC contracting states.

This is a political issue, and the big question is: why it is happening this way? If *all* EPC contracting states (therefore also implying all EU member states) wanted the EPC to be amended then it would be relatively simple and easy to make the necessary changes to the Biotech Directive and the EPC.

Do the events at the EPO imply some kind of political problem? A lack of unanimity? As ever, it would be fascinating to find out exactly what is actually going on behind the scenes…

“Do the events at the EPO imply some kind of political problem? A lack of unanimity? As ever, it would be fascinating to find out exactly what is actually going on behind the scenes…”
      –Jim Robertson
Robertson was responding to Mike Snodin, who on Tuesday quoted from CIPA’s position paper (we had made a local copy [PDF] and remarked on it earlier this week). His quote from CIPA’s publication : “Our position is that there are presently are no valid grounds upon which the EBA could accept a referral the President under Article 112(1)(b) EPC with respect to the interpretation of Article 53(b) EPC. The EBA has already provided a binding interpretation of Article 53(b) EPC, meaning that there are no “different” (i.e. conflicting) decisions of Boards of Appeal that might form the basis of a referral under Article 112(1)(b) EPC”; and

“in our view, there are no valid grounds for disputing the Board of Appeal’s conclusion that the above-mentioned EC Notice (i.e. the Notice upon which Rule 28(2) EPC was based) has no legal authority under the EPC”.

The EPO is clearly and unreluctantly still granting patents in defiance of the EPC. SUEPO estimated, as per its two-days-old publication, that 30,000 such invalid European Patents were granted last year alone. It is extremely expensive (legal fees) to clean up such a mess. It’s almost impractical.

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. Samsung Does Not Say Why It's Dropping DeX, But the ASUS EEE Story Might Offer Clues

    It's not at all outlandish or unreasonable to suggest that Microsoft used patents or bribes or kickbacks as incentives for Samsung to abandon GNU/Linux as a desktop platform



  2. EPO: It's Only Getting Worse

    Inhaling Seagull meme for EPO presidents



  3. It Has Begun: EPO Staff Protests Against António Campinos (Starting Wednesday)

    Wednesday marks the resumption of EPO protests; it’s happening for the first time under Campinos and only a year after he took Office. Even Battistelli, the notorious thug, lasted longer before such escalations/actions or — put another way — he did better than that (if one checks the timeline of his presidency)



  4. Links 20/10/2019: GNU/Linux at Penn Manor School District, Wine-Staging 4.18, Xfce 4.16 Development, FreeBSD 12.1 RC2

    Links for the day



  5. Guest Post: Understanding Autism for More Complete Inclusion

    "...assuming that autistic people are all the same isn't only technically wrong, it is misleading and leads to harmful and needless misunderstandings."



  6. Guest Post: Free Software Freedom is Not a Freedom of Choice

    The concept of "Freedom of Choice" and how the ruling class uses it to give a false impression of "Freedom"



  7. Guest Post: Free Software Developers and Pursuing 'Market Share'

    "The only people interested in software freedom are (almost always) free software developers. And users are interested in freedom to a very limited extent: the "free beer" side. Even many free software developers are only interested in the "free beer" part of free software."



  8. The Assertion That Microsoft Uses Communist Tactics Against GNU/Linux and Free/Libre Software

    A study of Taistoism might help understand how Free/libre software is being undermined



  9. European Patent Office and US Patent and Trademark Office Cranks Discovered Buzzwords, Stopped Worrying, Started Granting Patents They Know to be Fake

    The world's patent repositories are being saturated with loads of junk patents or patents that have no legal bearing but can still be leveraged for extortion purposes; the EPO is resorting to lies and artificially-elevated buzzwords to justify granting such fake (yet ruinous) patents



  10. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, October 19, 2019

    IRC logs for Saturday, October 19, 2019



  11. “The True Hypocrite is the One Who Ceases to Perceive His Deception, the One Who Lies With Sincerity,” Said André Paul Guillaume Gide (Nobel Prize in Literature)

    Lies flow like water in the realm of EPO and its publishers, whose sole role is dissemination of deliberate falsehoods, misnomers and misinformation



  12. The EPO Cannot Guard Fake European Patents From Scrutiny (in the Long Run)

    Legal certainty associated with newly-granted European Patents is already pretty low and as long as the EPO refuses to acknowledge that its courts (or boards) lack autonomy the EPO merely brushes a growing problem under the rug



  13. Links 19/10/2019: DeX Discontinued, DXVK 1.4.3 and Wine 4.18 Released

    Links for the day



  14. 'Corporate Linux' Will Not Protect Software Freedom

    The corporate model is inherently not compatible with software that users themselves fully control (or Software Freedom in general), so we must rely on another model of sovereignty over code and compiled code (binaries)



  15. IRC Proceedings: Friday, October 18, 2019

    IRC logs for Friday, October 18, 2019



  16. 26,000 Posts

    We want to thank those who help spread the word; it gives us moral support and morale.



  17. The Myth of 'Analysts'

    People with exaggerated roles (exaggerated by corporate media and corporations that control them) distort public perceptions about their clients; they're in effect just elevated marketing or Public Relations (PR) operatives



  18. The FSF Has Two Acting Presidents Now

    Alexandre Oliva, who acted as a sort of deputy of Richard Stallman in recent weeks, sheds some much-needed light on the current situation



  19. Should Anybody Dictate the Free Software Movement?

    "There's a great myth, as Jagadees reminds us, that advocacy doesn't produce software. That myth is corporate, and proper advocacy has at times produced the greatest software in the history of computing. If we want great Free software to continue, we need advocacy more than ever."



  20. Links 18/10/2019: More KDE Events and OpenBSD 6.6

    Links for the day



  21. We Don't Know Who Will Run the Free Software Foundation, But We Know Who Will Run the GNU Project

    Software Freedom is under a heavy and perhaps unprecedented attack; some people out there are paid by the attackers to celebrate this attack and defame people (cheering for corporate takeover under the blanket of “Open Source”), but the founder of the Free software movement remains alive, well, and very much active



  22. New EPO Meme: Who Wants to Make Billions From a 'Public' Monopoly?

    What was supposed to be a cash-balanced patent office became a money-making monster that fakes ‘crises’ to attack hard-working examiners



  23. EmacsConf Without Richard Stallman

    Now that emacs is being 'rebranded' this kind of meme seems apt



  24. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, October 17, 2019

    IRC logs for Thursday, October 17, 2019



  25. Guest Article: In the Absence of Richard Stallman OEM Source Software ('Open Source') is Trying to Hijack Even Emacs

    "Now they have to create some fictional history. No need to worry."



  26. Guest Article: Techies Should Not Dictate the Free Software Movement

    "We should start a second phase of the Free software movement that's making good software and putting users at the center."



  27. Links 17/10/2019: Ubuntu Turns 15, New Codename Revealed, Ubuntu 19.10 is Out

    Links for the day



  28. Free as in Free Speech (Restrictions May Apply)

    When limits of speech are not safety-related rules but political correctness or conformism



  29. There Won't be Patent Justice Until Patent Trolling Becomes Completely and Totally Extinct

    SLAPP-like behaviour and extortion/blackmail tactics using patent monopolies are a stain on the patent system; it's time to adopt measures to stop these things once and for all, bearing in mind they're inherently antithetical to the goal/s of the patent system and therefore discourage public support for this whole system



  30. EPO Staff Union and Staff Representatives Ought to Demand EPO Stops Bullying Publishers and Censoring Their Sites

    An often neglected if not forgotten aspect of EPO tyranny is the war on information itself; EPO management continues to show hostility towards journalism and disdain for true information


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