06.27.19

The EPO’s “Collaborative Quality Improvements” (CQI), Formerly Known as “Team Collaboration Project,” Shows the EPO Grossly Violating the Law, Granting Patents in Clear Violation of the EPC

Posted in Europe, Patents at 8:57 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

In April: The Staff Union of the European Patent Office (SUEPO) Warns About the Granting of Tens of Thousands of Invalid European Patents Every Year

A horse race

Summary: “The European Patent Office helps your company to invent,” joke EPO insiders in relation to the dubious CQI programme; “We informed some of the major European patent applicants about a new project,” they said, “which is a diversionary tactic of the EPO management and now possibly a hobby horse of President António Campinos.”

Seeing how Battistelli ‘normalised’ Brimelow’s software patents “as such” (the predecessor’s mistake, which we criticised the most), and seeing how his successor calls everything "hey hi" (AI) or similar buzzwords, we were curious to see how such patent applications would be handled by examiners. Some told us that they loathed granting such patents but were under enormous pressure to allow them. We published several articles to that effect. What would happen if the applicants participated in examination? Or contrariwise, if examiners took the applicants’ side and helped them ‘trick’ the system (or violate the EPC)? One begins to wonder if the EPO is even a patent office any longer…

“Did you know? The European Patent Office helps companies to invent,” said examiners at the EPO, who circulated the following text among EPO stakeholders. We reproduce the text below.

The European Patent Office helps your company to invent

24.06.2019

Dear Sirs,

Is your company’s business model based on innovation but your employees (unfortunately) don’t have any inventive skills? Don’t worry. The European Patent Office (EPO) will help you out.

The latest creative “business idea” of the EPO’s top management can indeed turn (almost) any company into a high tech forge: EPO examiners are currently being trained to invent – for you!

You possibly belong to the large group of (old-fashioned) patent applicants who think that a patent examiner’s job is to assess whether somebody has made an invention or not. If so, you may expect a patent examiner to do an in-depth prior art search for a patent application, and then, after thorough examination of the technical matter, to either deliver a patent for an invention or refuse the application for the lack of it. But these days nothing could be further from the truth.

The EPO President and top managers enjoy immunity from jurisdiction and execution. These people are above the law, including national law and … patent law. Being one of these people – and knowing that you are above the law – you are free to do a lot of illegal and unethical things without taking any risk.

A current EPO pilot project is called “Collaborative Quality Improvements” (CQI). While users of the European patent system have become used to well sounding buzzwords whose true meaning is almost the exact opposite of what they appear to mean, they nevertheless seem to be buying the EPO’s we continue improving patent quality story. The CQI pilot was originally called “Team Collaboration Project” but later renamed. Its original aim was to boost productivity by at least 20%.

Several groups of examiners are currently working under the CQI umbrella, many against their will. The alleged objective of CQI is the improvement of patent quality by teamwork and knowledge sharing. This shall be achieved by more discussions within the three member examining divisions and regular CQI team meetings. But the unspoken objective of CQI is to increase the patent grant output. Examiners shall stop investing precious time in doing in-depth prior art searches. Instead, their managers expect them to base examination on the first potentially relevant document they come across. It is sufficient if that document, mainly its figures and some keywords, resembles a bit (just a little bit will be good enough these days) the patent application on the examiner’s desk. Ideally the examiner simply picks a document from a list generated by the EPO’s fully automated prior art search algorithm. That takes only a few minutes. The chosen document is then called the “closest prior art”.

In particular the COOs are pushing this new way of working. The first results of the CQI pilot were so promising that the EPO President mentioned them in an announcement to the staff earlier this year. VP1 presented the pilot to the Administrative Council in March 2019. The project is also mentioned in the (Draft) Strategic Plan 2023 (goal 3, key initiative 4) and shall be expanded to all EPO patent grant units.

Depending on the complexity of the technical field, a highly qualified, trained and specialized examiner needs in average 1 ½ to 2 ½ days to study a patent application and draft a search report and a detailed first reasoned assessment of the invention. But much of this effort shall in future be avoided. Prior art searching skills will no longer be required. Future EPO search reports may only contain some automatically retrieved documents. While the EPO’s automatic search algorithms are surely better than random number generators, the results they produce come rarely close to the truly relevant subject-matter, the genuine “closest prior art”.

Search reports will continue being published as usual, without any hint that the search process has been “streamlined”. The EPO’s obligation towards the other stakeholders, including your competitors and the public, are then formally met. The EPO will nevertheless charge you the full search fee.

But you will get something in return: instead of examining the patent application in the light of the prior art indicated in the search report (which can be rather irrelevant prior art, as explained above), the examiner will, during the examination phase, quickly read through the patent application and create your invention. This is sometimes achieved through collaborative brainstorming in pairs consisting of the examiner and the chairman of the examining division (that’s where the term “Team Collaboration Project” comes from). The aim of the exercise is to reach a horse deal for an “EPO invention”. When agreement is reached, you will receive a phone call from the examiner with a text proposal for a patent. The examiner will try to talk you into his proposal. All you need to do is to accept it. The proposal will then turn into your horse deal. But you won’t be aware of it since the examiner is not supposed to tell you that your patent application is being treated under the new work scheme. Of course, your competitors won’t know either.

When an automatically retrieved and rather irrelevant document is used as the “closest prior art”, the result of the consecutive patent examination will of course be arbitrary. The patents granted on such insecure basis will not provide legal certainty. But the EPO’s new business model is based on output (and bonuses for top managers) instead of honest work for the public. And why should you bother about carefully examining patent applications if you run a patent office being free to ignore the patent law?

We wish you a fruitful future cooperation with your business partner, the European Patent Office.

Yours faithfully,

Patent Examiners at the European Patent Office

Contact: https://www.epo.org/service-support/contact-us.html

So there you have it. The EPO is in gross violation of the EPC. Who’s going to hold anyone accountable here?

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

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 21/1/2021: Google Tightens the Screws on Chromium, VideoLAN VLC 3.0.12

    Links for the day



  2. IBM Panics and Resorts to 'Customer Retention' Tactics With Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)

    IBM 'frees' RHEL but with limitations that can restrict growth of small companies (or subject them to financial barriers, originally unforeseen)



  3. Recent Techrights Articles About President Joe Biden

    Instead of writing yet more stuff about the latest US president, let's look back at what we wrote in recent weeks/months



  4. Links 20/1/2021: LibreOffice 7.1 RC2 and the RHEL Contingency

    Links for the day



  5. InteLeaks – Part XXIII: Intel Paying for Bogus 'Research' 'Insights' Which Merely Seek to Justify Outsourcing to Microsoft and Imposing Microsoft's Proprietary Software on Free Software Developers

    Intel's preference for Microsoft monopoly (an imposed/top-down decision) was seemingly certified by so-called 'consultants' and 'analysts' from the outside rather than the inside, basically manufacturing a false perception of consent after managers had already made up their minds



  6. Suppressed Facts of the Free Software Movement and Its Community of Volunteers – Part V: How FSF Secrecy Ended Up Insulting People, Alienating Trans Developers

    Having just uploaded this introductory video, we delve into the backstory or the real reason the FSF sank into somewhat of a crisis with the trans community almost half a decade ago



  7. InteLeaks – Part XXII: Bubbles and Buzzwords, No Substance at Intel's Internet of Things (IoT) Group (IOTG)

    The video above is continuation of the previous part about a document full of superficial buzzwords (not technical jargon anywhere), in effect recommending to managers that they blindly follow trends and cargo cults (such as Clown Computing) and not what’s most suitable for technical excellence



  8. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, January 19, 2021

    IRC logs for Tuesday, January 19, 2021



  9. Links 20/1/2021: WireGuard for pfSense and New US President

    Links for the day



  10. Links 19/1/2021: Krita 4.4.2 Released and JingOS Hype

    Links for the day



  11. Team UPC Keeps Pretending That UPCA Can Still be Resurrected (Even Without the UK, Which is Strictly a Requirement)

    The latest distortion of facts regarding the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Agreement (UPCA) as seen from the lens of people who seek to profit from such distortion



  12. 'Ethical Source' is Not Ethical and Not a Movement But a Misguided Self-Serving PR Stunt

    Something which is neither enforceable nor ethical is being promoted by profoundly unethical media in the pockets of large corporations



  13. InteLeaks – Part XXI: Intel Seeking Advice From a Bunch of Clowns (Harbor 'Research')

    A firm called Harbor 'Research' is making dubious recommendations to Intel; as shown in the above video, there's also an obsession with buzzwords (typically suggestive of a lack of technical grasp/understanding)



  14. IRC Proceedings: Monday, January 18, 2021

    IRC logs for Monday, January 18, 2021



  15. The US Election Was Not Rigged, But the Nomination Process Was (Undermined to Maintain Control by Oligarchy)

    Cheating/driving the left out of the Democratic Party seems like a longstanding tradition and we know who stands to gain from it; moreover, problems remain in the voting process because it's controlled by secret code of companies like Microsoft (in spite of the openwashing)



  16. InteLeaks – Part XX: Redacted (for Names Only) Release of Intel File About Developer eXperience (DX) Meddling in GNU/Linux

    Today (or tonight) we release the first 'phase' of InteLeaks in a sensibly redacted form; coming up next is a surprise from Team Microsoft



  17. Sites in Bed With the EPO and UPC 'Covering' the 'News' Without Mentioning Any of the Overt Abuses

    It is rather sad that blogs like IP Kat have turned into proponents of abusive EPO management and Team UPC increasingly resorts to lying using pseudonyms (to avert criticism and accountability); much of the rebuttal or response that’s hinged on reality/facts can only be found in comments, which are still subjected to a face-saving moderation process (conducted by Team UPC)



  18. Suppressed Facts of the Free Software Movement and Its Community of Volunteers – Part IV: Stories From the Depths of the Free Software Foundation (FSF)

    To reduce or alleviate suspicions and a potential of mistrust the FSF needs to become more transparent and liberate information (such as the real reason Bradley Kuhn left, as noted in the previous part)



  19. Links 18/1/2021: GNU Radio 3.9, Wikipedia at 20

    Links for the day



  20. InteLeaks – Part XIX: Intel's Web 'Experts' Seen as Microsoft Champions Dealing With the Platform Microsoft is Looking to Destroy

    Things aren't rosy at Intel because the hires aren't suitable for the job of documenting and/or presenting GNU/Linux-centric products (whose target audience is Free software developers)



  21. Adding Images as Characters to the Daily Bulletins of Techrights

    Our daily bulletins now have inside them coarse graphics, depicted using characters alone, and the tool used to generate them announced a new release earlier today; we showcase some of its features (in a new video)



  22. Links 18/1/2021: Weekly Summaries and Linux 5.11 RC4

    Links for the day



  23. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, January 17, 2021

    IRC logs for Sunday, January 17, 2021



  24. The Oligarchs' Parties Will Never Choose the Side of Software Freedom Because Free Software Cannot Bribe Officials

    The tough reality is that next week's (or this coming week's, depending on what Sunday counts as) inauguration ceremony is partly symbolic as all the same and important issues remain largely untouched, for corporations control almost everything of significance



  25. COVID-19 Has Actually Helped Software Freedom Due to Financial and 'Spare Time' Factors

    Developers and users are increasingly exploring what the Free software world has to offer; this is actually measurable and it contradicts claims to the contrary



  26. Future Plans and Using Videos to Complement Text

    Remarks on recent and impending site changes; We are not replacing text with video, we're just trying to enhance the presentation a bit, especially where visuals help make a point or where browsing through Web sites (or leaks) is more suitable than static, linear presentation



  27. InteLeaks – Part XVIII: Intel Does Not Know How to Properly Do Research and It Seems Apparent Unscientific Methods Are Used to Justify Poor Documentation

    There appears to be a severe crisis at Intel; they cannot recruit scientists (or those whom they recruited are walking away) and as a result the company produces bad products with poor documentation (or highly defective chipsets that top-notch marketing cannot compensate for); in this video we walk through some examples of how studies are being conducted (as already noted in Part XVII)



  28. Suppressed Facts of the Free Software Movement and Its Community of Volunteers – Part III: The Free Software Foundation (FSF) Seems More Like a Victim of Destabilisation Campaigns

    The Free Software Foundation (FSF), which turns 36 later this year, is looking to raise money that helps support the GNU Project, soon 38 years old and likely the most important Free software project to exist (ever)



  29. Links 17/1/2021: EasyOS on Raspberry Pi and GNU libsigsegv 2.13

    Links for the day



  30. InteLeaks – Part XVII: The High Cost of Microsoft Windows Users in GNU/Linux Development Teams

    A look inside Intel explains what holds back the technical team, which bemoans the lesser technical people getting in the way and not even using the product that they are writing about


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