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

10.12.19

The EPO’s Universal Patent Injustice Concealed With Polyglottic Tricks

Posted in Europe, Law, Patents at 10:08 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

French management, German language, English-speaking applicants?!

From left to right: Benoît Battistelli, President of the EPO; Michel Barnier, European Commissioner for Internal Market and Services; Antonio Campinos, President of OHIM

Summary: The EPO is fooling nobody; it’s desperate to hide the very simple fact that Battistelli did something illegal and over the past few years every decision issued by the EPO was legally invalid (as per the EPC)

THERE are officially three languages at the European Patent Office (EPO), French, English and German. That in its own right is a controversial subject because Spanish is spoken by a lot more people and Spain is in Europe. Most member states can deal with English, some (like Belgium) feel OK with French and for 2 states as well as one to the west and several to the east German might be of some use (without fluency). But it’s clear that English is the most important language. The EPO’s Web site, for example, speaks English by default. As only the minority of European Patents are actually European (assigned to people of European nationality) that sort of makes sense. So how come the EPO selectively releases particularly important decisions in languages other than English? And only the spin (summary) is presented in English? It’s pretty clear that the EPO is trying to bury something, as it did when that one particular case (G2/19) was going on. The EPO went out of its way to produce media noise and distract from criticism, as we noted at the time. G2/19 isn’t just some ordinary case; if ruled in the particular way it could void many hundreds of prior decisions. It also concerns the crimes of Battistelli, gleefully perpetuated by his ‘butler’, António Campinos. This same court will soon decide on matters such as software patents in Europe. Shouldn’t we know whether the court’s decisions are legally valid? Considering the fact that the judges too (something through AMBA) complain about loss of autonomy? Shouldn’t European people (or businesses) be permitted to see what goes on behind this veil of secrecy? How rogue is the EPO willing to become? This dam will burst one day and it won’t be pretty.

“Shouldn’t European people (or businesses) be permitted to see what goes on behind this veil of secrecy?”Criminals tend to go out of their way to hide their crimes. The EPO’s managers are no exception. Why would they make it simpler for the public to observe their abuse? Instead of twisting, spinning, misleading etc. while making that come across as compliance with transparency policy/regulations?

The EPO’s attempt to suppress publication of this case has been chronicled here for months. Media of the patent microcosm mostly played along, as we noted around the time of this case. Riana Harvey wrote on Thursday: “Rose Hughes reports on case G2/19, which the Enlarged Board of Appeal released its full reasoning for. The appeal related to a case in which a third party had submitted observations pursuant to Article 115 EPC that a patent application lacked clarity.”

Go back to the original and notice the sole comment on that original: “Another possibility would be to learn German.. oh wait, what did they say about Britain? “Learning a foreign language is considered as flamboyant as wearing a crown in a bus”… well…”

“…it’s very clear what the EPO is doing.”How many Brits can speak German? How many people around the world in general have a grasp of the language? Maybe one percept of the world’s population can speak that at mother’s tongue level! Combine the population of Germany and Austria, as a fraction of about 8 billion people.

As we noted not so long ago, it’s very clear what the EPO is doing. It’s very clear why. To limit audience/people who are able to read the decision it was published only in German and as J A Kemp has just put it, weeks down the line there’s still no English translation, month after the decision itself (“currently only available in German”).

To quote “Decision From The Enlarged Board Of Appeal In G2/19″ (published before the weekend):

The EPO has issued a press release (see here), which summarises the full decision (currently only available in German here) from the Enlarged Board of Appeal in G2/19.

[...]

The second answer relates to the relocation of the Boards of Appeal to Haar from Munich. Interestingly, the Enlarged Board indicated that it was only required to rule on this matter insofar as it was related to the possible infringement of the procedural right of a party. The Enlarged Board concluded that holding oral proceedings in Haar does not infringe a party’s right to be heard and that mere perceived inconvenience does not injure the right to be heard.

Although they considered it unnecessary, the Enlarged Board did nevertheless also consider the effect of Article 6(2) EPC, which states that “The European Patent Office shall be located in Munich. It shall have a branch at the Hague.” It had been argued by the appellant that Haar is not in Munich and thus locating the Boards of Appeal in Haar contravenes Article 6(2) EPC. The Enlarged Board did not accept that argument, commenting that as the main EPO body responsible for granting patents is in Munich, the requirements of Article 6(2) EPC are met. The Enlarged Board also observed that separating the Boards of Appeal geographically from the EPO administrative departments in Munich highlights the independence of the Boards of Appeal and, in view of this, it is not necessary to limit the location of the Boards of Appeal to the city of Munich itself. The Enlarged Board also noted that the Boards of Appeal in Haar are “only located slightly outside the boundaries of the city of Munich”. It therefore seems unlikely that any future challenges to the location of the Boards of Appeal in Haar will succeed.

That last sentence is key: “It therefore seems unlikely that any future challenges to the location of the Boards of Appeal in Haar will succeed.”

This is the message that the EPO wanted to get out there. “We did something illegal to capture the courts; and don’t dare challenge the legality of it anymore!”

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. Understanding Thierry Breton: What Thierry Did Next...

    "Whether by coincidence or not, when Atos announced in 2010 that it would acquire Siemens’ IT unit, it was the 32-year-old Macron at Rothschild who advised Breton on the deal."



  2. Links 20/11/2019: HONOR MagicBook With GNU/Linux, Coreboot 4.11, GNU Health Patchset 3.6.1

    Links for the day



  3. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, November 19, 2019

    IRC logs for Tuesday, November 19, 2019



  4. EPO Geared Towards Financial Exploitation of Europe Instead of Serving Europe

    For the financial benefit of law firms and patent offices (they profit from processing loads of patents and lawsuits) Europe is being reverted back to Medieval Times when exercising invention and free thought (or free coding) was a luxury of the rich alone



  5. Microsoft and IBM Are the Patent Trolls, They Won't Protect Us From Trolls

    "Microsoft has no taste" and IBM has no taste, either; they're lying to our collective face together with OIN and the 'Linux' Foundation



  6. How Ralph Nader Put It

    Ralph Nader on money in politics



  7. ZDNet (CBS) Associates GNU/Linux Users With ISIS

    Response to "US student was allegedly building a custom Gentoo Linux distro for ISIS," just published by ZDNet and composed by their biggest troll, Catalin Cimpanu



  8. Understanding Thierry Breton: Noël Forgeard and His “Golden Parachute”

    The end of the first half of the Breton series; in this particular part we continue to cover the EADS scandal and the second half of this series will include the EPO connections (the vote in a plenary for Breton's nomination is due 27/11)



  9. Links 19/11/2019: Zswap's B-Tree Search Implementation, WordPress 5.2.4

    Links for the day



  10. We've Already Entered the Era When Patents Should be Presumed Invalid

    The abundance of low-quality patents may mean short-term profits for patent offices and law firms; but we know at whose expense they are profiting and the legitimacy of patent systems suffers as a result



  11. Jean-Luc Breton

    Breton a champion of obstruction and obfuscation



  12. Understanding Thierry Breton: Insider-Trading Scandal at EADS

    Although Breton was not directly implicated in the insider trading scandal itself he did come under fire in 2007 for the role he played in a side-show to the main story, namely the payment of a generous € 8.5m severance package to Noël Forgeard when the EADS co-CEO was compelled to resign in June 2006.



  13. Startpage is Not Denying Its Betrayal of Privacy, It is Just Being Evasive

    They can't call you a liar if you issue a non-denying 'denial'; the "Roll Safe Think About It" meme seems applicable here



  14. Guest Post: Open Source is Not Free Software

    "If you look at human history, you can see lots of similar ideas, movements, intellectuals who are affected by the power of the ruling class like this."



  15. IRC Proceedings: Monday, November 18, 2019

    IRC logs for Monday, November 18, 2019



  16. Links 19/11/2019: HPC Focus and LibreOffice 6.4 Beta

    Links for the day



  17. Understanding Thierry Breton: “Rhodiagate” and the Vivendi Universal Affair

    When the "Rhodia affair" became the "Breton affair"



  18. Links 18/11/2019: Last Linux RC, OSMC Updated

    Links for the day



  19. What GitHub is to Open Source

    Lots of prisoners inside GitHub



  20. Openwashing Institutionalised NPEs (OIN) and Software Patents With Notorious Managers From the EPO

    There’s a strong push for software patents in Europe (basically fake European Patents on abstract ideas) and IAM leads/participates in it with help from OIN, Grant Philpott (EPO) and — maybe soon — Breton (EU)



  21. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, November 17, 2019

    IRC logs for Sunday, November 17, 2019



  22. Links 17/11/2019: Slax Beta and Arch Conf 2019 Report





  23. Understanding Thierry Breton: The “Cost-Killer” Tries to Tame the National Debt

    The oligarchic policy of Thierry Breton at Bercy



  24. Reactions to Last Week's Thierry Breton Hearing

    Nobody is particularly impressed by Thierry Breton except those who know little about him (and he contributes to this lack of knowledge by obstructing, omitting, and misleading)



  25. The Open Invention Network Has Become a Guard Dog of (Some) Patent Trolls and It Misrepresents Us Under the Guise of 'Open Source'

    The Open Invention Network (OIN), in collaboration with Fraunhöfer, is promoting software patents and all sorts of other nonsense as part of ‘open’ standards in a new paper sponsored by the EU and edited by the former EPO Chief Economist Nikolaus Thumm (not Battistelli's choice); this is another reminder of the fact that OIN misrepresents Free/Open Source software (FOSS) developers and their interests



  26. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, November 16, 2019

    IRC logs for Saturday, November 16, 2019



  27. Unitary Patent is Dead Partly Because the EPO Demonstrated That EPC is Being Routinely Violated, Illegal Patents Granted

    Some elements of Team UPC have given up, whereas others try to push the lie that Unitary Patent/Unified Patent Court (UPC) is not an EU thing and that therefore everything is fine



  28. USPTO Rewards Microsoft for Corruption at ISO by Teaching People Proprietary OOXML and Promoting Its Use

    The world's most important patent office promotes Microsoft lock-in, revealing not only corporate bias but also highlighting ways in which Microsoft crimes continue to pay off



  29. No, Startpage is Not Dutch Anymore

    Startpage is still clinging onto perceptions rather than truths; it means that Startpage isn't just betraying privacy but it's also dishonest and untrustworthy



  30. Understanding Thierry Breton: Chirac's Entrepreneurial “Joker”

    Minister in charge of the public treasury was not a career politician but an “entrepreneur” with a proven track-record as a financial wizard and “cost-killer”


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