ALMOST everything that the European Patent Office (EPO) says or "tweets" is a lie. Almost everything! António Campinos and Battistelli are professional liars with a track record to prove it. It makes them 'perfect fits' for a patent office that deceives, breaks the law, and then cover that up. Perfect!

Let's look at some new examples and examine them.

"The EPO bribes scholars and it bribes media (publishers). It manufactures co-called 'events' with phony 'panels' that are crafted (pre-selected or filtered) for overall bias."The EPO's communications department is perfectly happy to lie to everyone. This newly-promoted video is a lie because the EPO supports patent trolls and law firms at the expense of inventors. It also assists non-European monopolies/giants. 3.5 weeks later the EPO still pushes this rigged propaganda about who benefits from patents. Industries that can afford to buy or make monopolies for themselves pay significantly higher wages, no doubt, but at whose expense? How many of these firms are even European? They've just spoken about "SMEs" yet again and then added: "Our staff's professional development is highly important to us. We're focused on equipping them to reach their full potential and guide them as they increase their capabilities, skills and competencies."

This is a shameless and deliberate lie. Just ask any member of (EPO) staff. The very opposite is true.

The EPO has meanwhile promoted its forums for the first time in ages. "The forums are a joke with just about 1,000 threads in 5 years," I told them, "or about one per two days. It's a "dead zone" and an embarrassment to something that's Europe's second-largest body."

The EPO is hardly being listened to. Watch how many "likes" or "RTs" it attracts in Twitter. Hardly any. They barely ever receive comments. We suspect that many of the so-called 'followers' are paid-for fakes -- a subject we covered here several times in the distant past.

The EPO therefore relies on outside help with the lies. The EPO bribes scholars and it bribes media (publishers). It manufactures co-called 'events' with phony 'panels' that are crafted (pre-selected or filtered) for overall bias. We know who profits from these lying platforms; it's the likes of IAM and Managing IP. We need to call them out on it.

In recent days Managing IP published many articles about this thing called "London IP Week" and posted tweets like this: "In a lively discussion at a London IP conference, a licensee and licensor debated the merits of the German injunction system and what ‘non-discriminatory’ means in the context of FRAND..."

FRAND is a lie. Every letter in this acronym is a deliberate lie, crafted by the litigation and trolling 'industry' for spin (distorting public discourse). Do the above participants feel any remorse about perpetuating these lies? They are complicit. They profit from the lies. Be sure to also see articles like this new one about trademarks. This is classic Managing IP dishonesty, treating everything like the only people who exist in this world (or whose voice counts) are lawyers! They even defended this position to me, stating very clearly that they write for lawyers. "Lawyers reflect on the ideal qualities for whoever replaces Mary Boney Denison, who is retiring as USPTO commissioner for trademarks at the end of this year," says the summary. What do non-lawyers say? That doesn't matter. There's also this "SkyKick TM opinion". Similarly, and predictably, whenever they cover patents they only take into account one side of the 'argument' (business). To them, only people who profit from litigation count. Sadly, this perfectly describes today's EPO management as well. A long time ago it quit caring about science; instead it became all about litigation, looking for ways to spur law firms' activity. In the next post we'll explain how that relates to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the granting of software patents in Europe. ⬆