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

10.31.19

Today’s EPO is an Illegal Institution Promoting and Granting Illegal Patents

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 3:51 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

The EPC is violated every time, rendering it meaningless or irrelevant

You must grant software patents! Oh yeah? The EPC says not! Now grant! I killed the EPC!

Summary: With patent courts or tribunals or boards (panels) that enjoy as much ‘independence’ as patent examiners — i.e. none at all — the EPO continues to grant and then authorise patents in direct and clear violation of the EPC, never mind public interest, directions from public representatives, external (to the EPO) courts and so on

“I am just wondering, the UK is bent to leave the EU, why not the European Patent Office. We both know that it is no EU institution but… probably there are better reasons to leave the EPO than the EU…”

So said a reader of ours, who is actually a high-profile person who opposes software patents in Europe. It has become pretty clear that EPO tyranny didn’t end with Battistelli‘s departure because António Campinos is even worse in certain aspects. This is why EPO staff protested last week.

“I am just wondering, the UK is bent to leave the EU, why not the European Patent Office. We both know that it is no EU institution but… probably there are better reasons to leave the EPO than the EU…”
      –Anonymous
Looking at the official words of the EPO itself, those have nothing whatsoever to do with staff’s positions. It’s clear that press releases and tweets are composed by people highly loyal to high-level managers (or else they would not endure in these positions).

“Looking at the official words of the EPO itself, those have nothing whatsoever to do with staff’s positions. It’s clear that press releases and tweets are composed by people highly loyal to high-level managers (or else they would not endue in these positions.”Here are some examples from yesterday.

The EPO is clearly hiding the collapse in patent quality while focusing on other things instead (“level of satisfaction related to the European Patent Register & future needs”). This is what it did this week in EPOPIC, which we wrote about yesterday. The following day (not the opening day) they had fewer high-profile speakers, but the nonsense kept on coming. Take this bunch of “tweets” for example [1, 2, 3]: “A new IPC subclass “G16Y” for IoT-related technologies will enter into force in January 2020 #EPOPIC cc @JPO_JPN [..]. ZIT is the world’s first #classification for #IoT-related technologies #EPOPIC cc @JPO_JPN [...] Opening the next session at #EPOPIC on classification, Toshiki Yamaguchi at @JPO_JPN is going to give us the latest information on new J-PlatPat & #IoT-related classifications.”

So in EPOPIC too they misuse these words; Many bogus, invalid, bunk software patents have been ‘dressed up’ as “IoT” — a rather meaningless or at least vague marketing buzzword. Here’s more: “Automatic Classification: There is likely a data deficiency challenge ahead – we need human investment! One of the take-aways from Alexander Klenner-Bajaja’s insights into #AI & #patentclassification #EPOPIC”

“Hey hi” is pure magic. You just say out loud those two letters, A and I, and the audience will be wowed. Are software patent not valid? A I! Hakuna matata.

“It means no worries

“For the rest of your days

“It’s our problem-free philosophy”

Just grant, grant, grant. Do it for Grant Philpott. The poor sod will only get promoted if he artificially inflates the number of grants by consciously violating the EPC, compelling examiners below him to break the law for him.

The EPO’s propaganda partner IAM has meanwhile published “AI technology – the pitfalls of protecting inventions” and promoted that in Lexology.

Aled Richards-Jones (Carpmaels & Ransford LLP) is admitting these so-called “AI” patents are just software patents, almost right from the outset: “The current situation in the United States presents uncertainties when it comes to patenting AI-related technology, following the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corp v CLS Bank, while the law covering other aspects of AI is equally complex. In the United Kingdom, protecting AI-related technology involves a range of considerations, from EPO case law relating to computer-implemented inventions, to UK domestic laws involving other forms of protection such as copyright and trade secrets. With innovation currently outpacing the law, where does this leave innovators? This article uses a hypothetical example to shed some light on the landscape.”

So what? They grant anyway. Let the courts deal with the resultant mess.

This is as much of a problem in the US as it is in Europe and HTIA has just mentioned it in relation to this article from Dave Jones. We’ll put it again in Daily Links as it’s not about Europe. “David W. Jones is a former IP Counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee and currently executive director of the High Tech Inventors Alliance,” says the bio and his employer quotes him as saying: “The solution to poor quality isn’t to lower the bar. We need to address quality head on by making it less likely invalid patents are granted and by strengthening the ability to challenge them when they do.”

The same is true in Europe. “How to fix the patent quality crisis” is his headline and he wishes to raise patent quality, not lower it. The EPO has been constantly lowering the patent bar in recent years and that became very visible — to the point where EPO management panicked and sought to silence the messengers.

The problem isn’t limited to software. Big Pharma blogger Rose Hughes (litigation industry for monopolies) has just published “BREAKING: Board of Appeal provides some initial thoughts on the Broad Institute’s CRISPR appeal (T0844/18)” (we covered this case many times before).

Well, the EPO is not allowed to grant patents on life. So on the surface this whole appeal may seem like a waste of time (or non-starter). It’s not legal. That much should be obvious, but the EPO is so inherently corrupt and the law does not matter to it. Judges aren’t rewarded for enforcing the law (EPC) but for doing the Office President’s biddings. Watch that comment from an attorney:

Looking forward to the appearance of the summarized TBA Communication on the EPO public file. Meanwhile, thanks to the IPKat for sharing this news that is “breaking” in more senses than one.

Reading through the Board’s summary of the pro’s and con’s of stepping back from the current established practice, two thoughts occur.

First, getting more into line with “the intention” of the Paris Convention strikes me as outweighing most, if not all, other considerations.

Second, can anybody here recall a case of many years ago, in which a UK patent attorney firm (U&L) was caught in the middle of an ownership dispute, between rival parties, that went to litigation during the Paris year. The facts of the case were quite mundane really. Such ownership disputes can arise quite easily. The two sides were giving that patent attorney firm (which had filed the priority application) opposite and irreconcilable PCT filing instructions. Thus it was, that U&L entered the litigation as an “interpleader”. I should like to re-read any published case report in the context of the present dispute before the TBA. Can anybody supply the case report reference?

We already know, based on prior cases such as G 2/19 (Enlarged Board of Appeal), that these rulings aren’t compliant with the EPC — so much so that the EPO aggressively lobbied to not even deal with a query about it (deeming it inadmissible). The EPO is an outlaw institution where the concept of lawfulness ceased to exist some years ago. Something must be done.

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. Links 4/4/2020: Sparky 5.11, Firefox 74.0.1, POCL 1.5

    Links for the day



  2. IRC Proceedings: Friday, April 03, 2020

    IRC logs for Friday, April 03, 2020



  3. Links 3/4/2020: Ubuntu Beta, GNOME 3.36.1, ExTiX LXQt Mini, NetBSD 8.2 Released

    Links for the day



  4. Digital Communication, Digitalisation and Videogaming Among the EPO's Latest Smokescreens for Illegal and Abstract Patents on Algorithms

    The EPO keeps liaising with the EU to promote patents which EU officials have themselves said were illegal; to make matters worse, the EPO's violations of its own laws inspire the United States to do the same



  5. Emotional Blackmail for Illegal Software Patents

    Semantic tactics the European Patent Office (EPO) uses to promote software patents in Europe and may theoretically use in the future (satire)



  6. Clear Linux is to GNU/Linux What Clearly Defined is to Open Source

    The idea that we need Intel to take GNU/Linux ‘mainstream’ is ludicrous; as OSDL co-founder (now succeeded in the flesh of the Corporate Linux Foundation), Intel is more about Linux (with DRM, “secure boot” and everything that lets it be remotely controlled) than about GNU and it’s not too keen on GPL (copyleft), either



  7. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, April 02, 2020

    IRC logs for Thursday, April 02, 2020



  8. Links 2/4/2020: Linux 5.6.2, Qt Creator 4.11.2, LineageOS ROM Based on Android 10

    Links for the day



  9. OIN in 2020 Resembles Linux Foundation in 2020 (Corporate Front Group Piggybacking the Linux Brand)

    We regret to say that the Open Invention Network seems not to care at all about Software Freedom; to make matters worse, it is a proponent of software patents and a voice for companies like IBM and Microsoft, not the "Community" it fancies misrepresenting



  10. Inside the Free Software Foundation (FSF) - Part IX: Semi-Happy Ending

    Richard Stallman is here to stay and the FSF will let him stay (as chief of GNU); we want to close the series on a positive note



  11. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, April 01, 2020

    IRC logs for Wednesday, April 01, 2020



  12. Upcoming Articles and Research Areas

    Although we've failed to write as much as usual, we're still preparing some in-depth articles and maintaining Daily Links (in spite of unforeseen ordeals like a forced laptop migration)



  13. Links 2/4/2020: ProtonMail Bridge for Linux, GTK 3.98.2 and Red Hat DNF 4.2.21

    Links for the day



  14. Links 1/4/2020: Linux 5.7 Merges, Qt 5.14.2, GhostBSD 20.03, Linux Mint 20 Ulyana Plans, WordPress 5.4 “Adderley”

    Links for the day



  15. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, March 31, 2020

    IRC logs for Tuesday, March 31, 2020



  16. Techrights to Delete Articles From All Past Years to Save Disk Space

    What if we deleted over 25,000 posts?



  17. IRC Proceedings: Monday, March 30, 2020

    IRC logs for Monday, March 30, 2020



  18. Links 30/3/2020: GNU Linux-libre 5.6, WireGuard 1.0.0

    Links for the day



  19. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, March 29, 2020

    IRC logs for Sunday, March 29, 2020



  20. Links 30/3/2020: Linux 5.6, Nitrux 1.2.7, Sparky 2020.03.1

    Links for the day



  21. The Fall of the UPC - Part IX: Campinos Opens His Mouth One Week Later (and It's That Hilarious Delusion Again)

    Team Campinos said nothing whatsoever about the decision of the FCC until one week later, whereupon Campinos leveraged some words from Christine Lambrecht to mislead everybody in the EPO's official "news" section



  22. Pretending EPO Corruption Stopped Under António Campinos When It is in Fact a Lot Worse in Several Respects/Aspects (Than It Was Under Benoît Battistelli)

    Germany's eagerness to keep Europe's central patent office in Munich (and to a lesser degree in Berlin) means that politicians in the capital and in Bavaria turn a blind eye to abuses, corruption and even serious crimes; this won't help Germany's image in the long run



  23. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, March 28, 2020

    IRC logs for Saturday, March 28, 2020



  24. Links 28/3/2020: Wine 5.5 Released, EasyPup 2.2.14, WordPress 5.4 RC5 and End of Truthdig

    Links for the day



  25. IRC Proceedings: Friday, March 27, 2020

    IRC logs for Friday, March 27, 2020



  26. The Fall of the UPC - Part VIII: Team UPC Celebrates Death, Not Life

    Team UPC plays psychological games now; it is trying to twist or spin its defeat as good news and something to be almost celebrated; it is really as illogical (and pathetic) as that sounds



  27. Links 27/3/2020: GNU/Linux Versus COVID-19 and Release of GNU Guile 3.0.2

    Links for the day



  28. When Your 'Business' is Just 'Patent Portfolio'

    Hoarding loads of patents may seem impressive, but eating them to survive is impossible if not impermissible



  29. LOT Network is a One-Man (Millionaire's) Operation and Why This Should Alarm You

    The ugly story of Open Invention Network (OIN) and LOT; today we take a closer look at LOT and highlight a pattern of 'cross-pollination' (people in both OIN and LOT, even at the same time)



  30. Faking Production With Fake Patents on Software

    The EPO with its illegal guidelines (in violation of the EPC) can carry on churning out millions of fake patents that European courts would only waste time on and small companies be blackmailed with (they cannot afford legal battles)


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