THE BRETON series will soon explore the connection to the European Patent Office (EPO). The series will be finished about one week from now. Don't obsess over nationalities though; sure, Breton and Macron are French. And sure, Team Campinos/Battistelli is predominantly French (those two presidents are). But it's much better to follow the commercial -- not the national -- trail. It's all about money; it's never about Europe. And no, it's not about money for Europe but from Europe. The public sector, through privatisation, is being looted by these people. Serco already does some of the work of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO); Campinos already hands over some of the EPO's work over to Serco as well. This is pillage and plunder, but it's done by people in suits rather than pirates in dingies.
"Call it the "EPO Laboratory". Campinos already did his "experiments" with the EUIPO (outsourcing an EU agency to India)."We continue to watch with great concern the events that unfold at the EPO; some people refer to this as "corporate globalism" (the idea that massive and well-connected corporations set in motion the devouring of all public assets, workers and Commons worldwide). The EPO isn't just a symptom; one might say it's a model or a case study. Call it the "EPO Laboratory". Campinos already did his "experiments" with the EUIPO (outsourcing an EU agency to India).
The corporate media (or "mainstream media") is also part of the problem. It's owned by large publishers -- in effect multinational corporations -- and very rich people, including some of the world's richest people. As such, "the press" (or "the media") often reflects not public opinion or popular discourse; instead it's lecturing the public, seeking to 'manufacture consent'. In social control media it's even worse as people are censored, spied on, and subjected to propaganda from states and corporations (the real clients of such social control networks).
It has become rather frustrating to see how even those who wrote about the EPO's Serco outsourcing deal have since then deleted their articles. Even the press release was deleted, but the PDF of the announcement is still on Serco's site. Why are they trying so hard to hide what's happening? This relates in a lot of ways to Breton and Atos -- a subject we'll publish something about later today (part 10 of the Breton series).
"It has become rather frustrating to see how even those who wrote about the EPO's Serco outsourcing deal have since then deleted their articles."The EU hoped to impose on the European public an inherently unconstitutional system called (or rather dubbed, with plenty of euphemisms) "UPC". Helped by EPO lobbying (e.g. bribing media and scholars), the EU sought to hand over control of courts to those who violate the law every day. But the UPC is dead, for numerous reasons. Several complaints, including constitutional ones, have been filed. In some cases, such as in Hungary, courts sided with complainants. Studies commissioned by those not loyal to Team UPC have also disproved the alleged premises. The UPC was a lie -- a system from which multinationals were set to gain, along with their lawyers in Europe. We've just noticed that Bristows' Luke Maunder perpetuates the old lies with "Luxembourg government advertises for leader of UPC’s IT team" (similar to this PR stunt from earlier this year).
Team UPC spent at least 4 years advertising jobs that do not exist and will never ever exist. It even developed an IT system that will never be used. It's part of their lobbying tactic. These ads, by the way, are against the law (faking job openings). They admitted to the media (Financial Times) that they merely try to fake an impression (illusion) of "progress". Anyone can just throw out there some ad. In Bristows' own words: "The position is located in the CTIE (Centre des Technologies de l'Information de l'Etat, State Information Technology Centre) in Luxembourg."
Position for a job that does not exist and won't exist. In a country that barely exists except for tax (evasion) purposes. It's a 'hopping point' for rich multinationals.
"Are patent offices supposed to be in the lobbying business? No."As an avid proponent of the EU I'm often left wondering why these law firms are so eager to tarnish the EU's reputation with these dirty tricks.
Earlier this week corrupt EPO management openly bragged (warning: epo.org link) about lobbying -- equipped with paid-for lies -- about patents in Brussels.
Are patent offices supposed to be in the lobbying business? No.
This is what the EPO wrote:
The EPO last week presented two of its studies at an event in the European Parliament hosted by Jörgen Warbon MEP, Vice-President SME Europe of the European People's Party group. The Office's study on High-growth firms and intellectual property rights, as well as its recently published Patent commercialisation scoreboard: European SMEs, were presented to MEPs and other stakeholders at a breakfast debate co-organised by SME Europe and the EPO.
In his opening address Mr Warborn reinforced the pivotal role of intellectual property (IP): "IP is the measurement of our competitiveness". He also noted, however, that EU growth in patents is being outpaced by that of China and India. "IP offices located in Asia receive 66.8% of all patent applications filed worldwide, whereas only 11% of the global total is filed in the EU."
"Does the EPO nowadays control the European Parliament? Shouldn’t that work the other way around?"We've meanwhile also learned about Microsoft (US) lobbyists, ACT, pushing for software patents in Europe in this Berlin event; remember that those same liars also attacked Linux and ODF.
Why doesn't the media mention these attacks? Why are we all so exposed to the EPO's propaganda?
As the old saying/adage goes, "follow the money..."
Riana Harvey of IP Kat is, as usual, a megaphone of EPO management and its propaganda, lobbying with their press releases yesterday (she often links to Watchtroll, the litigation fanatics who attack judges). Watchtroll's latest article is "European Patent Office launches new Espacenet" -- yet another EPO puff piece.
"Why doesn't the media mention these attacks? Why are we all so exposed to the EPO's propaganda?"Remember when IP Kat actually questioned what these liars had said? Remember when the blog wasn't just a bunch of lawyers? How about IAM, which is literally funded by patent trolls? IAM still refuses to report on EPO protests and corruption, but it's perfectly happy to repeat press releases of the EPO. It's just a propaganda rag in the EPO's pockets.
The only thing they had to say about the EPO? "An EPO agreement with China’s national IP administration looks set to boost Chinese tech companies’ moves into European markets." Jacob Schindler promoted this nonsense through the parent company of IAM, which interjects IAM's nonsense (EPO megaphone) into news feeds.
"So-called 'Hey Hi!' has been around for more than half a century; but nowadays the media shuffles the labels a bit. Automation? "Hey Hi!" Computers? "Hey Hi!" Algorithms? "Hey Hi!""Going back to the 'Kats', as we noted the other day IP Kat promotes the "Hey Hi!" (AI) hype. It's totally out of control nowadays, especially in patent zealots' circles. Mind this new comment that says: "I am unpersuaded by the "lack of incentive for AI developers" argument. The personal computer created a new era of content creation. No one argued at the time that Apple or IBM should have any rights in the output created with their products. Google Translate is an AI solution (something people tend to overlook, this is the 'AI effect'). No one is arguing that Google should enjoy rights in the translations created with its product."
So-called 'Hey Hi!' has been around for more than half a century; but nowadays the media shuffles the labels a bit. Automation? "Hey Hi!" Computers? "Hey Hi!" Algorithms? "Hey Hi!"
Everything is "Hey Hi!"
"What good is an opposition which is rushed? For an opposition proceeding to be effective time is needed; finding prior art doesn't take 10 seconds."We've also just noticed IAM's sister site "World Trademark Review" (WTR is as credible as IAM, i.e. not so much) stating that "Singapore IP [sic] Office chief executive confirmed as candidate as WIPO leadership race prepares for take-off". Singapore's IPOS promotes nonsensical software patents (disguised using buzzwords such as "FinTech") just like WIPO (even though they're illegal in almost the whole world!). Disguised as a 'news' site, WTR is actually a pressure group/front of the litigation 'business' (law firms), just like Life Sciences Intellectual Property Review (close to WIPR and WIPO), which continues crafting EPO propaganda. How to spin EPO scuttling proper appeals or challenges to fake patents (making it harder to find evidence) as a positive thing? Here we go: "EPO successful in cutting opposition times" (optimal time would be zero, i.e. reject the appeal!)
The European Patent Office (EPO) has made strides in streamlining its opposition procedures, new data from Mewburn Ellis has shown.
According to the new report, published November 14, the EPO is on track to meet its target timeframe for patent oppositions of 15 months by 2020.
The EPO introduced its streamlining initiative in July 2016, aimed at reducing the amount of time it takes to conclude European patent opposition proceedings.