Bonum Certa Men Certa

Global Patent Warming

I cannot grant those patents. So I will change the rules.



Summary: The old term "Global Patent Warming" comes to mind when one assesses the neoliberal approach of today's EPO, where the sole goal is making piles of money by granting loads and loads of illegal European Patents

UNDER the reckless management of Campinos and Battistelli the European Patent Office (EPO) makes it a lot easier for examiners to allow European software patents (sometimes compelling them to grant in defiance of the EPC because of the misguided guidelines), at least within the Office, not outside (national courts). Lawyers would admit and they occasionally say that it's even harder to get software patents from the USPTO (after AIA and 35 U.S.C. ۤ 101) than from the EPO.



"Off-the-shelf Free/libre software libraries allow programmers to paint just about everything as "hey hi" within less than one hour."It's very troubling to us, especially geeks. The EPO makes it easier to get illegal patents on statistics and mathematics by misusing buzzwords like "hey hi" (AI) -- a term that nowadays refers to all sorts of things ranging from automation to computing. Off-the-shelf Free/libre software libraries allow programmers to paint just about everything as "hey hi" within less than one hour. It's very 'plug-n-play'; and still... it all boils down to algorithms.

Grzegorz Wesela-Bauman (JWP Patent & Trademark Attorneys) has published in Mondaq this piece entitled "New EPO Guidelines – Easier Procedures For Patenting AI-Based Inventions" and we'll quote just the relevant pieces of text while highlighting key parts:

The EPO has made considerable changes to both the procedural issues, which are important for patent attorneys, and in recognizing the patentability of inventions, which is of importance for inventors.

Among the procedural changes, it is worth pointing out the simplified representation for applicants before the EPO before granting the patent, or the simplified method of obtaining discounts for application payments and substantiative examinations when there is more than one applicant.

Substantive changes include granting AI-based inventions the status of technical solutions. A significant change has also been made in the area of novelty search, which may affect the procedures required for inventions in chemistry and pharmaceutical sciences. Additionally, facilitation is on the way for demonstrating the level of inventiveness, in particular for biotechnological and pharmaceutical inventions.

The number of changes is enormous and exceeds the scope of this post. Below is a short presentation of selected changes.

[...]

At present, the European Patent Office is working on clarifying the issue of patentability of inventions which were previously considered non-technical. This is relevant because recognizing the technical character is the first and foremost condition for an invention to be considered as such. The examination of the novelty and inventive step cannot begin until the first condition has been met.

Inventions that were previously denied technological character were the so-called computer implemented inventions (CIIs). Last year the EPO decided that those inventions are in fact technical. Artificial intelligence-based inventions (AI) and machine learning-based inventions (ML) have recently followed suit.

In the previous versions of its guidelines, the EPO demonstrated that it should be assumed that AI/ML inventions are non-technical. In the new version of its guidelines, the EPO has changed that approach and stated that the EPO's experts must assume that AI/ML-based inventions may have technical character.

Although this change may seem only superficial, it offers a significant improvement for the applicants. To be more precise, after the guidelines come into force, what the EPO experts will have to demonstrate is a lack of technical character of an AI/ML-based invention, whereas earlier it was the applicant who had to prove that the invention had technical character.

It is worth noting that there is a chance that the procedure for AI/ML inventions will become even friendlier for applicants this year. The European Patent Office is currently deliberating whether inventions based on computer simulations can be patented. Should this happen, it will become easier for applicants to not only demonstrate the technical character but also to demonstrate that this type of invention involves an inventive step.


So just like that they ignore caselaw, violate the EPC, throw away instructions from Parliament and trample over software developers (who were never consulted about this).

Lobbying by the litigation industry, helped by their media (with buzzwords and hype waves), may have yielded results.

"Lobbying by the litigation industry, helped by their media (with buzzwords and hype waves), may have yielded results."The EPO is basically stepping away further and further -- even more so under Campinos -- from the rules that govern it. Then it goes to other countries for photo ops that yield this kind of piece from J A Kemp LLP (patent litigation firm). To quote: "It has been announced that the European Patent Office (EPO) has signed an agreement with the government of Georgia to enable European patents to be validated in Georgia. The validation agreement will enter into force once it has been adopted into Georgian law."

So EPO guidelines become another country's too? Even outside Europe? Even if the EPO violates the law? We don't suppose Georgia's 'IP' people understand that nowadays many European Patents are fake/invalid patents. We've also just noticed this new puff piece from World Intellectual Property Review, reminding us once again that it's little but a megaphone of litigation zealots and -- by extension -- EPO management. To quote: "The European Patent Office (EPO) has released new search tools in a bid to improve the world’s largest free collection of patent documents. In an announcement yesterday, November 19, the EPO said the new Espacenet is a “substantially revised and improved version” of its existing patent information search tool. It said new functions will make it easier for users to conduct searches and access more than 110 million patent documents from across the world for free."

"Good luck to the lone inventor, searching monopolies or millions of submarine patent ambushing him/her, awaiting litigation opportunities to bankrupt his/her business."For free!

Good luck to the lone inventor, searching monopolies or millions of submarine patent ambushing him/her, awaiting litigation opportunities to bankrupt his/her business. Good for innovation?

Why aren't there BILLIONS of documents? Not yet? Maybe trillions? That would be lots and lots of "innovation"... correct?

We've meanwhile also learned from this self-promotional article in Lexology that "a recent European Patent Office (EPO) case has shown that further measures may well be needed" to "keep information truly confidential..."

But wait, isn't patenting all about publication?

Terence Broderick from UDL Intellectual Property [sic] writes about T2239/15, which concerns MPEG. These MPEG patents are very likely bogus software patents (geometry, mathematics etc.) that are grouped in massive numbers to make it far too expensive to invalidate them all. The EPO should not grant any of these, but in practice it even offers special awards to the person who's responsible for hundreds of these. From the article:

In recent case T2239/15 the EPO considered whether documents which were said to be ‘private’ were also ‘confidential’, in the absence of any agreement to say so.

Two prior art documents were cited in examination proceedings which the applicants claimed were confidential working documents, circulated as part of the MPEG (Motion Picture Expert Group) working group. The applicants submitted that a confidentiality agreement was in place within the working group.

A variety of submissions were filed to support this stance which centred on the secrecy associated with national standards bodies, obligations set out in guidelines for delegates and files which set out that documents resulting from meetings of the working group (known as input documents) were considered ‘private’.

However, the flexible nature of the working group couldn’t support an obligation of confidentiality on the members. Indeed, the documents themselves even indicated that members of the group were encouraged to seek external expertise. It was said that the number of members was indefinite and that no absolute obligation of confidentiality existed.

Therefore, the problem wasn’t sharing documents, but that it couldn’t be guaranteed that all members of that group were covered by an explicit obligation of confidentiality — even if documents shared between the members are accepted as being ‘private’.


The EPO does not care about confidentiality; the EPO violates confidentiality and then covers it up. It's a crime, sure, but if the EPO hides evidence of it, will it count? And even if it got caught, nobody would be punished because of immunity.

Recent Techrights' Posts

Comparing U.E.F.I. to B.I.O.S. (Bloat and Insecurity to K.I.S.S.)
By Sami Tikkanen
New 'Slides' From Stallman Support (stallmansupport.org) Site
"In celebration of RMS's birthday, we've been playing a bit. We extracted some quotes from the various articles, comments, letters, writings, etc. and put them in the form of a slideshow in the home page."
Thailand: GNU/Linux Up to 6% of Desktops/Laptops, According to statCounter
Desktop Operating System Market Share Thailand
António Campinos is Still 'The Fucking President' (in His Own Words) After a Fake 'Election' in 2022 (He Bribed All the Voters to Keep His Seat)
António Campinos and the Administrative Council, whose delegates he clearly bribed with EPO budget in exchange for votes
Adrian von Bidder, homeworking & Debian unexplained deaths
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Sainsbury’s Epic Downtime Seems to be Microsoft's Fault and Might Even Constitute a Data Breach (Legal Liability)
one of Britain's largest groceries (and beyond) chains
 
People Don't Just Kill Themselves (Same for Other Animals)
And recent reports about Boeing whistleblower John Barnett
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Monday, March 18, 2024
IRC logs for Monday, March 18, 2024
Suicide Cluster Cover-up tactics & Debian exposed
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Gemini Links 19/03/2024: A Society That Lost Focus and Abandoning Social Control Media
Links for the day
Matthias Kirschner, FSFE: Plagiarism & Child labour in YH4F
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Linux Foundation Boasting About Being Connected to Bill Gates
Examples of boasting about the association
Alexandre Oliva's Article on Monstering Cults
"I'm told an earlier draft version of this post got published elsewhere. Please consider this IMHO improved version instead."
[Meme] 'Russian' Elections in Munich (Bavaria, Germany)
fake elections
Sainsbury's to Techrights: Yes, Our Web Site Broke Down, But We Cannot Say Which Part or Why
Windows TCO?
Plagiarism: Axel Beckert (ETH Zurich) & Debian Developer list hacking
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Links 18/03/2024: Putin Cements Power
Links for the day
Flashback 2003: Debian has always had a toxic culture
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
[Meme] You Know You're Winning the Argument When...
EPO management starts cursing at everybody (which is what's happening)
Catspaw With Attitude
The posts "they" complain about merely point out the facts about this harassment and doxing
'Clown Computing' Businesses Are Waning and the Same Will Happen to 'G.A.I.' Businesses (the 'Hey Hi' Fame)
decrease in "HEY HI" (AI) hype
Free Software Needs Watchdogs, Too
Gentle lapdogs prevent self-regulation and transparency
Matthias Kirschner, FSFE analogous to identity fraud
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Gemini Links 18/03/2024: LLM Inference and Can We Survive Technology?
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Sunday, March 17, 2024
IRC logs for Sunday, March 17, 2024
Links 17/03/2024: Microsoft Windows Shoves Ads Into Third-Party Software, More Countries Explore TikTok Ban
Links for the day
Molly Russell suicide & Debian Frans Pop, Lucy Wayland, social media deaths
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Our Plans for Spring
Later this year we turn 18 and a few months from now our IRC community turns 16
Open Invention Network (OIN) Fails to Explain If Linux is Safe From Microsoft's Software Patent Royalties (Charges)
Keith Bergelt has not replied to queries on this very important matter
RedHat.com, Brought to You by Microsoft Staff
This is totally normal, right?
USPTO Corruption: People Who Don't Use Microsoft Will Be Penalised ~$400 for Each Patent Filing
Not joking!
The Hobbyists of Mozilla, Where the CEO is a Bigger Liability Than All Liabilities Combined
the hobbyist in chief earns much more than colleagues, to say the least; the number quadrupled in a matter of years
Jim Zemlin Says Linux Foundation Should Combat Fraud Together With the Gates Foundation. Maybe They Should Start With Jim's Wife.
There's a class action lawsuit for securities fraud
Not About Linux at All!
nobody bothers with the site anymore; it's marketing, and now even Linux
Links 17/03/2024: Abuses Against Human Rights, Tesla Settlement (and Crash)
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Saturday, March 16, 2024
IRC logs for Saturday, March 16, 2024
Under Taliban, GNU/Linux Share Nearly Doubled in Afghanistan, Windows Sank From About 90% to 68.5%
Suffice to say, we're not meaning to imply Taliban is "good"
Debian aggression: woman asked about her profession
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Gemini Links 17/03/2024: Winter Can't Hurt Us Anymore and Playstation Plus
Links for the day