02.11.20

Gemini version available ♊︎

The European Patent Office Continues to Violate the European Patent Convention (EPC) With Impunity While the European Commission Lets That Happen

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 6:07 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

A blindfolded horse
A blindfolded horse

Summary: The European Commission (and Union) can be seen as increasingly complicit in the EPO’s abuses; this means that the EPO has become a liability or source of accountability for the integrity of Europe as a bloc

THE Web site of the European Commission has long promoted buzzwords and hype waves favoured if not created by management of the European Patent Office. We pointed this out in the past.

This is particularly disturbing.

“If or when this spills over to the EU, it becomes risk of more exits from the EU.”Do we wish the corruption of the EPO to spread to the European Commission and Union? Remember the nepotism and entryism which implicate both (António Campinos giving top EPO posts to his EU mates, mimicking the notorious appointments of his successor and selector). There was a further sign of this in a tweet posted by the EPO yesterday. I responded to that in Twitter (not that they even respond with any substance).

“Nepotism, bribes, lies, union-busting etc.” are an integral part of the EPO in recent years and “it’s a den of corruption at every level, every aspect (including inwards).” If or when this spills over to the EU, it becomes risk of more exits from the EU. In recent days some people pointed this out to EU officials, citing Techrights for examples…

Remember that critics of EPO corruption are often pro-EU people who are genuinely concerned about what they see.

“Software patents lack legal basis in the EU, neither the EPO with its invention and novlang of the ‘technical effect’ can render it patentable,” Benjamin Henrion wrote/quoted yesterday, citing this EU paper [PDF], a recent formal publication from the “Publications Office of the European Union.” The first words of both the abstract and the body are “Artificial intelligence” (AI). It says “AI relies heavily on software and data. While software as such is not patentable, it may be protected by copyright and trade secrets (or even by patent law in the case of computer-implemented inventions (CIIs)) if certain requirements are met. There is an ongoing debate about the adequacy of the current IP system to cope with AI technologies18 as well as about the implications of AI for existing standards of patentability. The following paragraphs review the key requirements for protection of AI by patent and copyright law.”

Later it speaks of “Fourth Industrial Revolution” and then says that “[f]or several years now, the courts have struggled with the issue of whether to grant patents in new fields of invention, particularly computer software (Kohlhepp, 2008). The eligibility of software, including AI software, to receive patent protection is an intricate issue. Generally, computer programs “as such” are excluded from patentability at the EPO (Article 52(2)(c) and (3) of the European Patent Convention (EPC)), but the exclusion does not apply to computer programs having a technical character…”

There’s further discussion there about the EPO’s guidelines (the complete reference is Iglesias, M., Shamuilia, S. Anderberg, A., Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence – A literature review, EUR 30017 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2019, ISBN 978-92-76-14178-5, doi:10.2760/2517, JRC119102.).

In our latest Daily Links we included several new articles about DABUS and CRISPR patents at the EPO. These show that the EPO continues to flagrantly disregard the EPC and judging by the paper above, the EU and EC are more or less fine with it.

Incidentally, “NLO attorneys Marta Alvarez Guede and Katelyn Bernier” have just published this piece of marketing (“The six big ways the US and Europe differ on software patents”) or lawyers pretending to be journalists. Software patents are bunk in US and in European courts (35 U.S.C. § 101 puts curbs/limits on USPTO examiners and EPO examiners cannot grant software patents in Europe… unless they’re spun as “hey hi” (AI) or some other buzzword), but liars from IAM won’t tell anyone that. They’re paid to mislead and here’s more of the same:

The USPTO and EPO do not see software-related inventions in the same way. NLO attorneys Marta Alvarez Guede and Katelyn Bernier highlight what applicants must understand about the offices’ different approaches

According to the European Patent Convention (EPC), a patent can be granted in any field. However, it does not regard computer programs as inventions if claimed as such, while methods for performing mental acts, playing games, doing business and presenting information are excluded from patentability altogether.

Under the approach followed by the EPO, a claim directed to a computer program will not be excluded from patentability under Article 52 of the EPC if it contains at least one feature that is considered to have technical character. In this way, it is sufficient that a claim is directed to a device or a method implemented in a computer to avoid exclusion. The non-technical features of such a claim will be ignored when assessing an inventive step.

The EPC provides no general definition of what is technical, but relevant case law before the EPO Boards of Appeal gives some indication of what constitutes ‘technical character’. In particular, a claim to a computer program is not excluded from patentability if, when running in a computer, it provides a further technical effect going beyond the computer’s normal behaviour. Such further technical effect could be saving computer resources such as memory, processor time or energy, or controlling further processes.

The judges of the EPO Boards of Appeal lack independence (they say so themselves) and as recently as months ago they were pressured by Campinos to rule in favour of software patenting.

Where’s the European Commission when one needs it? Oh, that’s right, issuing silly papers with buzzwords like “hey hi” and “4IR” in them — the same nonsense that EPO management bribed European publications to spread far and wide.

The National Law Review has meanwhile also published this piece where Laura Morelli (McDermott Will & Emery) pretends the UK can negotiate a place in the UPC. It’s not possible, it’s an EU system. UPC means EU. But on she goes anyway, conflating that with another matter (EPC):

The European Patent Office (EPO) is established under the European Patent Convention (EPC). It is separate from the EU and counts among its contracting states the EU Member States as well as non-EU Member States. European patents will, therefore, continue to cover the UK without the impact of Brexit.

In contrast, the impact of Brexit on the Unitary Patent (which establishes a unitary patent enforceable in all participating Member States) and on the Unitary Patent Court (which provides a unified court system with exclusive jurisdiction for litigation relating to Unitary Patents and European Patents) remains uncertain. Although ratifying the UPCA on 28 April 2018 in the midst of the Brexit process, thereby expressing its willingness to remain within the framework of the Unitary Patent and Unitary Patent Court, the continued involvement of the UK in such system will need to be negotiated.

It cannot be negotiated unless the UK rejoins the EU, but this is just the typical kind of spin we see from UPC fanatics every day this month. We’ve come to witness in Europe the same lies and abuses that are often condemned when they happen across the Atlantic. Don’t let this become ‘normalcy’.

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

Decor ᶃ Gemini Space

Below is a Web proxy. We recommend getting a Gemini client/browser.

Black/white/grey bullet button This post is also available in Gemini over at this address (requires a Gemini client/browser to open).

Decor ✐ Cross-references

Black/white/grey bullet button Pages that cross-reference this one, if any exist, are listed below or will be listed below over time.

Decor ▢ Respond and Discuss

Black/white/grey bullet button If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

DecorWhat Else is New


  1. Peak Code — Part I: Before the Wars

    Article/series by Dr. Andy Farnell: "in the period between 1960 and 2060 people had mistaken what they called "The Internet" for a communications system, when it had in fact been an Ideal and a Battleground all along - the site of the 100 years info-war."



  2. Links 21/1/2022: RISC-V Development Board and Rust 1.58.1

    Links for the day



  3. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, January 20, 2022

    IRC logs for Thursday, January 20, 2022



  4. Gemini Lets You Control the Presentation Layer to Suit Your Own Needs

    In Gemini (or the Web as seen through Gemini clients such as Kristall) the user comes first; it's not sites/capsules that tell the user how pages are presented/rendered, as they decide only on structural/semantic aspects



  5. The Future of Techrights

    Futures are difficult to predict, but our general vision for the years ahead revolves around more community involvement and less (none or decreased) reliance on third parties, especially monopolistic corporations, mostly because they oppress the population via the network and via electronic devices



  6. [Meme] UPC for CJEU

    When you do illegal things and knowingly break the law to get started with a “legal” system you know it’ll end up in tears… or the CJEU



  7. Links 20/1/2022: 'Pluton' Pushback and Red Hat Satellite 6.10.2

    Links for the day



  8. The Web is a Corporate Misinformation/Disinformation Platform, Biased Against Communities, Facts, and Science

    Misinformation/disinformation in so-called 'news' sites is a pandemic which spreads; in the process, the founder of GNU/Linux gets defamed and GNU/Linux itself is described as the problem, not the solution to the actual problems



  9. Links 20/1/2022: McKinsey Openwashing and Stable Kernels

    Links for the day



  10. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, January 19, 2022

    IRC logs for Wednesday, January 19, 2022



  11. Links 20/1/2022: Linuxfx 11.1 WxDesktop 11.0.3 and FreeIPMI 1.6.9 Released

    Links for the day



  12. Links 19/1/2022: XWayland 22.1 RC1 and OnlyOffice 7.0 Release

    Links for the day



  13. Links 19/1/2022: ArchLabs 2022.01.18 and KDE's 15-Minute Bug Initiative

    Links for the day



  14. When Twitter Protects Abusers and Abuse (and Twitter's Sponsors)

    Twitter is an out-of-control censorship machine and it should be treated accordingly even by those who merely "read" or "follow" Twitter accounts; Twitter is a filter, not a news/media platform or even means of communication



  15. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, January 18, 2022

    IRC logs for Tuesday, January 18, 2022



  16. Links 19/1/2022: Wine 7.x Era Begins and Istio 1.12.2 is Out

    Links for the day



  17. Another Video IBM Does Not Want You to Watch

    It seems very much possible that IBM (or someone close to IBM) is trying to purge me from Twitter, so let’s examine what they may be trying to distract from. As we put it 2 years ago, "Watson" is a lot more offensive than those supposedly offensive words IBM is working to purge; think about those hundreds of Red Hat workers who are black and were never told about ethnic purges of blacks facilitated by IBM (their new boss).



  18. What IBM Does Not Want You to Watch

    Let's 'Streisand it'...



  19. Good News, Bad News (and Back to Normal)

    When many services are reliant on the integrity of a single, very tiny MicroSD card you're only moments away from 2 days of intensive labour (recovery, investigation, migration, and further coding); we've learned our lessons and took advantage of this incident to upgrade the operating system, double the storage space, even improve the code slightly (for compatibility with newer systems)



  20. Someone Is Very Desperate to Knock My Account Off Twitter

    Many reports against me — some successful — are putting my free speech (and factual statements) at risk



  21. Links 18/1/2022: Deepin 20.4 and Qubes OS 4.1.0 RC4

    Links for the day



  22. Links 18/1/2022: GNOME 42 Alpha and KStars 3.5.7

    Links for the day



  23. IRC Proceedings: Monday, January 17, 2022

    IRC logs for Monday, January 17, 2022



  24. Links 17/1/2022: More Microsoft-Connected FUD Against Linux as Its Share Continues to Fall

    Links for the day



  25. The GUI Challenge

    The latest article from Andy concerns the Command Line Challenge



  26. Links 17/1/2022: digiKam 7.5.0 and GhostBSD 22.01.12 Released

    Links for the day



  27. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, January 16, 2022

    IRC logs for Sunday, January 16, 2022



  28. Links 17/1/2022: postmarketOS 21.12 Service Pack 1 and Mumble 1.4 Released

    Links for the day



  29. [Meme] Gemini Space (or Geminispace): From 441 Working Capsules to 1,600 Working Capsules in Just 12 Months

    Gemini space now boasts 1,600 working capsules, a massive growth compared to last January, as we noted the other day (1,600 is now official)



  30. [Meme] European Patent Office Space

    The EPO maintains a culture of illegal surveillance, inherited from Benoît Battistelli and taken to a whole new level by António Campinos


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