07.16.20
Posted in Deception, Microsoft at 10:53 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Article may be behind paywall
From the article: “Some jobs were also cut in the Microsoft Azure cloud division, one source later told Business Insider.” (Microsoft insiders said Azure had been losing a lot of money and Microsoft just keeps lying to shareholders in order to fake its future prospects)
Summary: “They’re asking former Microsoft employees who got laid off to contact them over encrypted messaging to talk about it,” Ryan explained in IRC a few moments ago. “There have been several [round of cuts] recently. They do it several hundred at a time so it’s harder to keep track.”
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Bill Gates, Microsoft at 10:13 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: We’ve decided to shelve this series or end it for the time being in order to focus more on the Seattle PD‘s FOIA, which will soon yield the second installment about the arrest of Bill Gates’ engineer (arrest for pedophilia)
IN part one, part two, part three, part four and part five we wrote about ways in which the media was suppressed by Gates Foundation ‘philanthropy’. The context of one incident was Africa (see how the Gates Foundation harms Africans), another was my own.
“Remember how Intel and Microsoft viciously attacked children’s education in Africa. It’s not a theory; this is well documented.”Previously, a former Microsoft employee sent us the video “Exposing the Gates Agenda in Africa” (even people from Microsoft are aware of their ‘prodigy child’ doing bad things). Well, Mr. Gates has long sought a way to personally profit a lot by depopulation (no altruism there, just God complex and greed). We wrote about it a great deal one decade ago (lots of misleading media coverage at that time; much of it was paid for by Gates, under the guise of “supporting journalism”). Remember how Intel and Microsoft viciously attacked children’s education in Africa. It’s not a theory; this is well documented.
Back in June this former Microsoft employee wrote to us about “Bill Gates and Monsanto”. “It’s funny,” he said, that “back in 2010, Bill Gates bought like 500,000 shares of Monsanto stock worth roughly 23 billion dollars with the goal of “feeding the world.”. However, something completely overlooked is how similar the Microsoft and Monsanto business models are in that they are predicated almost entirely on their ability to lock businesses into their products. Regardless of what Bill Gates says his justifications are for investing billions into probably the most unethical and damaging company of the post-modern world, it seems as if his true motivations can be reduced to the simple act of game respecting game. I truly think Bill Gates invested in them because they’re basically the Microsoft of the agriculture industry.”
“At this point it’s uncertain whether we have the time or the deep desire to piece together pieces spiked by Mr. Gates.”We had some more urgent stuff to show at the time, based on Seattle PD’s disclosures (the second installment will apparently arrive quite soon). It’s partly redacted, as one can expect, so some guesses were needed. We had to explain caveats.
At this point it’s uncertain whether we have the time or the deep desire to piece together pieces spiked by Mr. Gates. It would take too much effort and it happened years ago, so recollections are too distant in terms of time. This means that, for the time being, we walk into the subset, hoping that prior parts have already shed sufficient light on the machinations at play. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 9:52 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: With Breton inside the Commission what we’re basically seeing is the EPO cabal speaking on behalf of the EU as well, spreading falsehoods and promoting illegal, unconstitutional agenda in defiance of judges and Justices
I have never come across anything quite like this. Right in the middle of Europe — in the reputable Bavaria no less! — there’s a sort of Mediterranean ‘Mafia’ running a ‘racket’ of sorts…
How was this allowed to happen? Why is nobody putting an end to it?
“How was this allowed to happen? Why is nobody putting an end to it?”Well, behind the smokescreen of EPO-funded fluff* there’s something rather horrific and sinister going on. I, as a longtime proponent of the EU, am horrified to see the EU becoming an extender of EPO corruption. They don’t care about the law and about facts, let alone constitutions. Corruption and illegalities rage on. Having added an update to our previous post about this (with Bristows jumping in, parroting Breton), I now see Myles Jelf (Bristows) jumping in to say:
As well as the issue of the UPC’s central division, other concerns were expressed about the unitary patent and UPC system going ahead without the UK, including:
- the system will be less attractive without coverage of the UK;
- the UPC procedure includes clear features of English legal procedure, yet the only participating country with a similar procedure will be Ireland;
- the expertise of UK judges will not be available, and UK lawyers will not be able to participate;
- English still being the main language; and
- the financial implications for the remaining participating countries.
Why on Earth does the German injustice minister carry on with this Big Lie? It’s going to completely discredit the German government while quite likely having zero effect on the death of the UPC. Facts aren’t on the UPCA’s side. They just aren’t.
And now the EU as well. With Benoît Battistelli's buddy speaking for the EU/EC, it’s bound to become a total embarrassment. Look no further than all the comments in this ongoing thread. All of them.
“It’s going to completely discredit the German government while quite likely having zero effect on the death of the UPC.”Jan Van Hoey said: “Time for Boris to pull the plug and send its notification to the secretariat of the Council of the EU. That’s what Mr Tillman was suggesting in its previous interview. It is also strange to consider agreements not into force part of “Union law”…”
Benjamin Henrion has been saying something similar (it’s in our IRC logs).
MaxDrei then wrote: “Talk about deja vu. In the UK, in the run up to BREXIT, HMG flying on auto-pilot, deposited its instrument of accession to the UPCA. Now, the EU Commission, another craft flying on auto-pilot, happily announces that it would “welcome” ratification of the UPCA by Germany. Sometimes the ship, sailing on its pre-set course, is so enormous that it takes years to change course. Somebody on the bridge has first to issue an authoritative command. Those underlings who are responsible for Press Releases have no authority to do anything else but state what course the ocean-going liner is proceeding along.”
“Concerned observer” is the latest to weigh in:
Well, the only way to describe that response is that is uses carefully selected language to make statements that, whilst not strictly untrue, are highly misleading.
Most misleading of all is the statement that “participation in that system, including the Unified Patent Court Agreement, is only open to EU Member States”. The trouble with this is that termination the UK’s membership of the EU does NOT automatically terminate the UK’s participation in the UPC Agreement. Whilst Mr Tilmann has (rather dubiously, in my opinion) suggested that a notification from the UK would serve to terminate its participation in the UPCA, not even he has suggested any plausible mechanism under the Vienna Convention for AUTOMATIC termination of the UK’s participation at the end of the transitional period.
There has certainly not been any “notification” from the UK to the other Participating Member States of the UPCA. Thus, the problem with the UPCA remains that the UK will be (and, arguably, already is) a “third country” under EU law. In this sense, Mr Breton’s response simply does not address the legal issue underlying Mr Breyer’s question. Whilst extremely disappointing, this is hardly surprising … given the level of “political” support for the UPCA at the EU level.
It remains to be seen whether national courts (such as the BVerfG) will be persuaded by such misleading responses. In my experience, courts tend not to be so easily misled. Also, given that Germany is proposing to ratify the UPCA by relying upon arguments that happen to work very nicely for their legal profession (by effectively dividing between Munich and Paris cases that would have gone to London), it remains to be seen whether the other Participating Member States (such as Italy) can be persuaded that this is acceptable. Whilst various carrots and sticks will no doubt be deployed, I doubt that it will be so easy to persuade all of the PMSs.
Finally, I have my doubts about Jan’s suggestion that the UK should formally withdraw from the UPCA. Recent years have seen many highly dubious (and sometimes contradictory) legal theories wheeled out to keep the UPCA “alive”. In this respect, I have no doubt that Mr Tilmann would find some way of arguing the UK’s formal withdrawal would not prevent the UPCA from coming into force. No doubt he would also concoct some arguments for salvaging the associated Protocols (on Provisional Application and Privileges and Immunities), regardless of the fact that those explicitly call for ratification by the UK…
This is pretty much the consensus if one asks anybody except Team UPC as “more than 71.4 % of judges no longer support the UPC,” based on a recent survey from JUVE.
“With Benoît Battistelli’s buddy speaking for the EU/EC, it’s bound to become a total embarrassment.”A scholar has written to us about this, seeking to participate by expressing concerns about the campaign of Team UPC.
“Hi Roy,” said the message, noting “that the matter is urgent as many sources confirm that Germany can ratify UPCA and they will try to push it through rather than risk a renegotiation.”
Regarding getting people involved in this: “In the constitutional law quarters, academics are more independent and open minded, especially those specialising in human rights, but they do not understand patent law at all.
“A lot of it can be traced back to the EPO and failure to regulate the EPO (or have effective oversight) basically dooms many institutions around it, including ILO.”“There is a recent feedback initiative from the Commission on the future of IP. [...] As things stand at present, the matter is a bit urgent and if Germany does not manage to have its way, the UPC legislative package must re-open [...] The moment is critical. [...] we need to get politicians to re-open the negotiations on the UPC and UPCA. [...] at the same time, we need to get politicians to re-open the negotiations on the UPC and UPCA.”
Keep an eye on this space. There might be further formal action quite soon. We cannot specify the details just yet, but Team UPC is vaguely aware. It’s truly a shame that all this corruption has touched the German government and the EU; the aftermath or the consequence will simply erode public confidence in these institutions. A lot of it can be traced back to the EPO and failure to regulate the EPO (or have effective oversight) basically dooms many institutions around it, including ILO. █
____
* The latest nonsense comes from Watchtroll (“IPWatchdog”), e.g. “‘Not a Field of Giants’: Trends in 3D Printing Tech Include Key Contributions from US,” and Machinery that bases its ‘reporting’ on “European intellectual property firm, Withers & Rogers.” It’s an EPO parrot; to quote: “Highlighting the UK’s position as a European hub for innovation in 3D printing, the report revealed the city of Derby at number seven in a ranking of 15 major European innovation centres for AM technologies, with Munich, Barcelona and Zurich taking the top positions.” They’re reusing these talking points, extracted from the EPO’s own ‘script’. Real journalism is dead/dying.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 8:46 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: The standards of the EPO rise to the challenge of Chairman Campinos
IN comes the President
So bow down, Office resident
King of productivity
Of sweatshop serendipity
Put on the mask
Buying one was your task
Say nothing
Don’t even ask
Our quality is fantastic
Our Party Leader is bombastic
Quality means speed
Don’t say that’s drastic
Recruitment in the air
Like the smog you can’t bear
Carry on producing
To deny monopolies is unfair █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 8:06 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Recruits? There are none. António Campinos and Benoît Battistelli have turned the EPO into an unscientific/antiscientific (against facts) “swamp” which routinely does unlawful things.
Summary: According to internal documents, the EPO is writing its own death knell behind closed doors; it’s going to become just a patents ‘factory’ (monopolies aplenty), not a patent examination centre
THE FOLLOWING text from SUEPO (private publication) was ‘leaked’ to us by an insider, who sought to highlight what’s going on. It’s associated with or related to this leak from the European Patent Office’s (EPO) management. The concerned insider said “herewith a recent publication from SUEPO.”
“The EPO is not stopping recruiting new staff, it is new staff who are not applying for a position in this miserable place.”
–Anonymous EPO insiderSUEPO doesn’t say or write much in public anymore; the censorship is rather apparent, having been accomplished by intimidation tactics. “Indeed,” our source noted, “the EPO is an awful place to be. Examiners’ lives matter. But the little peasant doesn’t care as long as he gets his fix.”
Here is what SUEPO wrote, based on the EPO’s “Revised Operational Plan”:
Munich 14.07.2020
sc20114cp
The Medium-Term Business Plan (2021-2025)
Your Future, No Future
The Finance Department and DG1 management are currently finalizing, behind closed doors, the Medium-Term Business Plan (2021-2025) which will shape the future of the work in DG1. The news is far from positive.
A freeze in recruitment
600 examiners will be leaving the Office between now and 2024, with no replacement foreseen, since there will be a freeze on recruitment over the same period. Only afterwards will 100 new examiners be recruited, of course all holding five-year contracts. The fate of formalities officers is no better. The already permanent understaffing in this area will be aggravated even further, with a record low of only 561 formalities officers in 2024. Even if “the Talent Pipeline from the EUIPO 1” will not run dry, it will most probably only supply other (mainly managerial) areas outside DG 1.
Productivity increases
A further increase in productivity of +6,7 % over the same period compared to 2019 (page 5) is planned, although examiners have already been struggling for quite some time to meet their productivity objectives (1,84 days/product actual vs 1,79 planned). The reason that the current production objective has been met is only because staff have postponed their annual leave during the Covid-19 pandemic (-26% compared to plan)2.
The steep productivity increase foreseen of +5.1% from 2021 to 2022, is striking! The only possible explanation for such a sudden need to increase productivity even further is more made-up financial reasons. In the end, it is not rocket science to calculate that fewer staff producing more or less the same output can only result in an increase of productivity.
Wrong assumptions without benefits
In the MTBP, all productivity increases are justified by the 2019 Financial Study3 and are linked to “SP2023 benefits”.
Our analysis of the Office’s 2019 Financial Study was confirmed by the analysis of Ernst & Young: the EPO faces no financial gap and the basic assumptions were overconservative. Still, the President has cut staff’s purchasing power with the new salary adjustment procedure, and on top of it he continues to increase production pressure.
Regarding any alleged benefits from SP2023, no one knows what these should consist of. Given that examiners and formalities officers are still facing daily software updates of an ever-changing paperless workflow, future possible IT benefits will need to be offset with the time loss first.
Brain drain / “Attract Talent” programme for zero recruits
The orientation paper on recruitment (CA/100/19) and the Programme “Attract Talent” both state:
“In the next ten years it could potentially see the departure of around 2 000 staff members, of which 1 200 are expected to be examiners. This is both a challenge and an opportunity. With effective recruitment and an intense programme of knowledge transfer, the Office could use this staff turnover to capitalise on both in-house experience and new external skills.”
The freeze in recruitment until 2024 renders both documents almost meaningless. The EPO will let highly experienced examiners and formalities officers leave without any possibility of knowledge transfer to new recruits.
In addition, the upcoming reform of the education-related benefits and childcare allowance is actually creating a significant amount of unrest among staff, especially for expats with children, who still have to cope with home-schooling and teleworking in parallel during the Covid-19 pandemic in a foreign country. It will not only harm EPO staff again, it will further reduce the number of applications for future recruitments.
Conclusion
According to the plan, the remaining examiners and formalities officers will have to compensate for the work of those leaving the Office. Due to the lack of arguments, the steep productivity increase planned between 2021 and 2022 raises questions. Coincidentally, it corresponds to the time period in which the Administrative Council would decide on an extension of the mandate of the President of the EPO. But is it just a coincidence?
The Central Staff Committee
[...]
_____
1 SUEPO Munich & The Hague publication, su20006cp
2 DG1 Management Dashboard (8 July 2020)
3 “Financial Study” CA/46/19, pages 56-59, 70-72. By decreasing the number of examiners by 500, Mr Campinos goes way beyond the already overly conservative assumptions of the Base-2 scenario and actually uses the stress scenario for which he never sought mandate from the Administrative Council.
“They say they stop recruiting new staff,” our source noted. “Come on! This is a very modern view to consider things, very German actually. The EPO is not stopping recruiting new staff, it is new staff who are not applying for a position in this miserable place.” █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Content is available under CC-BY-SA