07.18.20

Marks & Clerk Reveals That António Campinos, With Zero Experience in Software, is Lobbying Judges (Who Are Supposed to be Independent But Are Actually Controlled by Him) to Open the Floodgates to Illegal Software Patents

Posted in Europe, Patents at 1:46 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Is it Campinos v BoA G 1/19?

“[The EPO] can’t distinguish between hardware and software so the patents get issued anyway.”

Marshall Phelps, Microsoft

Summary: There seems to be no improvement when it comes to the autonomy of judges at the EPO; the ‘king’ of EPOnia does everything by decree, but it’s more or less disguised as an extensive legal process (see G 2/19)

THE EPO became so bad at or uncaring about patent quality that it became more lenient than even the USPTO (home of software patents) when it comes to granting software patents. Marks & Clerk, a large law firm, said so publicly.

“…we already know that the judges, who certainly lack autonomy, are being pressured by the Office. This clear lack of independence (in principle and in practice) taints the outcome, whatever it may be.”Putting aside yet more fluff/propaganda sourced from the EPO (e.g. “Report [sic] Reveals UK at the Forefront of 3D Printing” from 3D Printing Progress; there’s more in languages other than English*), we’ve just found an article by Lara Sibley (Marks & Clerk), on behalf of software patents boosters. It is about a hearing to which one had to sign up (register) in advance. It was published in Mondaq on Friday (two days after the said hearing). As a reminder, António Campinos is already meddling in the case, pushing for an outcome that favours software patents in Europe, because just like Benoît Battistelli he doesn’t believe these judges have independence and EPC is just some ‘nuisance’ to be bypassed, not something to be respected.

“A pending case (G 1/19) relating to computer implemented simulation has been referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal,” Sibley wrote. “The case is relevant to the patenting of simulations in particular, but is potentially also relevant to the patenting of software more generally.”

This is why it can become an Alice-like test for Europe. Here are bits of the article with our comments added in yellow:

Computer simulations are widely used in the development of new products. Often simulations can have significant real world impact – much of the response to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic for example has been driven by detailed simulations of the impact on transmission rates of differing policy approaches [here we go again; opportunistic exploitation of COVID-19 by patent maximalists; this case predates COVID-19]. As with other software-based innovation however, patent claims directed to methods of simulation, design or modelling generally comprise features which in Europe are considered to fall under the category of mathematical methods [because that’s just what it is; statistics and predictions based upon statistics].

A pending case (G 1/19) relating to computer implemented simulation [“computer implemented” just means software, but they make it sound fancier and physical] has been referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal. The case is relevant to the patenting of simulations in particular, but is potentially also relevant to the patenting of software more generally. A hearing was held for G 1/19 on 15 July 2020. The background to this case, together with an overview of the hearing, is presented below.

[...]

Turning to the details of the case, G 1/19 concerns a computer-implemented method [read: algorithm] of modelling pedestrian crowd movement in an environment that includes the simulating of movement of a plurality of pedestrians through the environment.

The appellant submitted that the invention produced a technical effect in the form of “a more accurate simulation of crowd movement”. As to the technicality of simulating crowd movement, the appellant argued that simulating the movement of pedestrians yielded results which were no different from those obtained by modelling an electron using numerical methods. [Classic software patent]

The Board of Appeal was not convinced that numerically calculating the trajectory of an object as determined by the laws of physics is in itself a technical task producing a technical effect. In the Board of Appeal’s view, a technical effect requires, at a minimum, a direct link with physical reality, such as a change in or a measurement of a physical entity. [Sounds like they’re preconditioned/warm to the view that this is abstract, as per the US (case)law]

However, the EPO Guidelines for Examination refer to an important case (T 1227/05) where the Board of Appeal allowed a claim to a numerical simulation of a noise affected circuit. [Under whose administration?]

[...]

The referred questions 1 to 3 were then considered in order. The submissions concerning Question 1 were the most extensive, with some of these submissions also being referred to during the discussion of the later questions.

As regards Question 1, the meaning of a computer-implemented simulation “as such” was discussed. [Back we go to Brimelow’s “as such”; it is quite meaningless and in India it’s “per se”] The questions i) to v) posed by the Enlarged Board in their communication of 22 June 2020 (and summarised in the section above) were then considered. On question i), the appellant and the representatives of the President both made submissions that the “COMVIK case law” was suitable for the examination of computer-implemented simulations. During the discussion of potential and virtual technical effects in relation to question ii), various hypothetical examples were put forward by the representatives of the President, including that of a virtual wind tunnel, in which a virtual technical effect could solve the same technical problem as a real technical effect. On question iii), the appellant and the representatives of the President also both put forward submissions that a feature relating to a “non-invention” (such as a mental act) can still contribute to technical character in the context of a claim to a solution to a technical problem [Notice meddling by the Office, on behalf of patent maximalists]. Concerning question iv), and consideration of the purpose of the simulation, the appellant raised an intermediate example, lying between the case where a claim specifies simulation of an undefined “technical system” and the case where a claim specifies a very specific technical purpose (for example, simulation of a circuit subject to 1/f noise, as specified in T 1227/05). In relation to question v), it was submitted by the appellant that in the present case, the simulation of human behaviour is used to control a technical system, in particular the simulation can be used to improve the building structure. The representatives of the President also put forward the view that a technical contribution could still be present in certain circumstances, even where the simulation models human behaviour. Simulations used in the field of self-driving cars were put forward as an example here. [Very weak arguments from the President, who never wrote a single computer program in his whole life]

[...]

Once issued, the decision in G 1/19 may have a significant impact not just on patenting of simulations but also on the patenting of software at the EPO more generally, depending on the response and reasoning of the Enlarged Board. Encouragingly, [for this author’s litigation giant] the EPO President’s response to the questions are in favour of maintaining the patentability of simulations without, for example, requiring a direct link with physical reality, and expressed the view that it is sufficient the simulation method reflects, at least in part, technical principles underlying the simulated system or process. However, the Enlarged Board is not bound in any way by the President’s comments and will reach its own conclusions. [Nonsense! You clearly are in denial, perhaps out of convenience, about the Office’s abuse of these judges and there may be consequences for ruling the ‘wrong’ way.]

The outcome will likely be known later this year; we already know that the judges, who certainly lack autonomy, are being pressured by the Office. This clear lack of independence (in principle and in practice) taints the outcome, whatever it may be.
____
* As we noted before, we’d rather not spend too much time obsessing over this misuse of shallow journalists who think their job is to just amplify for PR departments of corporations and organisations (the “easy job”; no fact-checking needed, no real understanding or investigation of the underlying issues). Judging by sentences like “European inventors and businesses accounted for almost half of all AM patent applications filed with the EPO in the period from 2010 to 2018,” among others, we can tell they put no effort into actual journalism. They just reprint ‘prepared’ sentences from the EPO’s PR department.

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

This post is also available in Gemini over at:

gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2020/07/18/software-guru-campinos/

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. GNU/Linux Turns 38 This Year, But the (Partly) Microsoft-Led Linux Foundation Wants You to Think It's Only 30 and a Good Friend of Microsoft

    What the Linux Foundation calls “Linux” (as its PR staff members refer to it in their new press release) is 38 years old, not 30. “Open Source” as a term did not formally exist yet, so this latest waffle makes no sense at all (the press release keeps mentioning a term that’s designed to attack and replace the original). But it’s part of a broader pattern of deception, attacking software freedom and pretending GNU never existed. Did money corrupt everything and is it too late to salvage truth, let alone freedom?



  2. Richard Stallman on Paid Smear Campaigns

    Dr. Richard Stallman on people who lie about him online (4 years after the older campaign of hate and distortion and half a decade before the current one, coordinated by groups funded by monopolies that dislike GPL)



  3. Links 22/4/2021: Grafana Goes for AGPLv3, Godot 3.3 Released, Mesa 21.0.3 Available

    Links for the day



  4. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, April 21, 2021

    IRC logs for Wednesday, April 21, 2021



  5. Behind the Curtains of Cheap and Cheesy PR the EPO is a Machine of Oppression (Against Its Very Own Staff), Tribunal to Rule on Strike Busting

    The laughable regime of Campinos is a naked emperor with nothing but diplomatic immunity (almost not a single member of staff trusts the President) and the PR strategic front is becoming worse than pathetic; it's like the place is run by infantile career-climbing sociopaths with no qualifications, trying to weaponise a sea of money against staff, inquisitive media, and states (by bribing them or hiring lawyers to intimidate/bankrupt them); while the EPO still swims in money its reputation drowns too quickly to ever resurface, recover



  6. Links 21/4/2021: University of Minnesota Blacklisted Over Defects, Red Hat Satellite 6.9 is Out

    Links for the day



  7. Links 21/4/2021: VirtualBox 6.1.20, GCC 11.1 Release Candidate, Nginx 1.20.0

    Links for the day



  8. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, April 20, 2021

    IRC logs for Tuesday, April 20, 2021



  9. Some People Who Asked to Be Removed From the Slanderous Hate Letter Against the FSF Are Still Being Denied Removal (But Not All)

    I am aware of some people (evidence is in the public domain for all to see) who asked to be removed from the hate list; their requests have not yet been processed, or simply denied. Maybe they should ask again. There are silent and selective changes.



  10. Overt Abuse and Mischaracterisations by Bully de Blanc

    The campaign to ruin the FSF and silence its founder, Richard M. Stallman (RMS), goes months prior to the hate letter set up by Bully de Blanc, her boss, and the Microsoft-sponsored OSI; they just attack the licence (GPL/copyleft) and they try to redefine things for the corporations which fund them



  11. According to StatCounter, This Month GNU/Linux Market Share on Desktops/Laptops Exceeded 2% (Based on Sites They Monitor)

    StatCounter does not monitor everything and not every machine connects to the Web, but in relative terms, based on the chart above, no doubt GNU/Linux continues growing relative to other operating systems (chart plotted based on the latest raw data, rendered in LibreOffice Calc)



  12. At the EPO, Lawlessness Has Become “a New Normal”

    Without as much as a real consultation with those who are impacted (by the EPO's gross infringements) the management of the EPO rushes ahead again, enjoying zero oversight, no legal review, and no accountability or scrutiny of any kind



  13. Links 20/4/2021: Tails 4.18 and Mark Surman in Mozilla's Board of Directors

    Links for the day



  14. Microsoft as a Censorship Machine Working to Undermine Free Software and Code Sharing (Also Sharing in General)

    Microsoft is, as usual, a tool of destruction rather than creation; it seems to be better at ruining things and censoring things, notably things that compete against Microsoft or pose a threat to Microsoft's business model (and close partners, such as RIAA)



  15. Phoronix Needs to Exercise Caution and Stay Vigilant/Careful of Microsoft

    Taking note or lessons from the blunder of Raspberry Pi (back in February), Phoronix should be careful of Microsoft 'freebies' as they're never free and there are strings attached, destined to alienate longtime supporters



  16. IRC Proceedings: Monday, April 19, 2021

    IRC logs for Monday, April 19, 2021



  17. Links 20/4/2021: EasyOS Dunfell 2.7.1, Phoronix Takes Microsoft 'Freebies', Microsoft Trying to Steal Credit for Linux on Mars

    Links for the day



  18. Richard Stallman on How UPC is a Trojan Horse for Software Patents in Europe

    Dr. Richard Stallman, the Free Software Foundation's founder, offers his analysis of the Unitary Patent (or UPC) and what it means for software patents in Europe now that the EPO increases its influence over continental law



  19. Technology Can Make Life Worse, Even in the Public Sector, Not Just the Private Sector

    There are growing concerns — increasingly justified concerns as a matter of fact — that customer service is universally going away and “COVID” has become the impenetrable shield or a cover in the face of facts, laws, and basic rights



  20. Links 19/4/2021: LibreSSL 3.3.2, OpenSSH 8.6, Firefox 88

    Links for the day



  21. Time to Move to Gemini, Wherever/Whenever Possible, as the World Wide Web is a Burden on Everybody

    A 30-minute rant about what the Web has become and the promise of gemini:// (designed to simplify everything, enable self-hosting, preserve privacy, and empower communities rather than military-connected monopolies)



  22. The Number of Signatures in the Anti-FSF Petition is Decreasing, Not Increasing

    A reader has notified Techrights that belatedly, perhaps where people’s job is at risk (we’ve heard of stories and situations wherein the employer’s view and a worker’s view diverge), the GNOME Foundation/OSI did in fact remove some people from the hate letter they had set up for their monopolistic sponsors. We do, however, still see some names in there of people who asked to be removed, so it must be a very selective process. They don’t want to lose face, so they must have made it very difficult to revoke one’s name. Exceptional circumstances? We have checked to confirm, based on the available archives, and indeed that number decreased since 10 days ago, whereas 6,415 people have thus far signed the support letter (it's still growing), so we’ve just re-plotted the chart.



  23. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, April 18, 2021

    IRC logs for Sunday, April 18, 2021



  24. How Many People Developed GNU (Maybe Hundreds) in the 1980s

    Dr. Richard Stallman, the Free Software Foundation's founder, explains how code was managed and contributed in the early days of GNU



  25. Links 19/4/2021: Linux 5.12 RC8, GNU Poke 1.2, EndeavourOS 2021.04

    Links for the day



  26. Proprietary Software (BT Hub) Has Ruined My Whole Day

    While we did have some plans to publish long articles, those plans were curtailed or at least delayed due to the fact our sole device at home not to be controlled by us (a so-called 'Smart' Hub from BT) decided to break itself and by doing so bring productivity to a standstill (that firmware update, silently installed without notice or any form of consent, managed to screw with the local network)



  27. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, April 17, 2021

    IRC logs for Saturday, April 17, 2021



  28. Tolerating the Intolerant and Lacking Tolerance for Opposing Views

    The person who shouted...



  29. Letter of Support for Richard Stallman - Doing Better in Community

    "How do you support someone you’ve known for years who is unfairly attacked and publicly maligned?"



  30. Richard Stallman on Rejecting Workplace Bureaucracy in the 1970s

    Dr. Richard Stallman, the Free Software Foundation's founder, explains what inspired him to get involved in non-software matters


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