11.29.20
Managing IP: Puff Pieces Galore for the EPO’s Dictatorship (Complete With Buzzwords and PR Stunts)
When dependent on or while working for publications sponsored by law/litigation firms can one engage in real journalism?
Summary: By giving a platform to notorious patent trolls and ‘engaging’ with the EPO‘s dictator (whom only 3% of EPO staff trusts) Managing IP is sort of giving away its real agenda, which isn’t journalism but conducting or assisting misinformation campaigns
SO Managing IP just (re)prints whatever chronic liars and patent trolls say (no fact-checking needed); is this what counts as journalism in 2020?
The frustrating state of Managing IP isn’t a new issue; we’ve been covering the site’s role in producing classic “fake news” about the UPC/A, in effect participating in a vicious and dishonest lobbying campaign.
“…we’ve been covering the site’s role in producing classic “fake news” about the UPC/A, in effect participating in a vicious and dishonest lobbying campaign.”Now, just as staff starts mass-mailing EPO management, the site goes ‘full IAM‘…
Here’s Managing IP as megaphone for ‘thug’ António Campinos, whom Max Walters deems to be some sort of ‘expert’ in science and “AI” (or “Hey Hi”). “EPO president discusses AI [sic] inventorship [sic] rules and video hearings [sic],” it says, “and explains why staff will eventually return to the office…”
Well, “eventually”…
Maybe do some grilling about the fake financial ‘study’. Would Campinos walk away in protest? Would funding be at risk?
For better insight into this whole thing see this weekly roundup (no paypall) and notice how they reprint press releases (this is what the site stands for, never the hard questions; same with Benoît Battistelli). To quote relevant bits:
EPO president António Campinos has said it will take “years” before IP authorities agree on whether artificial intelligence tools can be patent inventors.
In an interview with Managing IP, we asked Campinos about an AI tool – Device for the Autonomous Bootstrapping of Unified Sentience – which has been named as the inventor on parallel patent applications. Several major IP jurisdictions, including the EPO, have rejected the filings.
The EPO president said there has not been much relevant legislative progress recently, before admitting: “You can imagine the years of discussion that this will take before we come to an agreement in this area.”
[...]
A study published by the EPO shows that European universities and public research organisations are using European patents as the main instrument to commercially exploit their inventions.
According to the study, called Valorisation of scientific results – Patent commercialisation scoreboard: European universities and public research organisations, these institutions already protect more than a third (36%) of their inventions with patents. Of inventions in the pipeline, the institutions say they plan to protect 42% through patenting.
The study, published on Tuesday, November 24, adds that licensing is the preferred method of commercialisation (accounting for 70% of commercialisation of inventions), followed by R&D co-operation (14%). Selling patents accounted for 9%.
EPO president António Campinos said: “Europe’s universities and public research organisations are powerhouses of scientific research and are behind many breakthrough inventions. This report shows that they are using European patents to bring their new technologies out of the lab and into the market.”
The study was based on 686 interviews covering patent applications filed with the EPO between 2007 and 2018 by 241 European universities and public research organisations.
Did the site actually study this so-called ‘study’? Which is basically self-serving propaganda…
It’s sad to see what level of fluff so-called ‘news’ sites have stooped down to. Another new ‘article’ (more like platform rental) by Max Walters is just giving a platform to a vicious patent troll [1, 2], Kasim Alfalahi. Surely they can do some investigative journalism instead of just copy-pasting the words of some troll talking about himself and his so-called ‘business’. But yes, investigative journalism takes more work and is more risky. So they do PR, instead. █
Content is available under CC-BY-SA