HAVING just published this morning's "Virtual Injustice" installment (Part 2) I decided to do a quick video, which ended up being a lot longer than expected. It would be shocking, unless one already witnessed the situation at the EPO, to come to grips with the status quo. A bunch of people in their homes are deciding whether it's OK to decide on important matters from a bunch of homes. How did we come to this? Why has the legal system been outsourced to a continent that isn't Europe? Why are arguments being denied or dismissed as "inadmissible" any time they're potent? Why is the public being shut out (secrecy, lack of transparency) any time things 'heat up' a bit? Is there a national security dilemma at stake? Certainly not.

"They still haven't said a single word about the hearing (shown below)."The video is a bit of a ramble, but it ends up showing some of the more disturbing elements of the whole situation in a more informal fashion (with some rude words here and there; companies like Google cannot censor us for that). Finally, we take a look at the EPO's official Web site, which has been more or less just fluff since Monday. They still haven't said a single word about the hearing (shown below). ⬆