FOUR days ago, as we noted in Daily Links of that day, an EPO puff piece was published to relay misleading talking points of António Campinos and Team Battistelli. Little or no effort was made to correct or fact-check them. "We recommend reading the comments on the article as well," SUEPO wrote yesterday after it had seen that 'article'; we recommend just skipping straight to the comments because brainwash isn't good for the mind.

"The EPO is a problematic institution and the public needs to know about it before that injustice can be corrected."In spite of granting loads of Invalid Patents (IPs) instead of European Patents (EPs), e.g. European software patents, the EPO sees a decline in "demand" from its "customers" or "clients" (that's how the EPO's management views people who request monopolies!) and moreover, judging by new comments in IP Kat (at least those approved by AstraZeneca moderation), there's growing realisation that the EPO is a stacked institution of nepotism and kangaroo courts.

There are ongoing efforts to suppress such information (that's why many decent writers left IP Kat), but there's also hope that 10-million-euro media campaigns (such as last month's) won't create a smokescreen thick enough. Lawyering up the staff will hopefully not discourage the staff from speaking to media, either. The EPO is a problematic institution and the public needs to know about it before that injustice can be corrected. ⬆

"The European Patent Office is a Corrupt, Malicious Organisation Which Should Not Exist"

--Richard Stallman