12.28.21
Gemini version available ♊︎EPO Staff Representation: “We Believe That the EPO Should… Invest in Staff and in Quality” (Not Cuts and Worse)
The current strategy involves a “dangerous cocktail” of low-quality patents (in large quantities) and low-qualified staff being recruited as examiners, equipped with examination guidelines that violate the EPC
Summary: The EPO‘s attack on its very own staff and on the quality/validity of European Patents is an issue that Office leadership has long been warned about (but it chose to ignore the warnings)
2022 is just around the corner or right around the edge, but it’s never too late to glance back at warnings from patent examiners, who repeatedly cautioned António Campinos about his destruction of patent quality — an endeavour started years earlier by his ‘appointing authority’, fellow Frenchman Benoît Battistelli.
Today we reproduce, herein, an old document, two years old as a matter of fact, as it very much relates to the present; it speaks about the erosion of patent quality and staff being crushed as if examiners are just some people to be used as “rubber stamp operators” (helping to print money for the 'bank').
06.11.2019
su19021mp – 0.2.1/1.3.1The Financial Survey: A divisive exercise
Dear colleagues,
[Mr Campinos has asked you] to inform your team managers which of the “measures 1 to 10” have your support. This question is wrong at many levels.
- these “10 measures” presume that huge (5.8 billion) savings are necessary. We do not believe this to be true.
- these savings are to be obtained by cutting staff benefits and a further high (25-30%) increase in productivity. We believe that the EPO should, on the contrary, invest in staff and in quality.
- asking individual staff members which of the “10 measures” they prefer is divisive since many of the measures affect one category of staff more than another.
- only giving staff the choice between measures that target them excludes other options and a wider discussion about the future direction of the Office.
- the proposed consultation procedure is intransparent and open to manipulation. The alleged outcome cannot be verified.
- be aware that replying by selecting a measure may render an appeal against such a measure a certain loser.
At the moment the only measure directly affecting staff that SUEPO supports is the increase in the pension contributions as recommended by the actuaries (CA/56/19) who regularly review the performance of the RFPPS.
All the other measures proposed need further analysis and discussion. Alternatives that have not been proposed (adopting fees to follow inflation, asking a contribution of the Member States, less ambitious building plans) must also be considered.
We kindly ask that you keep the above considerations in mind if you wish to discuss the “10 measures” with your team managers or directors.
SUEPO and the staff representation are currently in deliberations of what is the best way forward for staff. We will publish soon information on each and every measure and the impact these will have upon you.
SUEPO Munich
Earlier today in Daily Links we gave not one but several examples of European Patents being crushed in courts or invalidated upon demand, which is neither simple nor cheap. The long-term costs of granting by default (to enrich oneself) could very well be seen in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) about a decade ago. This is why the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) was established over 10 years ago (AIA), and inter partes reviews (IPRs) have since then eliminated many thousands of fake patents, sometimes using 35 U.S.C. § 101 and Alice (SCOTUS, 2014).
Publishers like JUVE, Managing IP, and IAM don’t want us to mind the externalities; look who funds those publications, which are also part-time propaganda mills (lobbyists) for Team UPC, i.e. those who ‘mentor’ Campinos.
The avalanche of fake European Patents will rattle the European economy and meanwhile those who conspired to destroy the EPO are trying to do the same thing to European patent courts, in effect crushing the law and numerous constitution with their falsely-advertised UPC. Earlier today in Daily Links we gave several examples of classic “fake news” about the UPC. █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA