01.18.23

How Carbon Accounting Became a Cover for Fast-Languishing Sirius Open Source Ltd.

Posted in Courtroom, Deception, Free/Libre Software, Law at 9:33 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Just two days before the witch-hunt began:

Address change at Sirius

Summary: Sirius ‘Open Source’ is what people in the UK would likely consider/deem a “dodgy” company; today we revisit some aspects of that

IN many screenshots and PDFs shared here before (see the wiki for index) we’ve shown that Sirius changed its address many times before the witch-hunts. We also habitually present evidence that this company is too broke to be worth suing as it can take 12 months for a decision to be handed down; by then, the company might be bankrupt already, unable to pay. Apropos, regarding Microsoft layoffs, some anonymous employees say that the layoffs started last week and some people aren’t being paid severance. We’ll wait and see if more verifiable accounts can be found.

“We’ve used those document to show it’s getting worse over time as unbearable debt makes Sirius incapable of continued operations.”Over the past few years I occasionally downloaded documents (didn’t know years later we’d end up presenting and uploading them!) from what’s known here as “companies house” — basically a companies’ registry with PDFs hosted in AWS (millions of documents about British companies outsourced to another continent, which is ironic!). We’ve used those documents to show it’s getting worse over time as unbearable debt makes Sirius incapable of continued operations. We moreover hypothesise that the company is running away to dodge litigation and maybe dodge payments to the two ex-wives and 4 daughters, especially the young ones (early teens at this point in time).

It doesn’t look good, does it? It would be very difficult to sue or take this to court for dispute resolution. It’s not clear who to even sue because the company is registered at the address of Carbon Accounting and the UK ‘CEO’, whose own business is also registered at the address of an accountancy, is hiding his home address. He literally sends us letters without a return address. So it’s not only unclear where the company is actually based but also where its managers are based. You cannot simply sent legal letters to Carbon Accounting. It would make no sense. Carbon Accounting would turn the bailiff away.

“This is especially upsetting because as far back as 2019 I insisted on getting some answers. But managers were mum; they were beyond evasive. The “cabal” had a sort of conspiracy of silence, as obviously the Office Manager and Support Manager who sat there in the contract-signing knew what was going on but did not tell the staff.”Putting aside the fact that the company is registered with the accountants (Carbon Accounting) — a subject that I confronted the CEO about back in October (over the telephone!) — the address in the US may be an apartment and the addresses there seem inconsistent. The absent boss is also “sleek like an eel”, to use a term we mentioned the other week. Basically, the company now advertises itself as American (despite having at most one American staff member, a relatively recent recruit), it is playing legal tricks (and not following British law, even here in the UK), it tricked us all into signing of contracts we had not even seen (we’ll cover this later this month), and it keeps tricking people by storytelling, hiding the true story and the true state of the company.

This is especially upsetting because as far back as 2019 I insisted on getting some answers. But managers were mum; they were beyond evasive. The “cabal” had a sort of conspiracy of silence, as obviously the Office Manager and Support Manager who sat there in the contract-signing knew what was going on but did not tell the staff. I asked about the whole “US” thing and got no answers at all.

Lying to staff is about as bad as refusing to answer questions when asked. Something was being signed by the company with the Gates Foundation under an NDA.

In the next part we’ll explain how a “training and workshop” invitation turned out to be a trap, based on sheer deceit and obfuscation.

01.17.23

Microsoft and Its Media Partners Are Rebranding Plagiarism as ‘Hey Hi’ (AI) to Trivialise the Abuse

Posted in Courtroom, Deception, Law, Microsoft at 1:20 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Published 5 hours ago to highlight how Microsoft moles inside the media have covered it (e.g. Gralla):

Summary: “A video covering my concern with the way news stories are written about Microsoft and its blatant attack on open source code and the theft of open source code. Please take a look and let me know what you think in the comments below.”

Also see: Open Source Initiative is a Shameless Megaphone and Advocate for Microsoft’s Proprietary Software (GitHub). It Also Encourages Copyright and GPL Violations (Plagiarism Disguised as ‘AI’).

01.16.23

[Meme] Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht): Can’t See, Won’t Hear, Don’t Speak

Posted in Courtroom, Europe, Law, Patents at 5:31 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

EPO complaints and Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht)

Summary: The EPO is protected by the German government [1, 2] no matter what it does; even the “elite” courts won’t intervene

12.23.22

Dr. Ingve Björn Stjerna Has New Paper on Unified Patent Court (UPC) Agreement (UPCA) After Brexit

Posted in Courtroom, Europe, Law, Patents at 3:36 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Click below to download the paper

EU Patent Reform: The “withdrawn” ratification of the UPCA and its protocols by the United Kingdom

Summary: Contrary to what EPO dictators Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos kept saying, going ahead with a so-called Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court (UPC) would be illegal

THE FOLLOWING was published ten days ago by Dr. Ingve Björn Stjerna, who had observed the Unified Patent Court and its predecessors for well over a decade (he also published books on the subject).

Here’s what he had to say:

EU Patent Reform: The “withdrawn” ratification of the UPCA and its protocols by the United Kingdom,

Article on the UK’s alleged withdrawal from the UPCA and its protocols “with immediate effect” and the lack of a respective legal basis (Published on 13/12/2022)

The European patent reform and in particular the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (“UPCA”) con-tinue to be controversially discussed, with a frequently raised question concerning the role of the United King-dom in the UPC and the protocols thereto as well as its “withdrawals” of the related ratifications. In his second constitutional complaint against the German ratification of the UPCA (Case No. 2 BvR 2217/20), the author of this article had submitted these issues to the German Constitutional Court (“BVerfG”) for clarification, which, however, did not deal with them in substance, as it did with all other substantive issues. The relevant aspects of this question are discussed in more detail in this article, based on the statements in the constitutional complaint.

  • Download English Version (Article of 13/12/2022, PDF)
  • Download German Version (Article of 13/12/2022, PDF)

As noted in the previous post, the FCC or German Constitutional Court (“BVerfG”) is missing in action. It treats this as a corporate and political issue rather than a legal and constitutional matter. This is not OK.

Dr. Ingve Björn Stjerna on German ‘Justice’: “Not a Single One of the EPO Complaints Has Been Decided to Date.”

Posted in Courtroom, Europe, Law, Patents at 3:19 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Dr Ingve Björn Stjerna

Summary: With the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Agreement (UPCA) we’re already seeing the role played by German courts in undermining laws and constitutions; Is there any hope that Germany as a country will ever put an end to EPO abuses? The apathy (if not active complicity, set aside passive corruption) merely serves to to discredit or delegitimise the state…

THE EPO is basically above German law despite being based in Germany. Many times in the past we wrote about how the German government had intentionally turned a blind eye to EPO corruption. Some of the worst corruption is yet to be exposed (there’s truly explosive material).

At what stage does one categorically accept that the so-called ministry of ‘justice’ in Germany and its constitutional court (FCC) as well are in cahoots with or participating in this corruption? There are some concrete examples of entryism and one might say “collusion”…

Well, Constitutional Court judge Prof. Huber is leaving, after rejecting two UPC complaints without really looking into them. One complainant just wrote the following text:

Patent Law: End of the term of office of Constitutional Court judge Prof. Huber – When a constitutional complaint outlasts the twelve-year term of office of the judge responsible for it (Published on 08/12/2022)

For years, several constitutional complaints against acts of the European Patent Office have been pending before the German Constitutional Court (“BVerfG”). Five such proceedings are currently publicly known, namely those with the docket numbers 2 BvR 2480/10, 2 BvR 421/13, 2 BvR 786/15, 2 BvR 756/16 and 2 BvR 561/18 (afterwards “EPO complaints”), in which, among other things, a violation of the fundamental rights to effective legal protection (Article 19 (4) of the Grundgesetz [“GG”]) and to the lawful judge (Article 101 (1) sentence 2 GG) is complained of.

As is well known, the decisions of the BVerfG – as well as of other panels of judges to which several judges belong (so-called “collegial courts” [“Kollegialgerichte”]) – are prepared by the so-called “judge rapporteur”, or short “rapporteur”. The rapporteur for the EPO complaints in the responsible Second Senate is judge Prof. Peter M. Huber, who, in the field of intellectual property law, is known in particular for the not necessarily consistent decisions on the European patent reform for which he was the rapporteur as well.

The oldest two EPO complaints, dating from 2010 and 2013, have been listed since 2016 in the so-called “annual preview” (“Jahresvorschau”) of the BVerfG, which provides an overview at the beginning of a calendar year of those proceedings that the court intends to decide in the course of the year. Since 2021, all aforementioned EPO complaints have been listed in the annual preview of the court. Judge Prof. Huber has already indicated in a commentary in 2018 that he may consider the legal protection at the EPO to be in line with the minimum required by the German Grundgesetz.

Nevertheless, not a single one of the EPO complaints has been decided to date.

Read on for the rest…

12.09.22

Keeping Abreast of Patent Affairs and Legislation in Europe

Posted in Courtroom, Deception, Europe, Law, Patents at 1:14 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum 1631eef05aeccd77eb568d24b2c3ffbd
Fixing the Patent Mess
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: The ‘sausage factory’ of Europe, which includes illegal and unconstitutional things like the Unified Patent Court (UPC, a Trojan horse for European software patents), needs more careful inspection and intervention; we urge readers to speak to their Members of European Parliament (MEPs) and national press/journalists

SOMEBODY has sent me this old patent on software, having noticed that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) continues to grant many ludicrous software patents in spite of 35 U.S.C. § 101 and the official site of the USPTO is impossible to use without JavaScript. The same is true for the EU’s (and the EC’s) site, where new policies are being discussed and have opened to input from the public (as of 2 days ago). The video above contains some personal comments on these issues, but it finally alludes to some discussions I was having lately (the past two months) with European politicians and journalists. They’re well aware of the UPC problems and they’re planning to do something about it. In today’s fourth video we’ll say some more things about the UPC, seeing that the EPO‘s official site says nonsense/lies about the situation, as usual.

Illegal. Not even ratified. Illegally 'ratified'; without majority required

As the publication deadline passed around a week ago it’s probably safe to share some correspondence related to that, subject to redaction:

> Hi Roy,

> Thanks so much for sharing your email address. I work for ██████████, Germany’s largest ████████ business magazine

Yes, I am aware. ████████████ did good investigative work about the EPO (in the distant past).

> In your posts you mention talking to politicians about the conflict of interest with technical judges at the UPC. Who is particularly outspoken about it? Would be great if it was someone from Germany…

I suggest you speak to MEP █████:
██████
██████

> Also, you mention a lobby behind UPC. Who is behind that?

The government of Germany, large multinational laws firms, and their biggest clients (international companies) that stand to benefit from litigation, monopoly, and insourcing the EU’s legal process to Germany. They not only crafted the UPC but also wish to make it the law. This, in turn, harms the EU’s reputation. I can provide links.

> What do you make of Judge Grabinski’s announcement that they might come up with a set of rules around conflicts of interest? Can that be sufficient?

He is himself part of the conflicts of interest. I’d not put much weight on what he says because the ministry he fronted for covered up EPO scandals. I can provide URLs.

> Thanks so much,
> My deadline is tomorrow.


> Thank you so much, Roy.
>
> It would be great if you could send me links to both the lobby question, as well as Grabinski.
>
> Is there a politician in a more established party who is critical, too?

Last year I spoke to Merkel’s coalition, but it’s “in bed” with the lobby and didn’t even want to ‘bother’ the EPO after it broke the law and also SLAPPed me (for publishing facts).

Linking to one’s own writings is considered “self-promotion”, so I will instead refer you to: https://www.stjerna.de/restart/?lang=en

I hope this is concise enough an explanation. Let me know if you need more.

I wrote nearly 5000 posts/articles about the EPO and UPC: http://techrights.org/wiki/EPO

Of relevance is this 20-part series: http://techrights.org/2021/04/16/bundestagate-part-20/

Kind regards,

I’ve done my part and I hope European readers of Techrights will do the same. We need to work collectively, and mercilessly, to stop software patents.

“The European Patent Office is an executive organisation, it deals especially with patent applicants, as such, its view of the world may be biased. As an executive organisation, its interpretative powers are very limited. The European Patent Convention excludes computer programs, it is outside the EPO’s power to change this. The exclusion of computer programs is a political question. [...] The core task of a computer is to process data. So at least the processing of data is not patentable.”

Ante Wessels, FFII

12.05.22

Unified Patent Court (UPC) is “Real Soon Now!” Since 2014

Posted in Courtroom, Deception, Europe, Patents at 10:16 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

UPC Delayed again; More complaints

Summary: The Unified Patent Court (UPC) lobby is once again forced to admit issues and delays; we’ve seen this time and time again for nearly a decade already

Unified Patent Court (UPC) ‘Delayed’ Again, As Usual, as Unitary Patent Boosters Caught Up in Lies and Scandals

Posted in Courtroom, Europe, Law, Patents at 9:47 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

This is what Team UPC said in 2014:

Summary: “UPC [is] delayed by 2 months,” a source has told us, dubbing it “good news” and reaffirming what we’ve said this past year; this litigation lobby's 'wishlist' system isn’t legal, it’s not ready, there are yet more scandals, and journalists have been catching up with these scandals

“Time for more lawsuits,” a reliable source has told us. Expect UPC to face several more obstacles, though Team UPC will never admit that UPC is doomed.

Lately we’ve been briefing reputable journalists on this matter and they will inform the public. Kangaroo courts that are neither legal nor constitutional should never be formed. If they do, they will soon thereafter be abolished. It doesn’t take a genius to see that after Brexit UPC is simply impossible, no matter all the other issues.

About a month ago we asked Germans (or others) to contact their politicians. They can prevent ratification. As a reminder, the UPC harms the reputation of Germany and the EU because if they allow it, then it emboldens critics; it would make the German government and the European Commission look very eager to start an illegal court — all due to heavy lobbying, lies, and distortions.

“…it would make the German government and the European Commission look very eager to start an illegal court — all due to heavy lobbying, lies, and distortions.”“It would help to point to some official EU documentation to that effect,” a reader reminded us. Well, legally speaking, UPC cannot start because a) it strictly requires the UK signing (but it cannot because it left the EU); b) it causes various constitutional issues, some of which confirmed by courts already; c) there was no legitimate economic analysis; it was fabricated a long time ago and those who perpetrated this fraud even said they refuse to allow.

“The European Parliament has a committee dedicated specifically to constitutional matters,” the reader recalled, “so this might be relevant to bring to them.” Germans can use the list in this page (full contacts).

Hungary took this to court as well. It was ruled unconstitutional.

I myself decided to do my part, having contacted my MEP and said:

Commissioner Breton is refusing to properly answer your questions regarding the UPC. He evades these questions on purpose. There is a deep conflict of interest there. It is very well documented.

Now, as per last week, the UPC judges turn out to be exactly how the UPC complaint (FCC in Germany) cautioned. The judges are industry insiders, clearly not impartial, and the prospective president is an avid proponent of software parents.

I’m not an MEP, I’m just a blogger. I need you to help rectify this matter. UPC is clearly institutional injustice and it’s moreover unconstitutional in at least several states. I’m sure you’re aware of this already; you brought this up on the record. I’ve covered this before.

Can we have a discussion about this over the telephone? Do you want me to send you any supportive material?

I need your help as my representative. I spent like 1,000 hours writing about the UPC, but I am not a politician and I have no access to the EP.

Kind regards,

The MEP has since then responded and some journalists also got in touch.

There are also ongoing tensions at the EPO, which is related but not the same. It is what it is. We’ve not been keeping up with UPC, but the lobbyists lied too much and hope they get cold feet. The last thing Team UPC needs right now is an epic controversy like a court run by corporations as ‘judges’.

There are other issues as well, technical aside from the legal.

“They have some delay with the IT system,” one person told us months ago, but “Germany will ratify in December.”

“There are forces of resistance and some of them will be described in a future and perhaps even imminent post.”Well, that’s not going to happen. They told us that in December 2018 the FCC would toss out the UPC complaint. That did not actually happen (the opposite outcome came and only in 2020); it was a commercially and politically motivated false rumour. “I suspect Karlsruhe to also [trying to] protect the [German] patent system,” one person told us, and “that’s why their decisions are ‘political’.”

The main barrier may be the public realising what they’re up to. “Now it’s pretty clear Karlsruhe found an excuse not to escalate to CJEU,” the person added, “because the lobby behind controls the ministry of justice and wants the UPC [to enter] desperately into force.”

There are forces of resistance and some of them will be described in a future and perhaps even imminent post.

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »

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 Channels: Come and chat with us in real time

New to This Site? Here Are Some Introductory Resources

No

Mono

ODF

Samba logo






We support

End software patents

GPLv3

GNU project

BLAG

EFF bloggers

Comcast is Blocktastic? SavetheInternet.com



Recent Posts