EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

09.15.20

Team UPC Has Run Out of Allies as Even Patent Lawyers Increasingly Distance Themselves and Only Junior Staff is Still Willing to Lie for the Team

Posted in Europe, Patents at 3:35 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedies.”

Groucho Marx

Summary: After a bunch of prominent UPC proponents have fled (early retirement, resignation, or radio silence) there are few firms/people still willing to lie in public for Team UPC; the responses (in comments) are rather revealing for many consider them to be utterly insane and infinitely dishonest

A couple of 'hoax' blog posts from Team UPC/Bristows called for a violation of international law and the responses were understandably critical. “Disenfranchised” wrote: “The approach is also narrow-minded. The Court is not something just to be divided up for political favours. That happened with Cameron in 2013 but only because there was no other way and look where that got us. The UPC needs amending (should have been amended 4 years ago) to recognise the Central Division as having a single seat (with freedom to delegate workload as required to local divisions) and remove the ridiculous Annex II. It should also reflect the post Covid reality that we hope to see – time for the first true CyberCourt.”

“Even patent professionals are somewhat shocked by what Team UPC is hoping to accomplish and the lies it keeps telling.”“Astonished” then wrote: “If – with the existing agreements – the UPC is started, it will be fun to see the first case tried in Milan go to the EuCJ because of the wrong venue (this gives a new meaning to “forum non conveniens”). But I don’t see a start of the UPC soon, the BVerfG mor or less invited new constitutional complaints, so I guess it will take some more years to resolve the open questions, assuming this is at all possible. With the mess made out of the UPC agreement, it would be best to completely scrap it and start from scratch – without interested litigators during the drafting.”

“MaxDrei” then responded to the above: “The post from “Astonished” puts its finger on the problem: who today shall draft new legislation, if not the powerful lobby interests (here, the international patent litigation industry)? The days are long gone, when draft legislation was written by a public office (such as, in the UK, the “Parliamentary Draftsman”) with provisions carefully crafted to coincide with “the public interest” or the “general welfare” of society. Today, nobody knows any longer what that is (or if they do, the lobbyists immediately render it invisible).”

“So they had a little webchat and they have not actually met for 3.5 years. OK, got it…”See all the comments here; 6 out of 6 are unequivocally negative. Even patent professionals are somewhat shocked by what Team UPC is hoping to accomplish and the lies it keeps telling.

Some hours ago we found in Lexology a promotion of another bundle of lies, this one from Herbert Smith Freehills LLP’s Sebastian Moore and Rachel Montagnon. Referring to the ‘meeting’ they say “albeit virtually” (i.e. just some webchat) and they speak of “good progress” without actually naming any. They allude to “European Industry” (meaning litigation ‘industry’, i.e. themselves) an then proceed with the same lies as Bristows told. They published this on 9/11, just like Bristows (in its own blog and in Kluwer Patent Blog) and said: “Yesterday (10 September 2020) the UPC Preparatory Committee met (albeit virtually) for the first time since March 2017. On the agenda were the issues triggered by the formal withdrawal of the UK from the UPC system and the events in Germany in relation to challenges to Germany’s participation.”

So they had a little webchat and they have not actually met for 3.5 years. OK, got it…

“The note of the meeting on the Committee’s website (here) states that the Committee took note of the “good progress” being made in Germany with regard to the legislation needed for the German ratification of the Unified Patent Court Agreement and the Protocol on Provisional Application.”

“This is the sort of moral depravity which causes Team UPC to be alienated and mocked by a growing proportion of the legal profession. Many lawyers want nothing to do with these liars, who are simply becoming a liability and an embarrassment to the entire profession.”Wait, does the UPC committee run Germany now? Does it tell the Government of Germany what to do? This committee is just like a lobbying group, partly overlapping the litigation profiteers (see the members). The term “pressure group” would be more suitable than “Committee”….

Here’s a lie: “The Committee also took note of the call from European Industry for a swift entry into operation of the Unitary Patent System.”

Nonsense. The actual industry very often opposed the UPC. But they’re often lied for/about. This is the sort of moral depravity which causes Team UPC to be alienated and mocked by a growing proportion of the legal profession. Many lawyers want nothing to do with these liars, who are simply becoming a liability and an embarrassment to the entire profession.

EPO Oral Proceedings Have Been Outsourced to the United States (Proprietary Software With Surveillance Back Doors)

Posted in Europe, Patents at 3:25 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Related: COVID-19 Crisis: When EPO Outsources Everything to a Surveillance System of Microsoft and the NSA

Music headset

Summary: False ‘choice’ (between surveillance platforms) is all that the EPO can offer; but the illegality persists

THERE’S a saying (or several similar statements) in the Free software community about the offering of ‘choices’ that are both bad, perhaps even equally bad, e.g. “Mac” or “PC” (Windows). Freedom-respecting operating systems such as BSD and GNU/Linux aren’t even being considered; it boils down to brands.

“Pepsi or Coke?”

“Can I just have water please?”

“Tea or coffee?”

“Can I have water please? Thank you! Wait, water isn’t even an option???”

“Has the management of the EPO ‘normalised’ something that is not legal?”It’s a real shame that today’s EPO requires malicious proprietary binary blobs to get access to hearings about patents etc. To make matters worse, those malicious proprietary binary blobs come from another continent, which does the world’s most extensive spying (by far).

A few days ago a large law firm released a few publications (marketing) regarding patents on nature and software patents, which are not legal. It then added and promoted another one about “EPO Oral Proceedings by videoconference” (which EPO staff insists are illegal).

A headsetHas the management of the EPO ‘normalised’ something that is not legal? To the point where nobody mentions the illegality anymore?

Oh, wait. The EPO has a ‘solution’… to the wrong problem (or one nobody complained about).

Instead of stopping the illegal practice the EPO now adds another brand. In its very own words (warning: epo.org link), it’s “[t]esting Zoom as a second platform for oral proceedings in opposition” (which does nothing to make the practice any less illegal):

From 14 September 2020, as a development of the pilot project for oral proceedings in opposition by videoconference (VICO), the EPO will test the Zoom platform for the first time for oral proceedings involving multiple opponents and/or requiring simultaneous interpretation. This technical development will allow more cases to be concluded and thereby contribute to greater legal certainty; it also follows suggestions from user associations.

[...]

The EPO remains committed to providing easy access to transparent, fair and efficient proceedings in a low-cost, safe, effective and environmentally-friendly manner. We aim to conclude pending opposition cases within the shortest possible time. The introduction of Zoom as an additional platform to Skype for Business provides users with more options for concluding their opposition hearings rather than postponing them. We are confident that VICO can become the format of choice for patentees, opponents and patent professionals in the future

Oh, wow. So the vegetarian society now gets more choice. Beef will no longer be the sole option; coming soon: chicken! To use another example, go ahead and offer the organic foods society either GM rice or GM wheat.

“Any scientist who tells you they know that GMOs are safe and not to worry about it, is either ignorant of the history of science or is deliberately lying. Nobody knows what the long-term effect will be.”

Geneticist, David Suzuki, giving the 2008 Commonwealth Lecture in London

09.14.20

Team UPC Wants Germany to Break International Law

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 3:48 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Law violated

Summary: Team UPC is reaching the lowest of all lows; from lies to fraud they’ve succumbed to advocacy of breaking international law (they no longer deserve the category called “law firms”)

THE other day we wrote about the hoax posts from Team UPC, pretending there’s UPC “progress” and also that a bunch of people having a webchat is a formal “meeting”. There were many other lies thrown into those blog posts, which were bound to earn condemnation from the clinically sane.

Well, as expected, all comments disagree with the ‘article’ (AstroTurfing by Bristows or similar) and the first comment notes: “It seems that the UK is not alone in being prepared to break international law!”

Bristows et al have repeatedly done — and occasionally pushed for — illegal and unconstitutional things. No wonder staff resigned (left, retired, became silent). They should be ashamed of themselves. In spite of all the cheating, they failed to accomplish their goal. They wasted loads of time and if in their own minds they’re worth $300 an hour (they’re not), then they’ve lost a lot of money as well.

On wheelchair parkingThe first comment also notes: “Errr… are we not ignoring rather insurmountable problems with the “Entry into force” provisions of the Protocols, such as Article 3(1) of the PAP: “This Protocol shall enter into force the day after 13 Signatory States of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court including Germany, France and the UNITED KINGDOM, have either ratified, or informed the depositary that they have received parliamentary approval to ratify, the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court and have a. signed in accordance with Article 2(2)a. or signed, and ratified, accepted or approved this Protocol in accordance with Article 2(2)b.; or b. declared by means of a unilateral declaration or in any other manner that they consider themselves bound by the provisional application of the articles of the Unified Patent Court Agreement mentioned under Article 1 of this Protocol.”

“The UK is still a “Negotiating State” in the sense of Article 1(e) of the VCLT. The UK has not given its agreement for the international treaties whose texts it took part in drawing up and adopting (the UPCA and the two associated protocols) to enter into force. Thus, in addition to entry into force now being contrary to a literal reading of the relevant provisions of the Agreement and Protocols, there would appear to be no basis for entry into force under Article 24 VCLT.”

Basically, Team UPC happily advocates breaking international law. But they have done even worse things in the past…

The next comment points out that “[i]n the Italian announcement “Announcement of Milan candidacy to the seat of the UPC”: “it [the Preparatory Committee] approved a provisional redistribution of the competence of the London office between the existing offices in Paris and Munich”

“Basically, Team UPC happily advocates breaking international law. But they have done even worse things in the past…”“The Preparatory Committee does not have the competence to distribute tasks from London to Paris+Munich. This is not legal. And Italians are being screwed, as a promise to have the seat in Milan after the UPC enters into force is not legally binding.”

We covered this before. But Team UPC will carry on lying and lying and lying in public…

For instance, last month UPC hopefuls wrote this trash about the UPC as if it’s about the exist, having miraculously been passed. It says “UPC will have a Court of First Instance (divided into local, regional and central divisions) and a Court of Appeal (Luxembourg). Cases will commence in any one of these divisions according to the subject matter and the prescribed division set out in the UPCA and the UPC Rules. The main seat of the central division will be Paris with further seats in Munich and one other participating member state (previously this was London until its recent withdrawal from the UPC system).”

Oh, really? This is not legal.

“When these lawyers not only lie but also break the law and courage others to break international law, what are we supposed to think of patent lawyers?”It further notes: “The work of the central division will be divided according to the subject matter of the patent in dispute based on IPC classifications: the seat previously assigned to London (but now possibly to be located in Milan) will deal with patents falling into International Patent Classification of WIPO sections (A) Human necessities (including pharmaceuticals but also foodstuffs, tobacco, clothes, furniture, footwear, some agriculture applications and sports and amusements and much more – see here) and (C) Chemistry (which includes genetic engineering) and Metallurgy – see here. Munich will hear cases involving patents in IPC class F, concerning mechanical engineering. All other patent classifications will fall to be heard before the Paris central division.”

Who made this up? Who agreed on such a thing? The same litigation profiteers who choose something illegal?

Of course we can point out that the longer they do this, the more they disgrace themselves, framing themselves as illegality firms rather than law firms.

This is a total embarrassment to Europe, no better than the EPO in Munich. When these lawyers not only lie but also break the law and courage others to break international law, what are we supposed to think of patent lawyers?

09.13.20

Fake Patents Granted by the German Patent and Trademark Office (DPMA) and the EPO’s Misleading Propaganda Video Series (Conflating Patents With Other Things) Exploits Dead People

Posted in Europe, Patents at 9:20 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

As if science would not exist if it weren’t for patents…

Benoit Battistelli
Not the first time EPO management is exploiting deaths

Summary: Europe’s biggest and most powerful patent office (EPO), which is also Europe’s second-largest institution, is misleading the public and exploiting the deaths of many Europeans for shameless, self-promotional marketing

THE EPO issues persist, assured us an EPO insider last week. This site may not seem to be focused on the EPO anymore. That’s simply because not much is known about what goes on at the EPO, as we explained earlier this month. SUEPO has not been saying much and we don’t fault it for that; aside from holidays there seems to be growing secrecy and some people aren’t or haven’t been working ‘onsite’ for a while.

The EPO itself has hardly said anything lately, with only two public statements in more than a month! We have not been seeing promotion of European software patents for a while, but that does not mean they’re not being granted anymore.

“Many fake patents last their entire lifetime (a couple of decades typically) without a single challenge, so many out there will presume they’re legitimate. This is what happens when so many monopolies are granted with little concern for facts.”The other day we saw this report about a patent which was wrongly granted by the German Patent and Trademark Office (DPMA) and then (mis)used for litigation. To quote a report in English: “The patent in dispute is protected as German Patent “Method and Device for the Generation of Print Data” (GER Patent No. 11 2004 002 429.3) since 2004 and also as international PCT patent (PCT/JP2004/018213). Patent holder is Ryobi MHI Graphic Technology Ltd. (Japan).”

Notice how long it took to revoke this fake patent. Many fake patents last their entire lifetime (a couple of decades typically) without a single challenge, so many out there will presume they’re legitimate. This is what happens when so many monopolies are granted with little concern for facts. Sometimes the patents are not being challenged because so many of them are leveraged in bulk and in tandem, discouraging a full legal battle and pushing towards a settlement or cross-licensing (meaning tacit endorsement of low-quality and likely junk patents).

A few days ago the EPO went even further by issuing this truly ridiculous ‘news’ (self-promotional garbage), which merely exploits COVID-19 for shameless marketing like the EPO exploited terror attacks. (warning: epo.org link)

Let’s examine what they said.

The EPO today has published Inventors against coronavirus, a new video series highlighting the inventors working on solutions to various COVID-19 issues.

This has nothing to do with patents. It’s about invention. Patents don’t beget invention; sometimes they suppress research (fear of litigation).

It comprises interviews with experts from several fields including vaccinology, satellite navigation, diagnostics and haematology, and explores the role of each in driving recovery from the pandemic.

[...]

Inventors against coronavirus is one of several measures implemented by the Office to disseminate information to keep the public informed with expert viewpoints, and help researchers make informed decisions.

This is not what patent offices exist for. This is just PR-centric propaganda from the EPO and it exploits a tragedy, as usual.

On it goes:

Earlier in the year, patent examiners and data analysts compiled datasets to support the important work of clinicians, scientists and engineers. These cartographies are available in the Fighting coronavirus pages of the EPO website.

This is a catalogue of monopolies; it details what cannot and should not be done. It’s an impediment/barrier to researchers. Earlier this year French researchers studying COVID-19 got sued by a patent troll, using a patent the EPO granted to a literal fraud. The EPO later glorified this fraud using EIA, which this ridiculous ‘news’ item now celebrates!

So much for public service…

And get this:

They show recent developments in coronavirus-related technical fields as revealed in patent databases, including which countries and inventors have filed the most patent applications.

So they’re equating number of “patent applications” with solution to coronavirus. What kind of fool would fall for it? It’s basically an invitation to send in loads of low-quality patent applications, in the name of fighting with “Inventors against coronavirus” (as if coronavirus is afraid of monopolies, as opposed to open-ended collaboration to defeat and eradicate the virus as soon as possible).

“So they’re equating number of “patent applications” with solution to coronavirus.”Shallow propaganda such as this does not present the EPO as benevolent and mighty; instead, it serves to expose what a bunch of clueless and incompetent people nowadays run Europe’s largest patent office. They don’t understand the sector they’re in, they shamelessly lie at the expense of almost a quarter million Europeans who lost their lives (soon a million worldwide), and they constantly attack their own staff, ruining these people’s physical and mental health while claiming to fight for public health.

09.12.20

UPC ‘Progress’ or Hoax?

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 1:25 am by Guest Editorial Team

The real ’9/11 hoax’ seems to be a couple of blog postings from Team UPC

UPC boat sinks

Summary: Team UPC (Bristows in this case) has ironically chosen this bizarre day to push its ridiculous lies about the Unitary Patent Court’s (UPC) prospects

TEAM UPC has almost been ‘disbanded’; it’s hard to see or hear from it anymore. Morale is near zero. Even Bristows has said nothing about it since July… until yesterday. ‘UPC 9/11′? No, that was years ago. They want us to think there’s progress. But what are the underlying facts of substance?

“Team UPC has almost been ‘disbanded’; it’s hard to see or hear from it anymore.”Let’s examine. Let’s see what actually happened, shall we?

So on the 11th of September (yes, that day), for the first time in 2 months, Bristows decided to pretend that UPC makes some “progress” (the title says “meets” and “progresses”).

“The meeting, the first since March 2017, was 100% digital due to the corona pandemic and travel restrictions,” they wrote anonymously in Kluwer Patent Blog (almost at the same time) in order to push/advance those laughable illusions of UPC “progress”.

“Even Bristows has said nothing about it since July… until yesterday.”So it wasn’t really a meeting but a bunch of people having a webchat. And what is it that’s said to have progressed?

The post says: “The Unitary Patent system can start in the near future.”

Really? Says who?

“That is one of the conclusions of a meeting held yesterday by the Preparatory Committee of the Unified Patent Court.”

Oh yeah, the people whose job it has been to lie for at least a decade (to the public, to politicians, and so-called ‘journalists’ who just print puff pieces, sometimes in exchange for bribes). They just want to protect their obsolete jobs. Are they subjected to/under the umbrella of the furlough scheme?

“They just want to protect their obsolete jobs.”So the title is misleading.

“Some observers think the German ratification procedure may be completed as soon as this year,” it says.

What observers? Speaking about oneself? Or some imaginary straw man you’ve just created?

There are even laughable phrases like “as soon as the ratification process is completed” as if it’s inevitable and imminent.

“What will future employers think of all those “fake news” blog postings?”The Bristows site speaks of “final preparations, such as recruitment of judges, can take place.”

Oh, back to necrophilia then.

Bristows lost a lot (almost all) of the staff that shilled lobbied for the UPC, or maybe that staff went elsewhere, became silent, or simply too embarrassed to remark on the subject. Gregory Bacon is a very brave boy; he keeps lying and lying and lying without fear of the consequences to his reputation. Silly fool. What will future employers think of all those “fake news” blog postings? Maybe the blog and the blog posts will go offline to spare the shame.

09.10.20

The GNOME Foundation Arguably Gave a Patent Troll Even More Legitimacy by Settling and Failing to Dismantle Shoddy Software Patents

Posted in GNOME, GNU/Linux, IBM, Microsoft, Patents, Red Hat at 9:28 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

They’ve legally endorsed software patents

Summary: The IBM-connected GNOME Foundation wants us to think that letting a troll out on the loose is good news or “victory”; but actually, the patents of the troll are still in tact, posing a threat to many and setting no useful precedent (they technically settled over software patents)

THE other day I saw the post — a belated but very detailed post — about the GNOME Foundation’s patent lawsuit (and counter-suit). It’s from an IBMer and we know that IBM is a HUGE fan of software patents. It lobbies for them constantly, not only in the US but everywhere in the world. I was tempted to respond but did not do so until I saw the above video segment. It’s a video that I do not fully agree with and mostly disagree with for reasons specified several times before in relation to this particular lawsuit. Basically, the GNOME Foundation amassed a lot of money for a pro bono fight; there’s no disclosure/explanation what happened to all that money.

“It may seem like a win for Shotwell, but it’s a loss for the overall battle against software patents and arguably, at least by extension, a loss for programming, including Free software.”More importantly, however, the patent troll was left with the shoddy patents (not a single one was thrown out), free to sue lots of companies provided their products aren’t licensed as Free software or ‘open source’ (as per the OSI’s definition). What’s more, the troll got a zero-cost settlement, which can be used as a sort of ‘ammo’ proving the supposed ‘value’ of the patent/s at hand. So the GNOME Foundation did not actually complete the job; as IBM or OIN would have liked, they did not challenge software patents and in fact left the troll on the loose. It may seem like a win for Shotwell, but it’s a loss for the overall battle against software patents and arguably, at least by extension, a loss for programming, including Free software. That troll is still out there with all those patents. Since GNOME is mostly controlled by IBM (or formerly Red Hat), this whole thing shows how IBM policies supersede Red Hat’s. Bruce Perens recently highlighted those problems with OIN, which basically guards software patents from/against Free software-led reforms.

In this particular case the patent could be squashed using prior art, obviousness, and/or abstractness (Sections 101-103), but no such effort was followed through. Microsoft too was reportedly involved. Moreover, the troll in question received these patents from Microsoft’s troll, as we noted several times in the past.

The media never bothered covering this properly. Shallow journalism has become the norm, appeasing big sponsors.

09.08.20

[Meme] António the Computer Genius

Posted in Europe, Patents at 6:03 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

AI = CII = OK; you don't know how computers work, do you? You just want to grant everything. I use a computer, so I know enough.

Summary: António Campinos knows enough about ‘computers’ to lobby technical judges to grant and generally allow software patents in Europe (even if courts, directives and laws forbid that practice, which is also opposed by programmers everywhere)

Information Deficit at the European Patent Office

Posted in Europe, Patents at 1:09 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Still on holiday?

Gondole

Summary: Incompetent leadership at the European Patent Office (EPO) is letting down EPO stakeholders, who already turn elsewhere; but we need more information about what’s going on inside EPOnia (the EPO’s leadership seems to have chosen a low key or low profile strategy)

“Lawyers urge ‘unfriendly’ EPO to communicate venue changes,” says this new headline from a publication very friendly towards António Campinos and Benoît Battistelli. But what it boils down to isn’t the pattern of corruption and crimes at the EPO; it’s about some minor technical or procedural frustration regarding “location of an oral hearing”.

“Given this quiet atmosphere (SUEPO saying almost nothing at all, at least publicly), we cannot do much coverage.”Admittedly, as we noted before, many blogs and news sites about patents keep perishing. Some become inactive, others go offline (gone completely, eternally inaccessible). Even coverage of USPTO affairs has become increasingly scarce. This is all measurable and we analysed/shared some statistics earlier this year. There are fewer posts/articles, fewer comments (below is a screenshot of Watchtroll as of this moment), and about 80% of the comments in IP Kat are rants about the scam which is CIPA’s PEB. There’s a lot of discontent.

Watchtroll no comments

The way things stand (at present at least), we cannot offer as much coverage regarding patents as we used to. It seems like the topic is sort of ebbing away, with the occasional (albeit infrequent) complaint about patent trolls and PTAB actions being initiated by Unified Patents. For nearly a month we’ve seen almost nothing about the Unified Patent Court (Unitary Patent) and all the EPO talked about in its news section was a bunch of nonsense:

EPO quiet

Given this quiet atmosphere (SUEPO saying almost nothing at all, at least publicly), we cannot do much coverage. Not for the time being anyway… people are already back to work, so the summer vacation cannot be blamed for the calm (not anymore).

Do you know something we should know about internal EPO affairs? Do contact us. We promise confidentiality/source protection.

« Previous Page« Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries »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