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

11.20.19

Justice Peter Huber of the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) Calls ‘Bullshit’ a Rumour Nobody Really Spreads

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents, Rumour at 11:42 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Why are judges even speaking to Team UPC?! They’re lobbying by picking on judges and spreading falsehoods.

Justice Peter Huber of the German Federal Constitutional Court

Summary: A sort of ‘trial by media’ (by Team UPC) compromises the integrity of the case (constitutional complaint) and can be interpreted as judges succumbing to lobbying/pressure from those who conspire to violate many constitutions across Europe for personal/financial gain

P

ROVOCATION tactics seem to have worked for Team UPC, which together with Campinos and Battistelli at the European Patent Office (EPO) lobby hard for the UPC in the open and behind the scenes.

We previously took note of the "Attack on the Independence of the European Judges (Which Had) Apparently Expanded to the German Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht/FCC)" (taking note of a conflict of interest at the FCC).

“We previously took note of the “Attack on the Independence of the European Judges [Which Had] Apparently Expanded to the German Constitutional Court…”Why are FCC judges even speaking to Team UPC lobbyists like the litigation ‘industry’ stenographer Patrick Wingrove? Even Team UPC seems surprised. As one of them put it: “As for journalistic standards, it wd be helpful to be told when & why Prof. Huber agreed to interview (a rare occurrence, though this seems to be limited to the inner workings of the Court) & when, how (including in which language) and by whom it was conducted.”

This seemed unnecessary. Managing IP is a longtime UPC lobbying front. It bragged in Twitter: “Breaking: #UPC case to be decided in early 2020. In an exclusive interview, Justice Huber of the German Federal Constitutional Court gives @ManagingIP a timeline for the case and says suggestions that Brexit has stalled the decision are “bullshit”…”

“Why are FCC judges even speaking to Team UPC lobbyists like the litigation ‘industry’ stenographer Patrick Wingrove?”Why even give them clues?

“Apparently,” as one person noted, “no oral hearing foreseen by DE Constitutional Court” (are they rushing this?)

The FCC should not be bullied by Team UPC; they’re the major component of this anti-democratic, unconstitutional behaviour. They’re the sort of thing this complaint is about. From the said article: “The case holding up the Unified Patent Court will be decided in the first quarter of 2020, according to the judge at the German Federal Constitutional Court who is in charge of the matter.”

“The coverage from Team UPC keeps repeating the word “bullshit” (not a decent word for a judge/justice to be using anyway), but who even/ever claimed that Brexit was the cause of this delay?”Further down he’s quoted: “I don’t want to delay [the decision] but there are some other cases at hand that also have to be dealt with…”

The coverage from Team UPC keeps repeating the word “bullshit” (not a decent word for a judge/justice to be using anyway), but who even/ever claimed that Brexit was the cause of this delay? Certainly not us. It deals with a claim that perhaps nobody even made.

“Kluwer Patent blogger” (likely Bristows) accepts that there’s no UPC decision by FCC this year. In 2018 they insisted it would be done by year’s end (2018). They’re chronic liars. They just hoped to pressure judges. Here’s what they wrote some hours ago:

The constitutional complaint holding up the start of the Unified Patent Court will be decided upon in the first quarter of next year. Justice Peter Huber of the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC), who is overseeing case 2 BvR 739/17, has said this in an exclusive interview with Managing IP.

Huber added that the time frame will depend on the time it takes for him and other judges at the FCC to deliberate on the case. “It is quite a detailed process that we follow because we have to look at every detail of how we formulate and word the [ruling],” he said according to the interview of Managing IP. “But it is likely that we will get along with it.”

In the interview, Huber denied that the FCC has been delaying its decision because of the Brexit. According to Managing IP, he described the allegation as “bullshit”.

[...]

If the complaint is dismissed, this doesn’t necessarily mean Germany will immediately complete the ratification procedure…

Rose Hughes (Team UPC) again plays ball for UPC with some spin. At IP Kat she wrote: “In the interview to Managing-IP, Justice Huber also confirms that he intends to decide the case in the first quarter of next year. Brexit is currently scheduled for the end of January 2020. It may therefore be touch-and-go whether the UPC comes into force (following German ratification) before Brexit. On the other hand, it has also been reported that, even if the constitutional complaint is overcome, the German Parliament may still delay ratification whilst the outcome of Brexit is unclear. Another false rumour?”

The false rumours are Team UPC’s. They did that lots of times before.

“The bottom line is, Team UPC seems to be entrapping and pressuring judges into issuing a decision prematurely, based on unrealistic deadlines and before oral statements can be made/heard.”IP Kat was also boosting Watchtroll around that same time (this time Lucy Isaev). What has happened to the ‘Kats’? Litigation fanatics now? AstraZeneca’s legal team?

The bottom line is, Team UPC seems to be entrapping and pressuring judges into issuing a decision prematurely, based on unrealistic deadlines and before oral statements can be made/heard. They also speak to fake press which is actually a pressure group of Team UPC. Follow the money and study their track record.

We can imagine that the complainant will have something to say about that.

10.31.19

Purism’s Problems Purely Boil Down to Trust and False Promises

Posted in FSF, GNOME, GNU/Linux, Hardware, KDE, Rumour at 1:17 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

PureOS sounds promising, just like OpenMoko, but we all want (and likely expect) to see results

Business silhouette

Summary: A promising, potentially exciting, freedom-respecting set of products would be easier to talk about than actually deliver; we take a look at what goes on at Purism

THIS is a particularly difficult subject for me to write about, having spent a number of years cheering for Librem (in its various forms or form factors) and by extension its parent company, Purism, whose goals I believe to be well-intentioned. They’re a sort of privacy-first, freedom-at-the-forefront company (freedom as in Software Freedom as well as hardware freedom — to the limited extent presently possible).

Lately I have been reading negative things about Purism. I also received messages and mail about it. I am committed to Software Freedom, but I am also deeply committed to truth, so let’s put right there on the table the knowns, unknowns, and what’s in desperate need of verification. Because transparency is needed for true trust; otherwise it’s fantasy. Here in Techrights we’re as transparent as possible with IRC logs that serve to reveal operations (behind the scenes too). We’re balancing privacy and transparency, e.g. in the name of source protection. We redact some things, usually to protect identities only. But those who lurk in IRC (or read our logs) can get a pretty good idea of what’s going on.

“Many companies operate at a loss and/or have massive debt. They don’t like to talk about those things.”Purism is different. The company isn’t always upfront. Sometimes it’s not even honest and some would say “misleading”. I’d like to believe they’re not intentionally misleading people, but over the past month there was more evidence to that effect. Are they dishonest for “the greater good”? I don’t know. Some companies pretend to do better than they really do, hoping for a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy effect — inertia built atop an illusion. I get that. I don’t respect that, but I totally get that. It’s quite common and many large companies — including Microsoft — do this. Many companies operate at a loss and/or have massive debt. They don’t like to talk about those things. It might scare away those who subsidise/invest in them. Sometimes they’re bank(er)s, sometimes they’re so-called ‘angels’, sometimes they’re the public or prospective buyers who raise funds for projects/products.

One person asked me yesterday: “Have you heard anything about Purism? Or Librem? Being a complete and utter failure/scam?”

“Well,” she said, “from what I heard…”

She shared some discussions about this and even new memes. Moments ago someone pointed out to me this recent article that I had read days ago. It’s titled “The Sad Saga of Purism and the Librem 5″ and there are 3 parts to it.

“Their laptop campaign had over 65% return rate, I heard closer to 70%.”
      –Anonymous
“And no comments from @purism to that,” I was told, so “seems like a really sad story to me.”

Going back to that first person, “2 years ago,” she said, “over 1.5 million — I heard close to 2.5… was raised.”

“But they cannot deliver on the units,” she added.

“Their laptop campaign had over 65% return rate, I heard closer to 70%.”

“When employees went to San Diego to the fulfillment center, they noted all the concerns – return rate, quality, etc. They wanted to work with Weaver for improvement. He would not meet F2F from what I heard but online. During that session, he went around to see what concerns people had. Quickly, 5 were fired. Another quit within a week or so.”

But apparently it gets yet worse. This is the part which is mostly speculative. “From what I heard,” she said, “Purism money is now going to Forbes and social media campaigns without the transparency of what is really happening. Phoronix is one of their media outlets.”

I can believe the part about Forbes, knowing how they’re manipulated. But I’m not sure about Phoronix.

“Media manipulation is possible,” I responded, “but I won’t vouch for it. Michael Larabel isn’t perfect, I often wonder what he does with hardware shipped to him (among other things), but there’s no evidence they pay him or are in cahoots, so that seems unfair. Please dig further with your contacts. Eventually I will write about this.”

“When employees went to San Diego to the fulfillment center, they noted all the concerns – return rate, quality, etc.”
      –Anonymous
For the sake of accuracy let’s just assume — at least for now — that Phoronix covers Purism stuff because Phoronix readers care about it. That seems a lot more plausible to me

“As we already are pretty certain,” she said, that “Forbes takes money – I mean, just even looking at the content Forbes puts out about certain tech is telling. Phoronix was a question, but is looking more and more like a media outlet that takes money too based on the Purism story.”

Phoronix recently did a story that’s actually an interview with Purism folks. But nothing suggested that it was promotional. Nothing that I could see.

“I believe Purism is starting other services/campaigns in hopes to raise enough to fulfill those previous orders,” she continued, “but it didn’t work out… (social media, tablet)

“That’s all the info I have on this.”

From what I can gather, Purism is struggling. Also, at this stage, workers are leaving (or get fired). This is not good.

Is there something malicious going on? Probably not, but people who fund-raised for this company are being left in the dark and it’s not fair to them.

The subject line of the above message was, “purism – where’s the hw?” [hardware] which to me says it all.

To me at least. There’s a story behind it. It’s an old story.

Half a decade (probably less) ago they said they’d ship a review unit for me to write about (just on loan, for me to pass on to the next person once done). I’d never buy their overpriced laptops, but they wanted me to assess. It’s them who suggested this to me; they had approached me. But it soon became apparent that they were inconsistent, unorganised, and unprofessional.

Did they ever ship?

No.

Never.

Just wasted my time.

Again and again.

Then the person was removed. The person who spoke to me. The one who approached me. The one who wasted my time.

Always excuses. Hardly any apologies.

“From what I heard Purism money is now going to Forbes and social media campaigns without the transparency of what is really happening.”
      –Anonymous
I posted online about that (at the time). Repeatedly even. It was a sort of warning. They seemed a tad suspicious to me. Trust was eroded and ever since then I never looked at them the same way. But the press carried on, then the FSF (endorsement), not to mention fund-raising for Librem 5.

At one point they said they’d connect me for an interview (to publish on my site) with the founder of Qubes OS. Did that ever happen? No.

You bet! Another round of false promises; a total waste of time.

So, in summary I view them as bad on communications, big on promises, never delivering anything. Anything. Later they make up a bunch of excuses.

And going back to the question, “where’s the hw?”

I wondered that many years ago, almost 5 years ago. I’ve lost count.

The dreams they put forth are dreams. KDE, GNOME…. on a small device. Nice, but will that be delivered? I heard they scattered around some units recently. Then I heard about technical issues. Now I hear about staff leaving.

Deep inside I hope they succeed, but I remain sceptical based on my personal experience.

Purism needs to speak out and be frank about what’s happening. I’ve been nothing but courteous towards them (I didn’t even name the person who let me down; maybe she quit, maybe she got fired), but courtesy should be a two-way street/bridge. The very fact that a project about “freedom” does not even offer “openness” is not compatible with the spirit upon which it managed to raise millions of dollars in funds, thanks in part to endorsements/promotions from FSF, GNOME, KDE and so on. Not to mention volunteer writers like myself who have mentioned them over a thousand times over the years.

Moments ago figosdev told me: “ive always been neutral/curious about these guys, particularly with the fsf endorsement. im very curious what oliva thinks.

“I believe Purism is starting other services/campaigns in hopes to raise enough to fulfill those previous orders…”
      –Anonymous
“but with all thats happened to people trying to create real freedom lately, is it possible this is another attack, rather than a real revelation? (i dont know how i can prove im neutral, this is just my reaction.)”

Tom Grz wrote: “I’ve always been suspicious, primarily because their products are high-priced, and if they really wanted to make a difference they should move down the population curve. Also, the president is a jerk.”

Some memes do target the president’s personality; I don’t know him personally. There’s a link there to a talk from him. “Todd Weaver has more to say about himself than the advertised subject matter,” Grz added later.

09.29.19

FSF May Not be Trustworthy Anymore, It’s Believed/Said to Have Just Defaced Richard Stallman’s Personal Web Site (Updated)

Posted in FSF, GNU/Linux, Rumour at 5:31 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Update (01/10/2019): Stallman has told us that “stallman.org has not moved. It has been hosted by the same company for many years. It was never hosted by the FSF. On the contrary, I started it to keep it separate from the FSF.” Corrected text below.

Update (03/10/2019): Richard Stallman has since then stated he wants people to support the FSF.

Free Software Foundation History
Reference: Free Software Foundation History

Summary: The FSF is now actively ‘attacking’ its very own founder, whose Web site is said to have been defaced by FSF staff

“Stallman.org was defaced by an FSF employee,” I have just been told, “the deface has been reverted, and the domain appears to now be operating on non-FSF infrastructure…”

“The FSF must now issue a statement naming the culprit who defaced Stallman’s Web site,” I said. This is pretty serious. We heard rumours to that effect about 7 hours ago, but we were unable to verify and did not know who had done that. These rumours noted that other indicators of a defacement existed; “RMS’ site may have been tampered with,” somebody said in #techrights (IRC) at 4AM. “Some discussion elsewhere noted that the link to the “donate to the Free Software Foundation” leads to a youtube video as seen in this snapshot (it has since been fixed): https://archive.is/Yya6g . It might be a good idea to contact him regarding the two “step down” notices (one recent, other was his “remain” post edited) on his site to clear things up.”

“Something is going on and rumours suggest that large corporations play a role.”“Looks like code isn’t the only thing some people are deleting,” said the same person.

For those who have just woken up on a lazy Sunday, here’s some background. Earlier today we mentioned Richard Stallman's message (succinct site post) in which he said he had stepped down from GNU (just two days after saying the exact opposite). He has since then removed the post, causing a lot of confusion and unnecessary speculation that we won’t reproduce here because we don’t know all the facts (at least not yet). Something is going on and rumours suggest that large corporations play a role. The name “Saleforce” has been thrown around by several people, but there’s no ‘smoking gun’ evidence by which to prove a link. As far as we’re aware, Stallman has not responded to anyone to explain the withdrawal of his post about withdrawing from GNU. It’s a mystery, but the above update comes from a generally reliable source. We judge reliability based on connections and track record.

He later said “the deface was reverted [and] now stallman.org is not hosted on FSF servers (it was before). [And] given that stallman.org is basically 100% html, no php or whatever that means it pretty much had to be an inside job.”

08.16.19

Bill Gates and His Special Relationship With Jeffrey Epstein Still Stirring Speculations

Posted in Bill Gates, Microsoft, Rumour at 7:53 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Bill Gates reportedly offered to help a serial abuser of young girls (while knowing what he had done)

A church sculpture

Summary: Love of the “children” has long been a controversial subject for Microsoft; can Bill Gates and his connections to Jeffrey Epstein unearth some unsavoury secrets?

THIS IS a story more about crime than about software (very much like Microsoft, which owes its market position to crimes rather than technical merit). Bill Gates managed to use a fake ‘charity’ to push back against regulators, at times by bribing officials, bribing the media and so on. There’s also the perverted aspect, which we rarely touch as that tends to lead to “conspiracy theory” accusations.

“There’s also the perverted aspect, which we rarely touch as that tends to lead to “conspiracy theory” accusations.”In the past we mentioned Microsoft’s truly bizarre stance on pedophilia, even before Microsoft Peter was arrested for it (he's still in prison), as were people who worked in the home of Bill Gates. The subject merits further research as not much is known and we’ve seen some false rumours being spread too (several readers sent us links about it). Two of the links sent to us are below. One reader cited the Daily Mail, but we regard that to be an unreliable source.

The articles below seem to point to a reputation laundering effort. Some criminals buy themselves a new identity. Rich criminals just buy the media, as Bill Gates did, to ignore their crimes and instead paint them as “Saints”.

Related/contextual items from the news:

  1. Bill Gates reportedly met with Jeffrey Epstein to ‘discuss philanthropy’ after the disgraced financier went to jail for sex crimes

    The meeting took place in New York in 2013, according to CNBC, and is further evidence of how Epstein was able to make connections in elite society — even after he became a convicted sex offender.

  2. Years after serving jail time, Jeffrey Epstein found a way to meet with Microsoft’s Bill Gates to discuss philanthropy

    After the meeting in New York six years ago, Gates flew on one of Epstein’s planes to meet with his family in Palm Beach, the people added. He did not, they noted, fly on the so-called “Lolita Express,” which was allegedly used to transport underage girls to Epstein’s home in the Virgin Islands. The Daily Mail first reported on Gates using the plane in March of that year, citing flight records.

08.04.19

Rumour: Patent Troll Erich Spangenberg Said to Have Died

Posted in Patents, Rumour at 3:57 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Erich Spangenberg

Summary: Erich Spangenberg, today’s most notorious patent troll, is said to have died

“Sad to hear that Erich Spangenberg has died,” Gatlin McArthur‏ wrote yesterday. “He certainly had an impact on the patent world…”

In the same sense Stalin had an impact on the 20th century. Spangenberg literally destroyed many people’s lives, never mind businesses he destroyed (businesses don’t have feelings).

“Death does’t merit praise or silence.”Tweets are usually like hearsay, but Erich Spangenberg is possibly dead because Gatlin McArthur‏ is from within his ‘network’ (voices in support of patent trolls). Also, a day later this tweet has not been removed. We don’t want to guess what killed Spangenberg, but he was not very old, so it could be suicide, accident, or drug overdose. Or the tweet may be wrong.

Ray Niro is also dead (since 2016), just like his business. He created a culture of blackmail, especially in the US, costing the economy untold billions. Niro is considered to be the father of patent trolling. That’s his sole ‘innovation’.

Spangenberg helped the European Patent Office (EPO) illegally promote software patents in Europe. We wrote about it months ago. This disgusting patent troll had sent me death wishes. Months later guess who’s said to be dead. If true, now he can decorate his grave with money he extorted from people who actually needed it. Maybe the family deserves condolences, but Spangenberg deserves no sympathy, only condemnation. Death does’t merit praise or silence. Everyone dies eventually and bad people deserve to be remembered for their bad legacy.

12.21.18

Team UPC Belatedly Admits Lying About the German UPC Complaint (Fabricated ‘Rumours’)

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents, Rumour at 4:40 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Bristows EPO

Summary: The efforts to thwart a constitutional complaint about the clearly unconstitutional UPC (in violation of many constitutions, not just Germany’s) culminated in so-called ‘fake news’ strategies; but it’s backfiring each time the ‘news’ turns out to be false, harming the messenger’s (or messengers’) reputation

THE credibility of the European Patent Office (EPO) was severely damaged after it had lied to its staff, to its stakeholders, and to the media. The EPO is often presumed to be lying and these lies contributed to this. Remember the boy who cried “wolf!” and the message of that old fable.

“The EPO is often presumed to be lying and these lies contributed to this. Remember the boy who cried “wolf!” and the message of that old fable.”Patent law firms risk doing to same to themselves. In recent years we’ve seen a growing frequency of lies, even intentional lies (not casual errors or mistakes but deliberate falsehoods being disseminated). It hardly surprises us that the so-called ‘IP’ ‘industry’ is collapsing and being absorbed (some people rehired, some fired). They’ll never admit it openly, but we’ve been writing about this for years and offered extensive evidence. Earlier this week a site of theirs, Managing IP, wrote about it after it had promoted software patents, in effect reposting Patent Docs’ Michael Borella. It’s a misleading old article that promotes software patents (debunked here weeks ago). More interesting, however, was this admission from Patrick Wingrove, who writes for this patent propaganda site (Managing IP does lots of UPC propaganda) after some other British writers left. He admits he was spreading lies for Team UPC: “It seems unlikely at this point that we will have a decision on the UPC constitutional compliant before December 25, but the UPC preparatory committee is planning ahead regardless.”

Since when is the UPC preparatory committee a reliable source? They always get it wrong. Check their track record. Wingrove then repeats Bristows’ latest talking points: “Preparations for the UPC continue despite no German constitutional complaint ruling, an Italian ministry wants a central division in Milan instead of London, and the EU Article 50 ruling may have implications for UK participation” (it cannot participate in something that does not even exist).

“Since when is the UPC preparatory committee a reliable source? They always get it wrong. Check their track record.”The anonymous “Kluwer Patent blogger” (most likely Bristows) is again proven to have spread lies because the German Constitutional Court did not reject the challenges to the Unitary Patent, definitely not before year’s end. So Kluwer Patent Blog does the ‘damage control’, which is parroting the words of the UPC preparatory committee. It’s just wishful thinking from the liars whose career/goal was to trick politician into this coup. “Kluwer Patent blogger” (likely Bristows) added: “There is no reference either to a time schedule for the start of the functioning of the UPC. In a hearing before the House of Lords late October, Kevin Mooney, chair of the Drafting Committee of the Rules of Procedure, had said he believed the court could come into existence at the end of next year.”

Mooney? Seriously? He lied as recently as this winter, even when speaking to politicians publicly.

Bristows, writing in its own blog (Gregory Bacon), says that the “Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation issued a press release.”

“Team UPC is a big bunch of self-serving liars and seeing US patent litigation diminishing (IAM moaned about it as recently as this week) they’re desperate to manufacture lots of lawsuits in Europe. This is what it’s all about.”But so what? The UPC cannot even get off the ground.

Team UPC makes it sound like the UPC is a question of timing, not outcome, as if the decision is already obvious and the judges are just ‘actors’ getting in the way of this coup. As one of them has just put it: “German UPC complaint apparently still w Prof. Huber (who, as reporting Justice, as a rule, drafts a vote for circulation), no sign of a decision, almost certainly not before Christmas. Likewise the (older) complaints re: independence/court-quality of EPO Boards of Appeal.”

So how about those rumours the likes of Mooney and Bristows were spreading about decision by year’s end?

These people aren’t credible. They’re liars. Team UPC is a big bunch of self-serving liars and seeing US patent litigation diminishing (IAM moaned about it as recently as this week) they’re desperate to manufacture lots of lawsuits in Europe. This is what it’s all about.

12.09.18

Team UPC is Still Spreading False Rumours in an Effort to Trick Politicians and Pressure Judges

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents, Rumour at 7:16 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

The EPO wrote this (below) almost three years ago

UPC

Summary: Abuses at the European Patent Office, political turmoil and an obvious legislative coup by a self-serving occupation that produces nothing have already doomed the Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court (UPC); so now we deal with complete fabrications from Team UPC as they’re struggling to make something out of nothing, anonymously smearing opposition to the UPC and anonymously making stuff up

LAST WEEKEND the person who ratified something that cannot in principle be ratified (or become functional) decided to publicly announce his resignation. There were some reports that mentioned this in relation to the UPC as well (even though there’s more to his decision, primarily Brexit itself). Science Minister (or whatever his job title was at the time; it kept changing) Sam Gyimah wasn’t the first to resign and his predecessor too kept changing job titles until resignation (for similar reasons). We can only imagine how Germany’s constitutional court views this turmoil. Not too favourably…

“The UPCA is dying in its sleep, the EPO already ignores it (the subject is almost never brought up), and Team UPC blogs are more or less dead (no new posts).”With only a couple of weeks left before Christmas it seems pretty clear that the UPC is more “dead” than it has ever been. There will be some more restful weekends soon. As for weekdays? Don’t expect any oral hearings as none are even scheduled. In two or three weeks’ time Team UPC will need to explain why it floated totally false (fabricated) ‘unitary’ rumours. The UPCA is dying in its sleep, the EPO already ignores it (the subject is almost never brought up), and Team UPC blogs are more or less dead (no new posts).

Days after Ramona Livera (Elias Neocleous & Co LLC) published lies and distortions about the UPC in Cypriot press she apparently paid money for more sites to carry these ‘unitary’ lies (self promotion rather). It says more about the integrity and honesty of such firms (than it says about UPC/A itself).

A few days ago Hogan Lovells’ Joseph Raffetto and Steffen Steininger decided to relay some more falsehoods. Perpetuating false rumours of Team UPC is nowadays seen as a virtue, surely?

Here is what they wrote:

While the German Federal Court (FCC) has still not officially announced when it will issue a decision regarding the constitutional complaint against the German law that ratified the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA), rumors about a possible decision in December are circulating the German patent community. The FCC, however, officially has not acknowledged a decision date at this point. Across the channel, in the meantime, two UK patent practitioners argued before the House of Lord’s EU Justice Sub-Committee in favor of a UK participation in the Unitary Patent system during the transitional period agreed upon in a withdrawal agreement following Brexit and beyond that period.

When they say “rumors about a possible decision in December are circulating the German patent community” they don’t cite any sources. Because there are none. There’s no basis for this.

Where are those sources? They’re not even being named. It’s like a self-serving whispering campaign.

“When they say “rumors about a possible decision in December are circulating the German patent community” they don’t cite any sources. Because there are none. There’s no basis for this.”Alan Johnson has meanwhile had nothing to say on the subject. He and his colleagues are among those who spread these false rumours the most. Days ago he wrote in their UPC Blog about SPCs, not UPC (Bristows are big boosters of SPCs). So the UPC Blog is not even about UPC anymore! And on the same day Kluwer Patent Blog (where Bristows often writes) published SPCs under friendly fire (overly dramatic headline).

Why does nobody mention anything of substance about UPC or UPCA? Because there’s nothing.

JUVE, which likes patent trolls (and therefore the UPC as well), still calls patent trolls by a euphemism (“NPE”) and seems happy that they choose to troll companies that actually make something… in the country where JUVE itself is based. JUVE’s subscribers are profiting from these trolls and they hope to profit even more from something like the UPC (which would be inviting to trolls). As JUVE put it: “For NPEs, Germany will continue to be the court location in Europe. This is demonstrated by Data Scape’s lawsuits against none other than Apple, Amazon and Spotify at the Regional Court Düsseldorf…”

More money for lawyers would mean more money for the publisher (JUVE), but the UPC isn’t happening and JUVE isn’t writing about it anymore. It’s almost as if they’ve given up completely.

“More money for lawyers would mean more money for the publisher (JUVE), but the UPC isn’t happening and JUVE isn’t writing about it anymore.”Benjamin Henrion has meanwhile said about UPC that: “Defining how courts are established (130 pages of the rules of procedure) should be the only privilege of Parliaments, not outsourced to biased patent experts like Mr Mooney” (citing an old article from JUVE, which amplifies Team UPC itself).

“Mooney is a symptom of the problem,” I told him, as UPC “is a legislative coup.” It’s a bunch of lawyers attempting to hijack the law and enrich themselves. The constitutional court’s judges can hopefully see that because it’s not difficult to see that and it would be an utter embarrassment to Germany if it ever went ahead; it would also be a political crisis and possibly lead to legal action.

11.14.18

Allegations That António Campinos ‘Bought’ His Presidency and is Still Paying for it

Posted in Europe, Patents, Rumour at 1:47 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

When the politician met the banker

Campinos and Battistelli in 2011

Summary: Rumours persist that after Battistelli had rigged the election in favour of his compatriot nefarious things related to that were still visible

THERE have been several rumours swirling about António Campinos, but evidence is at times lacking or relatively weak. The European Patent Office (EPO) is corrupt, no doubt, and there’s plenty evidence to show it. Demonstrating that Campinos plays an active role in it, however, isn’t easy. Days ago we mentioned EPO ‘outsourcing’ rumours; we asked for input and got some input a couple of days later.

“We already saw Battistelli doing this many times in the past. It’s a form of corruption.”As readers may recall, Battistelli clearly meddled/intervened to have Campinos ‘set up’ as his successor. Take Belgium for example (we wrote about half a dozen articles about it, since more than a year ago, as this relates the UPC and EUIPO). Inside sources said that its vote was more or less ‘bought’.

Based on LinkedIn job postings, sources tell us, other countries may have had their vote ‘bought’ (rewards given after the vote, not before or throughout). We already saw Battistelli doing this many times in the past. It’s a form of corruption. We’ve been giving examples since 2014.

We’re told that the job postings have nothing to do with outsourcing but more to do with national patent offices and Council delegates (as was the case in Belgium). As one source framed it: “Is António Campinos paying for the votes which made him the seventh president of the EPO, or for future support?

“His election was a rigged process (we wrote about it countless times before) and the effect of this rigged election may be more profound and long-lasting than people care to realise.”A curious aspect of this is that the job advertisements on the EPO’s LinkedIn page aren’t always on the EPO’s site. Some may have already disappeared (maybe due to public scrutiny). We leave it as an exercise for the reader, e.g. which jobs these are and the possible motivations. One thing we do know is that there are internal conversations about it and Campinos has much to worry about. His election was a rigged process (we wrote about it countless times before) and the effect of this rigged election may be more profound and long-lasting than people care to realise. Certain people are indebted or are owed “favours”. There are many ways to pass money around, e.g. jobs, EU budget, and EPO budget (see how Battistelli looted the EPO itself a few weeks before he left).

« 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