●● IRC: #boycottnovell @ FreeNode: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 ●●

● Mar 17
[00:29]	schestowitz__	http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2021/03/board-of-appeal-in-t180715-continues.html?showComment=1615918919414#c1675653883329287131
[00:29]	schestowitz__	"
[00:29]	schestowitz__	The composition of the EBA will indeed be interesting. One thing is clear: the members of the BA having contributed to the creation of Art 15aRPBA2020 are known and some leaks can be expected. 
[00:29]	schestowitz__	OP as ViCos are, as such, not the problem, but there is a great difference between giving OP as ViCos a mandatory character or not. 
[00:29]	schestowitz__	The bravery of this BA is to be commended. I am curious to see whether its members will be renewed at the end of their contract. This referral is necessary because the trend uncovered by the EPO, supported by some BA members, is to ignore the will of the parties. The savings in building space must not be achieved at the expense of the users.
[00:29]	schestowitz__	It is paradoxical that an applicant or proprietor has a say in the form in which a patent is granted and maintained, but no say in the form of the right to be heard. Seeing one's opponents and the decision-making body in postage stamp format is not to everyone's taste. I can understand them.
[00:29]	schestowitz__	Claiming that OPs as ViCos are equivalent to real OPs is comparable to the EPO's claim that the new EQE format has proved to work very smoothly.
[00:29]	schestowitz__	If the parties agree, there is nothing to prevent OPs as ViCo, but please let the parties decide. However, at least the members of the decision-making body must sit together in the same place. See page 25 of the decision. One can try to squeeze out a lot from Art 116, but certainly not that scattering members of EPO deciding bodies around Europe corresponds to the letter or the spirit of the EPC. 
[00:29]	schestowitz__	Introducing mandatory OPs as ViCo is a fundamental change in the mechanisms of the EPC. Neither the head of the EPO or of the BA have the power or legitimacy to introduce such a drastic change. It is to the member states in form of a diplomatic conference to decide such a change. 
[00:29]	schestowitz__	When it was decided to bring search and examination together it was a diplomatic conference which took a decision which was later ratified by all contracting states. 
[00:29]	schestowitz__	Where is it seen that an executive body decides on the interpretation of legal texts? Certainly not in Western Europe. 
[00:29]	schestowitz__	Btw, why should third parties observations be limited to substantial patent law? Where is the legal basis for this stance? 
[00:29]	schestowitz__	"
● Mar 17
[18:57]		*liberty_box has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
[18:58]		*rianne_ has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
● Mar 17
[19:12]		*liberty_box (~liberty@host81-154-169-167.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell
[19:12]		*rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-169-167.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell
[19:44]		*liberty_box has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
[19:45]		*rianne_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
[19:56]		*rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-169-167.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell
[19:57]		*liberty_box (~liberty@host81-154-169-167.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell
● Mar 17
[21:47]		*liberty_box has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
[21:48]		*rianne_ has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
[21:57]		*rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-169-167.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell
● Mar 17
[22:00]		*liberty_box (~liberty@host81-154-169-167.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell
[22:56]		*rianne_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
[22:57]		*rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-169-167.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell
● Mar 17
[23:46]	schestowitz__	https://twitter.com/zoobab/status/1372211274805882885