Join us now at the IRC channel.
| *Blakereeate has quit (Remote host closed the connection) | Nov 24 00:00 | |
| *gry (~test@unaffiliated/gryllida) has joined #boycottnovell | Nov 24 03:45 | |
| schestowitz | ta" | Nov 24 08:55 |
|---|---|---|
| schestowitz | Topics relevant in Job Groups 5 and 6: We are listening to you, let's talk, make your voice heard! | Nov 24 08:55 |
| schestowitz | Dear colleagues in Job Groups 5 and 6, | Nov 24 08:55 |
| schestowitz | SP2023 – agility – reorganisations - new normal – staff health – new career – production targets – diversity and inclusion... EPO buzzwords these days, but do you find yourselves addressed in all this? | Nov 24 08:55 |
| schestowitz | We are very keen to receive your feedback to these questions, no matter how detailed or short they are, and would like to include them in the list of topics relevant to you. Of course we will treat your feedback confidentially. | Nov 24 08:55 |
| schestowitz | The first publication addressed to you is available here. | Nov 24 08:55 |
| schestowitz | Sincerely yours, | Nov 24 08:55 |
| schestowitz | The Central Staff Committee | Nov 24 08:55 |
| schestowitz | " | Nov 24 08:55 |
| schestowitz | x https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/plan-b-should-be-monthly-checks-for-all-nb37kbr9z | Nov 24 10:36 |
| -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-www.thetimes.co.uk | Plan B should be monthly checks for all | News | The Times | Nov 24 10:36 | |
| schestowitz | = | Nov 24 10:49 |
| schestowitz | x https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/23/world/bill-gates-vaccine-coronavirus.html | Nov 24 10:49 |
| -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-www.nytimes.com | Bill Gates, Covid-19 and the Quest to Vaccinate the World - The New York Times | Nov 24 10:49 | |
| schestowitz | # | Nov 24 10:49 |
| schestowitz | http://patentblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/11/20/upca-ratification-bill-progresses-in-german-bundestag-academics-upc-not-the-best-solution-for-europe-and-for-innovation/ | Nov 24 12:01 |
| -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-patentblog.kluweriplaw.com | UPCA ratification bill progresses in German Bundestag - Academics: UPC not the best solution for Europe and for innovation - Kluwer Patent Blog | Nov 24 12:01 | |
| schestowitz | " | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | On the lack of UPC impact study, you have to “choose your supermarket carefully” (read the entire paragrah 4): | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | https://script-ed.org/article/european-unified-patent-court-assessment-implications-federalisation-patent-system-europe/ | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | “The European Scrutiny Committee of the UK Parliament (House of Commons) found that that report was outdated and contained errors.” | Nov 24 12:01 |
| -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-script-ed.org | The European Unified Patent Court: Assessment and Implications of the Federalisation of the Patent System in Europe – SCRIPTed | Nov 24 12:01 | |
| schestowitz | “Ironically, although the Scrutiny Committee criticised the EU Commission for not offering an updated impact assessment study, the UK Parliament has yet to provide its own impact assessment (i.e. similar to one commissioned by the Polish government). The advice that the patent agents gave before the Scrutiny Committee concerned some practical points which revolve around litigation practices. However, an economic evaluation has not | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | been undertaken thus far as to the exact impact on the national economy and the business of various sectors, despite repetitive requests. [72] | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | [72] See, e.g., IP Federation, Newsletter: Latest Activities: “Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court”, 13 February 2013: “We are urging the Government to conduct a robust economic impact analysis based on the effect on the UK economy and publish the results for scrutiny before ratifying the Unified Patent Court Agreement”, available at http://www.ipfederation.com/activities.php?news_id=67.” | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | REPLY | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | MN | Nov 24 12:01 |
| -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-www.ipfederation.com | Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court – IP Federation | Nov 24 12:01 | |
| schestowitz | NOVEMBER 21, 2020 AT 6:49 PM | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | May be advisable to await the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court (“Bundesverfassungsgericht”) regarding the pending constitutional complaints (“Verfassungsbeschwerden”) asserting “insufficient judicial relief against a decision of the Boards of Appeal (“unzureichenden Rechtsschutzes beim Europäischen Patentamt gegen Entscheidungen der Beschwerdekammern”). | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | Widening the competency of the UPC to include in its competency any decision of the European Patent Office (now limited in Art.32(i) UPCA to “decisions of the European Patent Office in carrying out the tasks referred to in Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 1257/2012”) would be one approach to resolve any such constitutional issues. | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | However, the UPCA itself might be deemed to be deficient regarding safeguarding constitutional rights. | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | REPLY | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | Confused | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | NOVEMBER 21, 2020 AT 8:12 PM | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | “German support for the UPCA and the Protocol for Provisional Application … will trigger the start of the UP system, although two more member states will have to be found to approve the PPA. ” | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | Can anyone explain how the UPC can proceed without the ratification of the UK (which is mandatory under the UPC Agreement)? | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | REPLY | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | MaxDrei | Nov 24 12:01 |
| schestowitz | NOVEMBER 21, 2020 AT 10:39 PM | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | From patent professionals in the USA, it is a constant criticism of governments in Europe, that they are in the pocket of Big Industry, ignoring the interests of every other user of the patent system. The proof of their assertions is right here, is it not, folks? The Bundestag has been “nobbled”, right. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | And then there’s another point which no doubt carries weight in Berlin, namely, now that the Brits have left the UPC, the German national interest demands that we cannot leave the way clear for the French to take over dominance of patent litigation in Europe. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | Oh the irony though. The better way to obstruct a French take-over, while continuing to pander to Big Industry is to prevaricate on the UPC, not hurry it into force. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | REPLY | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | Jan Verbist | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | NOVEMBER 22, 2020 AT 10:30 AM | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | “The federal government does not see any further constitutional deficits”. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | This is a misleading statement, the EPO cannot be sued for maladministration nor refusal to grant. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | The Government does not want to see it, nor wait for the pending decision from Karlsruhe on the 3 other complaints, which should be published soon (early 2021) because they fundamentally know that it will delay/destroy the project. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | Not to mention the lack of a proper impact analysis. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | This is bad law making. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | REPLY | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | Attentive Observer | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | NOVEMBER 22, 2020 AT 3:17 PM | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | The answers to the questions from the liberal party by the German government warrants some comments. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | The UPC is good for SMEs | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | It is interesting to see how now the UPC should be good for UPC whereas everybody knows that SMEs are only the fig leaf behind which the big industry and big internationally active lawyers firms are hiding. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | When one knows that just 10% of the applications filed at the EPO stem from SMEs (official figures from the EPO), and that the average number of validations is around 5, all the talk about SMEs profiting from IPR is nice to hear, but far from reality. One just has to read the last paragraph of the study “SME Patenting – An Empirical Analysis in Nine Countries, to see that there is a lot of hot air. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | I rather trust the conclusion in Mr Xenos’ publication as the figures used there are very recent. “The Impact of the European Patent System on SMEs and National States and the Advent of Unitary Patent”, published in Prometheus, Vol. 36, No. 1 (March 2020). | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | The famous study of the EPO about SMEs is actually based on 12, in words twelve, examples. It is hard to believe that those are exemplary for European SMEs in general. Associating the use of patents and trademarks form SMEs, as in the joint study of the EPO and the EUIPO make the figures relating to their IPR use much larger as it actually looks. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | When the German government alleges that the legal fees incurred by German SMEs when using the UPC are a much lower than fees in the own country, one wonders why the government did not start to make justice more affordable on its own territory. Why is there the need to resort to a supranational jurisdiction? This defies any logic. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | Why has the German government not explained why Poland and the Czech Republic have signed but will not ratify the UPCA? Simply because it will have deleterious effects on their industry. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | The compatibility with the Basic Law and Point 106 in the decision of the GFCC | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | It is meaningless to claim on the one hand that the compatibility of the UPCA with the Basic Law, in particular the fundamental rights, as well as with Union law has been comprehensively examined, and on the other hand that the government does not see any further constitutional deficits, in the total absence of any explanations on the topic. The question raised by the GFCC in point 106 has not been discussed whatsoever. What was | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | then examination about? | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | The absence of translations | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | It is also incorrect to say that no translations are required in case of a UP. At least during the provisional period a patent which has been granted in French or German will have to be translated into English. In this respect, it should be checked that the UPCA is not in contradiction with the London Protocol which has been ratified by both Germany and France. It is also clear that the language in the proceedings is not necessarily | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | the language in which the patent has been granted, see Art 49UPCA. Under some conditions it is the claimant who can chose the language of the proceedings, cf. R14UPCA. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | R 14(2,c)UPCA allows for litigation in an EPO language, especially English, while at the same time allowing for holding the oral hearing in the national language of the local division as well as issuing the judgment in said national language. In that situation amendments to the patent have to be filed not only in the language in which the patent has been granted, but also in the language order by the local division. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | The possibility or not to use the language in which the patent has been granted is defined in R 231-323UPCA. It means a contrario that it is not necessarily the case. Where is then the simplification? | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | Last but not least, whilst at the EPO simultaneous translation is for free when requested one month before the scheduled date, translation costs will be cost of the procedure which will be charged to the succumbing party, cf. R109UPCA. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | The London Section of the Central Division | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | There is another problem which has not been resolved in the draft ratification bill: the status of the London Section. Claiming that a fundamental amendment of an international treaty by a mere administrative instance does not offend the basic law is simply defying any common sense. Simply alleging that some articles of the VCLT can be misused to this effect is not convincing. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | Not only has Italy shown interest in the duties of the London Section, but also the Netherlands and now Ireland. Should the UPCA ever enter into force, the battle for the duties of the London Section will is as heavy as it was when before the UPCA was signed. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | Art 87(2) is there to amend the UPC to bring it into line with an international treaty relating to patents or Union law. Changing the devolution of the duties of the London Section cannot figure under any of those hearings. It presupposes that all the contracting member states have previously adopted separately some amendments. Only then a mere decision of the administrative committee of the UPCA can be envisaged. | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | Art 87(3) UPCA foresees that a contracting state which does not want to be bound by an amendment of the UPCA under Art 87(1 or 2) can request a review conference. We will then be in the same situation before Art 7(2) UPCA was introduced. What happens if no unanimity can be reached at the revision conference? | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | Conclusion | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | Which proprietor not having lost its marbles will want any of its patents in such a system? This has by no means be made clear by the German government in its replies to the legitimate questions raised by the liberal party. The whole paper is full of vague statements with the aim of obfuscating the real issues | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | REPLY | Nov 24 12:02 |
| schestowitz | Attentive Observer | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | NOVEMBER 22, 2020 AT 4:17 PM | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | I would also like to draw the attention to the document: “The Unified Patent Court system is not the best solution for Europe and for innovation, and there are alternative systems to consider after Brexit”, originating from the UC Louvain, and having received support from numerous law professors all over Europe. One of them is even a former Vice-President of the EPO! | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | https://alfresco.uclouvain.be/alfresco/service/guest/streamDownload/workspace/SpacesStore/b3527930-e369-49cd-baeb-7208d3da83c4/UPC%20?guest=true | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | Looking at the various notes at the end of the paper is also very instructive. | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | It can be debated whether what has been done for trademarks within the EU needs to be done for patents, as the number of true supranational litigations is very low in view of the facts that the average number of validations in EU member states is around 5. The few companies really having to litigate in a large number of contracting states of the UPC can easily afford it. This is not the case for SMEs, whatever the German government | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | might presently claim. | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | Trademarks are somehow different as they have an immediate impact on the customer. Patents are not something the general public is confronted with. The necessity of harmonising in patent matters is not as stringent as for trademarks. | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | In the case of patents, subsidiarity could be the best for all. What appears more important is to increase the cooperation between patent judges in all contracting states of the EPO, and not merely in EU contracting states. | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | This aim can be reached easily at the fraction of the costs brought by the UPC or any other supranational system. But this would mean less revenue for internationally active patent firms in patent litigation. Hence the UPC is a must for those people. | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | It simply confirms that the hand of the German bill drafter is held by lobbyists who want the UPCA to come into force at any cost and with only their interests in mind. | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | REPLY | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | Attentive Observer | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | NOVEMBER 22, 2020 AT 9:21 PM | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | To MN, | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | The UPC cannot be competent to decide for all EP patents as it is a closed convention only applicable for EU contracting states. EPLA would have solved the problem, but the EU did not want it! | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | The UPC suffers the same drawbacks as the EPC. No proper revision instance, and not even in the UPCA but in its implementing regulations which can bee amended by the administrative committee. If the latter decide to scrap the rule, national parliaments have no say in it. | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | There is so much in the implementing regulations that any control by a national legislator is impossible. This also has not been explained in the new draft of the ratification bill. | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | REPLY | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | Attentive Observer | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | NOVEMBER 23, 2020 AT 11:18 AM | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | Art 31(1) Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) states “A treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose”. | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | Art 32 VCLT states “Recourse may be had to supplementary means of interpretation, including the preparatory work of the treaty and the circumstances of its conclusion, in order to confirm the meaning resulting from the application of article 31, or to determine the meaning when the interpretation according to article 31: | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | (a) leaves the meaning ambiguous or obscure; or | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | (b) leads to a result which is manifestly absurd or unreasonable.” | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | Art 7(2) UPCA states “The central division shall have its seat in Paris, with sections in London and Munich. The cases before the central division shall be distributed in accordance with Annex II, which shall form an integral part of this Agreement.” | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | The meaning of Art 7(2) is far from being ambiguous or obscure and does not lead to a result which is manifestly absurd or unreasonable. It is rather the interpretation of Art 7(2) in the draft bill suggesting that the duties of the London Section of the Central Division be shared by the Paris and Munich section which is manifestly absurd and unreasonable. | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | Art 31(1) VCLT states that “The context for the purpose of the interpretation of a treaty shall comprise, in addition to the text, including its preamble and annexes: | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | (a) any agreement relating to the treaty which was made between all the parties in connection with the conclusion of the treaty; | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | (b) any instrument which was made by one or more parties in connection with the conclusion of the treaty and accepted by the other parties as an instrument related to the treaty.” | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | There is no agreement at this stage of all the contracting states about the transfer of duties of the London Section to the Paris and Munich Sections of the Central Division. | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | In view of the claims from no less 3 contracting states to obtain the transfer of the London Section onto their territory, such an agreement is far away and might never be reached. | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | Attempting the execution of a decision of the Paris and Munich sections taking over the duties of the London Section might therefore not be possible as all contracting states of the UPCA are contracting states of the VCLT. I cannot see any national judge accepting to execute a decision in violation of an international treaty. | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | REPLY | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | zoobab | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | NOVEMBER 24, 2020 AT 12:05 AM | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | FFII has written to the Bundestag and to the EU institutions: | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | https://ffii.org/is-germany-competing-with-hungary-and-poland-on-the-worst-rule-of-law-award-with-its-rushed-ratification-of-the-unitary-patent/ | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | “The possibility to sue an administrative body, such as the EPO, for maladministration before the courts is one of the fundamental pillars of our western democracies, also called the “Rule of Law” (TFEU art2) and is a categorical constitutional guarantee (i.e judicial review of administrative acts). This applies also to the institutional possibility, under the requisite constitutional system of separation of powers, to appeal | Nov 24 12:03 |
| -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-ffii.org | Is Germany competing with Hungary and Poland on the “Worst Rule of Law Award” with its rushed ratification of the Unitary Patent? | FFII | Nov 24 12:03 | |
| schestowitz | acts and decisions of administrative bodies (e.g. the EPO), as it can be observed in all national systems and also at the EU level, as with the other intellectual property rights of trademarks and designs, where the decisions of the EUIPO are frequently appealed before the CJEU. In this respect, the constitutional mechanism that sustains the absolutely necessary separation of powers exists for intellectual property rights in the EU | Nov 24 12:03 |
| schestowitz | trademarks and designs) but is spectacularly absent from the Unified Patent Court and Unitary Patent institutional arrangement.” | Nov 24 12:04 |
| schestowitz | " | Nov 24 12:04 |
| schestowitz | " | Nov 24 12:06 |
| schestowitz | NOVEMBER 24, 2020 AT 3:28 AM | Nov 24 12:06 |
| schestowitz | “To MN,The UPC cannot be competent to decide for all EP patents as it is a closed convention only applicable for EU contracting states.” | Nov 24 12:06 |
| schestowitz | Yes, I agree. I stand corrected. | Nov 24 12:06 |
| schestowitz | " | Nov 24 12:06 |
| schestowitz | " | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | Sheikh it Sheikh it | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | @Sheikh_al_Touar | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | · | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | 57m | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | Growing Concerns That EPO Staff Has Been Placed Under de Facto House Arrest by an Entirely Unaccountable Office #NewNormal #lockdown #employees #management #Leaders #work #law #housearrest #patents #Europe | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | Growing Concerns That EPO Staff Has Been Placed Under de Facto House Arrest by an Entirely Unacco... | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | "House arrest" is excessive and disproportionate. So says the Central Staff Committee of Europe's second-largest institution (which surprisingly enough the media is failing to properly study and... | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | techrights.org | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | Sheikh it Sheikh it | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | @Sheikh_al_Touar | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | · | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | 59m | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | Internal Error: Unified Patent Court and Unitary Patent Incompatible With the Constitution and Basic Laws #patents #Europe | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | Internal Error: Unified Patent Court and Unitary Patent Incompatible With the Constitution and... | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | The FFII has issued a statement for Members of the Bundestag, Members of the European Parliament, Members of the Council, German Presidency of the EU, Chancellor Merkel, Commissioner Von Der Leyen,... | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | techrights.org | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | Sheikh it Sheikh it | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | @Sheikh_al_Touar | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | · | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | 59m | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | The EPO is Using Hype Wave and Buzzword to Promote Illegal Software Patents in a So-Called “Digital Conference” #deception #patents #Europe | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | The EPO is Using Hype Wave and Buzzword to Promote Illegal Software Patents in a So-Called “Digital... | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | The "HEY HI" or "AI" hype is misused by the Office; not just in person but also in webstreams, which basically serve as a vehicle for illegal agenda | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | techrights.org | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | Sheikh it Sheikh it | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | @Sheikh_al_Touar | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | · | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | 1h | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | Dutch Delegation and German Delegation at the Administrative Council of the EPO Upset at the Office for Secrecy, Working Behind the Scenes to Crush Productive Staff #Netherlands #Germany #Nederland #Deutschland #employees #staff #law #patents #Europe | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | Dutch Delegation and German Delegation at the Administrative Council of the EPO Upset at the Office... | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | Less than halfway through his term at the Office, Battistelli's buddy already faces growing criticism and, according to the Central Staff Committee, he "was emotionally affected by the intervention... | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | techrights.org | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | Sheikh it Sheikh it | Nov 24 12:09 |
| schestowitz | @Sheikh_al_Touar | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | · | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | 1h | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | Legal Action at the European Patent Office (EPO) Leveraged Against Management… for Robbing EPO Staff and Robbing Europe, by Extension #NewNormal #employees #management #Leaders #patents #Europe | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | Legal Action at the European Patent Office (EPO) Leveraged Against Management... for Robbing EPO... | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | The EPO is being looted for its value; the staff is rightly concerned and there’s legal action on the way, filed reluctantly as there’s clearly no other option (a last resort/necessary recourse) | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | techrights.org | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | Sheikh it Sheikh it | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | @Sheikh_al_Touar | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | · | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | 1h | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | Read more about the #UPCA new position paper on Techrights #deception #patents #Europe | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | http://techrights.org/2020/11/22/new-position-paper-upc/ | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | Quote Tweet | Nov 24 12:10 |
| -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-techrights.org | New Position Paper on the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Says It’s “Not the Best Solution for Europe” — Clearly an Understatement | Techrights | Nov 24 12:10 | |
| schestowitz | MSServices Global | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | Globe with meridians | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | @MSServices_info | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | · 1h | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | But this is rather an understatement! - UPCA ratification bill progresses in German Bundestag – Academics: UPC not the best solution for Europe and for innovation | #patents #Patente #Europe #UPCA #Germany #Deutschland #Bundestag #Politik #Wirtschaft | http://patentblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/11/20/upca-ratification-bill-progresses-in-german-bundestag-academics-upc-not-the-best-solution-for-europe-and-for-innovation/ | Nov 24 12:10 |
| -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-patentblog.kluweriplaw.com | UPCA ratification bill progresses in German Bundestag - Academics: UPC not the best solution for Europe and for innovation - Kluwer Patent Blog | Nov 24 12:10 | |
| schestowitz | " | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | " | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | Read more about the #UPCA new position paper on Techrights #deception #patents #Europe | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | http://techrights.org/2020/11/22/new-position-paper-upc/ | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | Quote Tweet | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | MSServices Global | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | Globe with meridians | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | @MSServices_info | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | · 1h | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | But this is rather an understatement! - UPCA ratification bill progresses in German Bundestag – Academics: UPC not the best solution for Europe and for innovation | #patents #Patente #Europe #UPCA #Germany #Deutschland #Bundestag #Politik #Wirtschaft | http://patentblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/11/20/upca-ratification-bill-progresses-in-german-bundestag-academics-upc-not-the-best-solution-for-europe-and-for-innovation/ | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | Sheikh it Sheikh it | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | @Sheikh_al_Touar | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | · | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | 1h | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | New Position Paper on the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Says It’s “Not the Best Solution for Europe” — Clearly an Understatement #Deception #patents #Europe | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | New Position Paper on the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Says It's “Not the Best Solution for Europe”... | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | UPC proponents (profiteers) aren't enjoying support anymore; not only has progress stalled (come to a complete stop) but the whole debate about the UPC (or anything conceptually like it) turned toxic... | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | techrights.org | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | Sheikh it Sheikh it | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | @Sheikh_al_Touar | Nov 24 12:10 |
| schestowitz | · | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | 1h | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | Mortality Rates Increase at the EPO and Christmases (or Holidays) During Corona Mean Fewer Days Off #NewNormal #Corona #employees #patents #Europe | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | Mortality Rates Increase at the EPO and Christmases (or Holidays) During Corona Mean Fewer Days Off | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | There's still no sign (other than hand-waving and empty gestures/smiles) that the EPO's management wishes to right the wrongs and undo the damage done over the past decade or so; in some ways,... | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | techrights.org | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | Sheikh it Sheikh it | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | @Sheikh_al_Touar | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | · | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | 1h | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | Newly Abnormal: A Crackdown on EPO Staff and Labour Rights in ‘Survey’ Clothing (Willis Towers Watson) #NewNormal #survey #staffsurvey #staff #employees #management #Leaders #Europe | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | Newly Abnormal: A Crackdown on EPO Staff and Labour Rights in 'Survey' Clothing (Willis Towers... | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | In a very characteristic fashion, with zero consultation/input from staff (or staff representatives/union leaders) EPO President António Campinos proceeds to implementing illegal ‘reforms’, assuring... | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | techrights.org | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | Dr. Roy Schestowitz (罗伊) | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | @schestowitz | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | · | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | 1h | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | Re | Nov 24 12:11 |
| schestowitz | " | Nov 24 12:11 |
| *rianne_ has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!) | Nov 24 17:12 | |
| *rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-173-112.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell | Nov 24 17:12 | |
| *rianne__ (~rianne@host81-154-173-112.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell | Nov 24 18:42 | |
| *rianne__ has quit (Client Quit) | Nov 24 18:42 | |
| *rianne_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) | Nov 24 18:42 | |
| *rianne__ (~rianne@host81-154-173-112.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell | Nov 24 18:42 | |
| schestowitz | http://patentblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/11/24/the-epos-ride-from-patentamt-to-oktroybureau/#comments | Nov 24 23:06 |
| -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-patentblog.kluweriplaw.com | The EPO's Ride from Patentamt to Oktroybureau - Kluwer Patent Blog | Nov 24 23:06 | |
| schestowitz | " | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | For years, professional representatives were told by the Boards of Appeal that Articles 113 and 116 EPC did not provide any absolute right to VICO oral proceedings. So what has changed? And where is the legal basis for what is undoubtedly a novel interpretation of the EPC, namely that Articles 113 and 116 EPC now will not provide any absolute right to in-person oral proceedings? | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | As with the Decisions of the EPO President in connection with VICOs for examination and opposition oral proceedings, this is nothing other than law-making by executive decree. The fact that the AC is involved in passing any new articles of the RPBA does not help either. This is because they are an ADMINISTRATIVE Council, not a legislative body … though, based upon the decision in G 3/19, one could be forgiven for feeling that the | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | line between the two has been somewhat blurred, if not entirely destroyed. | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | And to which judicial instance can you complain if you believe that a decision of the Boards of Appeal to conduct VICO oral proceedings infringes your right to a fair trial (according to Article 6 ECHR)? To my knowledge, unless there is a change to the statutory definitions of the grounds for submitting petitions for review, the Enlarged Board is almost certain to dismiss any such complaints as inadmissible … which strikes me as | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | being contrary to the principles of justice as enshrined in the ECHR. | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | Reply | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | Looking forward to the beach and the daiquiris | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | November 24, 2020 at 7:04 pm | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | While I’m also somewhat miffed about the manner and language of the President’s announcement (“access to justice”…hah), I must also say that this is an inevitable development, which should be seized by the patent profession as an opportunity rather than a hassle. | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | Having numerous friends in both towns, I enjoy trips to Munich and The Hague as much as anybody else, but it’s undeniable that all that travel to attend oral proceedings comes at a cost, first of all to the client, but also to the climate and to our personal lives and families. It also gives an unfair advantage to the parties and representatives located close to the two cities, to the detriment of those living elsewhere, in | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | particular in less-developed regions of Europe. | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | Moreover, while videoconferencing has its limits, properly used it could also open new opportunities to present a case even more clearly and persuasively than in person, using e.g. audiovisual tools, computer animations, etc. It will require learning and adaptation, but any good professional should be ready to learn and adapt to new circumstances. | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | Anyway, I look forward to be able to attend oral proceedings in the future from any of the sunniest islands belonging to EPO member states… | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | Reply | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | Camparinos | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | November 24, 2020 at 8:09 pm | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | How many patents are there over videoconferencing? | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | Even the EPO can’t tell if it is a legal solution that respects all the patents they granted themselves. | Nov 24 23:06 |
| schestowitz | " | Nov 24 23:06 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.6 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!