Very Large EPO Applicants Now Threaten a Boycott of the EPO (the EPO Management is Trying to Bribe Them to Change Their Plans/Minds While Hiding It From Staff)
YESTERDAY we showed that the EPO is bribing critics again [1, 2, 3] and there are serious ramifications not just to many parties but the very integrity if not legitimacy of this system. If corruption prevails to this extent, it will have severe international effect. Just how much corruption can be sustained before public condemnation grows loud enough?
Just as a reminder - for it's factual and backed by very extensive evidence - Benoît Battistelli and now António Campinos (nepotism) misuse the EPO's power and money to cover up their crimes, as usual, and in the process they grant many illegal European software patents - in effect seeding chaos for the European software industry and software users, i.e. everybody.
Why would the public stay idle and let this go on? These people cause billions of euros in damages to the European economy. They're not only a net negative (financially); they normalise crime.
Today we present a letter sent by EPO staff representatives at the end of last month. The Central Staff Committee (CSC) told staff that the EPO breaking the rules is leading to a breaking point and the EPO's plan is "now under severe attack" because of imminent boycotts.
What they refer to as "AI" is just a cover for algorithms - as over the past few years companies disguised the same old stuff as supposedly "innovative" 'hey hi' (AI), even when there's no Machine Learning in it.
Here's what the CSC wrote:
Call for an EPO reaction to the Süddeutsche Zeitung article "China hängt Europa bei KI ab" of 12 August 2024
Dear Colleagues,
The Süddeutsche Zeitung of 12 August 2024 contains a detailed article highlighting the fact that companies from Asia and the USA are filing many more patent applications in the field of artificial intelligence than European companies.
What is special about the article in the Süddeutsche Zeitung is that several patent attorneys are quoted and that the European Patent Office is heavily criticised: the EPO wants to be fast and efficient, but it is much more important to have valid and internationally enforceable patents, especially in the field of AI and digital simulation.
The intention of Mr Campinos to continue simplification of processes and procedures and to maintain timeliness in order to bring certainty to the market is now under severe attack. Whereas the EPO published 64.613 granted patents in 2014, last year the number of published patents already reached 104.609. At the end of 2014 the patent granting procedure was staffed by 4.221 examiners, whereas at the end of 2023, the staff count was down at 3.987 examiners.
The news that, as a result, one of the largest applicants for European patents, namely Siemens AG, is considering turning away from the EPO should be of great concern. However, the Central Staff Committee is stunned that since 12 August 2024, the top management of the EPO has not issued even a basic internal statement on the allegations raised. As the criticism could harm the EPO’s reputation, it would have been essential to address it promptly to maintain public trust.
For the past decade, the Central Staff Committee has consistently pointed out that the combination of increasing production pressure and the New Career System would lead to quality issues. Despite these warnings, top management has dismissed such concerns.
In this open letter, the Central Staff Committee calls for a reaction from the President.
Sincerely yours,
The Central Staff Committee - CSC
This refers to the following open letter dated 29/08/2024:
European Patent Office
80298 Munich
GermanyCentral Staff Committee
Comité central du personnel
Zentraler PersonalausschusscentralSTCOM@epo.org
Reference: sc24051cl
Date: 29/08/2024
European Patent Office | 80298 MUNICH | GERMANY
To: Mr António Campinos (President of the EPO)
By email:
To: president@epo.orgOPEN LETTER
Article “China hängt Europa bei KI ab” in the Süddeutsche Zeitung of 12 August 2024
Dear Mr Campinos,
The Süddeutsche Zeitung of 12 August 2024 contains a detailed article highlighting the fact that companies from Asia and the USA are filing many more patent applications in the field of artificial intelligence than European companies. The article is based, in part, on statistics recently published by WIPO in its Patent Landscape Report on Generative Artificial Intelligence. The report shows for example the number of published GenAI patent families between 2014 and 2023 for the top applicants. In fact, Siemens is the first European company to appear here, in the 18th position, behind one Korean, two Japanese, four US, and ten Chinese companies.
The topic of global investment in AI and the EU’s position in this regard is regularly covered in the press, lately again after a special report by the European Court of Auditors on the EU Artificial intelligence ambition. What is special about the article in the Süddeutsche Zeitung is that several patent attorneys are quoted and that the European Patent Office is heavily criticised: the EPO wants to be fast and efficient, but it is much more important to have valid and internationally enforceable patents, especially in the field of AI and digital simulation.
Your Strategic Plan 2028 does indeed address such issues and describes that the use of computer-implemented inventions and AI in fields that were purely mechanical or chemical presents challenges in both searching and examining across technologies. However, your intention to continue simplification of processes and procedures and to maintain timeliness in order to bring certainty to the market is now under severe attack.
Whereas the EPO published 64.613 granted patents in 2014, last year the number of published patents already reached 104.609. At the end of 2014 the patent granting procedure was staffed by 4.221 examiners, whereas at the end of 2023, the staff count was down at 3.987 examiners. The statement of the article in the Süddeutsche Zeitung, that the EPO spends 50 percent less time on a patent application, is therefore comprehensible based on the above figures from the annual and social reports for 2014 (CA/44/15, CA/55/15) and 2023 (CA/40/24, CA/40/24 Add. 2).
The news that, as a result, one of the largest applicants for European patents is considering turning away from the EPO should be of great concern. It is surprising that the article in the Süddeutsche Zeitung contains no official statement from the EPO. It would be even more surprising if the author of the article had not worked according to professional journalistic standards to ask the EPO for a comment. However, the Central Staff Committee is stunned that since 12 August 2024, the top management of the EPO has not issued even a basic internal statement on the allegations raised. As the criticism could harm the EPO’s reputation, it would have been essential to address it promptly to maintain public trust.
For the past decade, the Central Staff Committee has consistently pointed out that the combination of increasing production pressure and the New Career System would lead to quality issues. Despite these warnings, top management has dismissed such concerns. Political honesty should oblige you to publicly reassess your decisions. Staff is facing the criticism for consequences of your strategic plan and you have gone quiet.
Sincerely yours
Derek Kelly
Chairman of the Central Staff Committee
An automated English translation of the Süddeutsche Zeitung article was also provided. It's very deficient, but this is all we have:
China outperforms Europe in Kl
Companies from Asia and the USA apply for many more patents on future technology than European companies. Companies like Siemens are trying to counteract this.
From Thomas Fromm
There are only a few metres between the present and the past; it is only a few steps from the office of the top patent manager to the warehouse in Munich- Perlach, which is called the "Historical Depot" here at Siemens. Which is a relatively accurate description: the inventions from more than 175 years of Siemens are stored here, from the old pointer telegraph from 1847 to a 100- year-old oven. A place that shows how a company like this has changed over the decades. And also the world around it.
You can start this little journey through time in the present with Beat Weibel, the head of patents at Siemens. He knows how complicated it is today to apply for patents for software and artificial intelligence. 300 people work in his department, worldwide. Weibel regularly discusses the latest inventions that need to be protected with his colleagues. What needs to be registered as a patent, what is important right now and why?
Weibel says that Chinese, Korean and American companies lead the statistics for European patent applications, well ahead of the Europeans. He knows all the statistics and says: "Huawei is at the top of the European Patent Office's list, followed by Samsung. Siemens is in sixth place." "There are simply far more patent applications from China," says the manager, adding that Huawei alone makes around 5,000 applications per year. "Samsung from South Korea has 4800 patent applications. We recently had 1900."
Whoever holds the patents on a technology also decides what happens to it
That is not a small number, but there is a study by the Geneva-based World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) that lists how many patents international companies hold in the field of generative artificial intelligence.
Siemens is the first European company to follow the frontrunners here - albeit from 18th place. Before that: Chinese companies such as Alibaba, Tencent and Baidu and US companies such as IBM and Google. Between 2014 and 2023, more than 38,000 patents on generative computing were filed in China, and 708 in Germany. Especially when it comes to patents on artificial intelligence, says Weibel, you always have the problem of enforcing your rights. In addition, "the patent policy in Europe is not exactly innovation-friendly", which could "still backfire on us".
It's a constant race, because whoever is there first, faster and, above all, better and has this patented is at an advantage in international competition. "Whoever has the patents on the technology ultimately also has the power over what happens to it," says patent attorney Jens Koch from the Munich law firm Grunecker. "When you see that China applies for more patents in certain areas in Germany than German applicants themselves, then that should give us pause for thought," he says. Europe is "lagging behind, especially in key technologies".
From the invisible key technologies, artificial intelligence and software of today, back to the beginning, which is exhibited south of Munich.
A heavy, yellow metal door says that unauthorised persons are not allowed in here. But who would think that the global corporation Siemens has packed a large hall full of old inventions right here? With an electric car from the early days of car manufacturing, original lights from the 1972 Munich Olympic Stadium, irons and radios from the 1920s. A kind of "best of Siemens" from more than 175 years.
Many of these exhibits were patented in their day because they were revolutionary innovations. The electric pointer telegraph, for example, an early means of communication that company founder Werner von Siemens had assembled in the first few months of 1847, a brass construction on precious wood. On 1 May, the inventor submitted his project for the granting of a Prussian patent. It was finally granted in October of the same year under file number IV 15239. The patent was registered in England in April 1850 under the number 13062.
You had to register something like that back then, even if there was no Google, Alibaba or Apple. A time when intelligence was everything but artificial. Here in Perlach, they are still pretty concrete, the patented technologies of their time. New software and AI algorithms are different to a pointer telegraph or a 100- year-old oven.
Roland Busch, the Siemens CEO who is currently transforming his company from an industrial to a software group, likes to talk about the "Internet of Things" (IOT) when he wants to explain what the company is doing today, namely linking the real world with the digital world. This makes it all the more interesting to see this very special LOT in Perlach: the warehouse of things, if you like.
Last year alone, Siemens registered 2900 patents, bringing the Group's total number of patents to 46500. 3700 of these are in the field of artificial intelligence. However, the most recent patents include fuse boxes that are switched electronically - a kind of digitalisation of the old fuse box in the basement. And window panes for the ICE, which are designed to allow mobile phone waves to pass through better on the train and give passengers better reception on mobile phones and computers. In other words, things that a layman can still somehow understand.
Compared to the past, it now takes a third longer to prepare a patent application at Siemens, says Weibel. This is due to the fact that "technologies and software products have become more complex". At the same time, however, the European Patent Office (EPO) in Munich now spends 50 per cent less time "searching and examining an application", he says. "The EPO wants to be fast and efficient." However, it is much more important to have "valid and internationally enforceable patents", especially in the field of AI and digital simulation. Siemens will therefore "align itself more closely with the German Patent Office" in future. So it's not enough just to apply for patents. You also have to decide which patent office you want to go to.
Siemens' motto: take Chinese companies "very seriously"
Competition is getting tougher, especially with China. According to Grünecker lawyer Sebastian Flach, there is "an increasing expansion strategy" in terms of patents. The companies there are currently pushing "massively into the German market". For key technologies such as semiconductors, computers and AI, there has recently been "an increase in Chinese patent applications of 14 to 15 per cent per year".
Companies apply for patents to protect their innovations, even against the competition. Sometimes, however, it's not just about their washing machines or computer programmes, sometimes the entire company is copied. Take this alleged Siemens lift subsidiary, for example. At first glance, things look pretty good. On the siemenslift.com homepage, the characteristic Siemens lettering appears against a blue background. The whole thing is deceptively genuine and well done, and someone has also put some thought into the brief company description ("At the forefront of innovation and technology for over 170 years", "Founded by Werner von Siemens in 1847"). But then came the crucial mistake: In the self-portrayal, the creators write of a Siemens as a "diversified conglomerate", a company that is active in the fields of energy, medical technology, transport and industrial automation. Unfortunately, Siemens Energy and Siemens Healthineers (medical technology) have not been part of Siemens for years. Siemens in Munich says: Yes, the website is known.
This is a company from Bangladesh, against which legal action is already being taken. Incidentally, the company lists Beijing, Istanbul, Fürth and Kurt-Blum- Platz 8 in Hanau as its "international locations" (so much Germany is a must for a supposedly German company). Unfortunately just a little off the mark: There is a Kurt-Blaum-Platz in Hanau - not Blum.
There are Chinese companies "that use the names of other companies like Siemens", says Weibel. A washing machine manufacturer "that deceptively called itself Siemens" was successfully sued for 100 million renminbi in damages, more than twelve million euros. You have to take action against copycats at an early stage, he says. "When these companies get bigger", it will "only get more difficult". The motto is: take Chinese companies "very seriously" and "be prepared".
Being armed against Chinese competitors - an issue that was probably not so important when Werner von Siemens patented his first pointer telegraph!
As the EPO's management did not respond to this piece, as noted by the CSC, we can assume that this is true. The EPO may be soon be shunned by large applicants. Trying to bribe them would be a scandal on top of an existing scandal. █