More evidence, ironically from the UPC's biggest boosters, starts to surface, unveiling the truth or the ugly face of the EPO's 'baby', the UPC (the EPO spends a lot of money promoting this). There is a very dark side to the UPC in Germany, where patent lawyers even interfere with the legal system in an effort to wheel in the UPC Trojan horse [1, 2]. This is a coup d'état which European citizens are unaware of.
“11K for a declaration of non-infringement seems a bit prohibitive. Hardly encouraging/enabling a 'clear-the-way' attitude.”
--AnonymousCommenting on this new article from UPC booster Annsley Merelle Ward (also IP Kat, not just pro-UPC propaganda sites), one person says "11K for a declaration of non-infringement seems a bit prohibitive. Hardly encouraging/enabling a 'clear-the-way' attitude. Good for patentees when infringers are small fry."
The UPC, as it stands at the moment, has one major barrier. It's not countries that won't sign it (Spain, UK in case of Brexit etc.) but an actual democratic debate (the UPC is antidemocratic). Right now this whole process is taking place behind closed doors. It's like some kind of secret trade deal. Courts are being set up in London before there is even a British referendum, in order to make the exit barrier (exiting UPC) incredibly high.
“UPC action to revoke a patent will cost 20.000 EUR. Infringement actions at least 11.000 EUR. Lawyers not included!”
--Kristof NeefsThe UPC is -- by most indications (in spite of the international secrecy) -- indeed what we warned about all along. It would be an SME killer if it ever became a reality. As another person (Kristof Neefs, who says he is an IP, media and technology lawyer) put it: "UPC action to revoke a patent will cost 20.000 EUR. Infringement actions at least 11.000 EUR. Lawyers not included!"
Why would you need to revoke a patent? See the second paragraph above. The Battistelli-led EPO is a joke when it comes to examination (often if not increasingly rushed) and Battistelli is totally clueless about it, or maybe just in denial, i.e. willfully ignorant.
Managing Intellectual Property (MIP), a proponent of the UPC (like most patent lawyers out there), pretends that the UPC is already here (but it's not inevitable).
What needs to be done right now is dissemination of information about the UPC, which the European public (more than 95% of it) knows nothing about. Currently, the UPC is being promoted by the very same people who would benefit from it, whilst everybody else has no voice. It would be good news for patent parasites and patent lawyers (look who's excited about it) and we know at whose expense. Everybody would be harmed. Recall our recent article titled "UPC: To Understand Who Would Benefit From It Just Look at Who’s Promoting It (Like TPP)".
"This is like Koch Industries celebrating passage of ISDS."CIPA too is promoting the UPC right now. Remember what CIPA stands for. It's just a big bunch of patent lawyers lobbying for their interests at the very heart of Europe, trying to tax everyone while nobody (whom they tax) is paying attention. As CIPA put it: "The #UPC Preparatory Committee confirms there will be no opt-out fee. Big vote of confidence in the new system!" The UPC boosters (like Jane Lambert in this case) only care about EU membership because of patents!
This is like Koch Industries celebrating passage of ISDS. Anything like ISDS would give such a malicious corporation the power to pollute without government interference (because interference might harm Koch Industries' shareholders). We need to stop these people before it's too late. The UPC is a huge danger to Europe, which is an SME-based economy. ⬆