THE Unitary Patent lobby has been a rather embarrassing exercise, highly corrosive to the reputation of the EU and the European Patent Office (EPO). With UPC in the middle, for instance, there was nepotism and cross pollination between the EPO and EUIPO, an EU agency. It even looks like outright corruption.
"With UPC in the middle, for instance, there was nepotism and cross pollination between the EPO and EUIPO, an EU agency. It even looks like outright corruption."The news sites that focus on patents, copyrights and trademarks have more lately been speaking of a mistaken trademark grant by EUIPO. That's still in the news (belatedly revoked, harming McDonalds) and IP Watch speaks of "Sudden Vacancies At Some International Agencies, Industry Sees New Top Officials, Lawyers Engage In Firm-Hopping" (Catherine Saez says that "[t]he European Patent Office got two new vice-chairs," but neglects to point out the glaring problem).
If that's not bad enough, a day or two after that Bristows nonsense about UPC they're now verging on legal necrophilia. Responding to the article and its promotion in Twitter, one EPO watcher then wrote [1, 2]:
Here it is, your expected spin from Team UPC, looking to profit from more litigation...! It did not take long, did it? UPC dressed up? Uhmm no, it's still naked! #patents #EuropeanUnion
Meme published by http://Techrights.org ! Well done Techrights, since it perfectly illustrates the behaviour of Team UPC. A fantasy world based on their own agendas'. Lies, Lies and more Lies
"The UPC is basically a dead project. Even its biggest proponents (paid for it!) have given up. But not Bristows. These people have always lied the most. They wish to drown with this Titanic."Bristows' liars say that the FCC decision is "expected to happen quite soon." Citation needed, however none was provided. Team UPC's propaganda knows no bounds. They lie every week. They're even censoring comments that refute them, e.g. in IP Kat and the above blog ("Kluwer Patent blogger" now turns out to be "Alan Johnson, Bristows"). Well, no comments have appeared (by now; for almost 1.5 days). It starts as follows: "In answering this question we must look at two major factors. The first is the decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgeright – BVerfG) on the constitutional challenge by Dr Stjerna to the legislation necessary to allow German ratification of the UPC. The second is Brexit. Both are expected to happen quite soon."
Really? based on what? The final words of the article say this: "Hopefully even if we do not see the start of the UPC in 2019, we shall at least know by then whether next year will actually see the UPC, or whether this is a case of being all dressed up with no place to go."
They perpetuate that same old lie that the only remaining question is whether UPC can "start [...] in 2019" (it won't because it's dead, irrespective of timing). That's just a malicious lobbying/influencing tactic from the litigation 'industry' and speaking of which, REGIMBEAU's Cécile Puech, Frédérique Durieux, Soizic Guindeul and Aurélia Vavasseur have just commented on PPH (Patent Prosecution Highway), which is somewhat of a mockery of the patent system because it eliminates neutrality to aid bullies and trolls. They use terms like "simplify the task" -- similar to what one might expect from UPC litigation against a lot of companies in a lot of countries, including companies that only operate in a single country outside the court's jurisdiction.
The UPC is basically a dead project. Even its biggest proponents (paid for it!) have given up. But not Bristows. These people have always lied the most. They wish to drown with this Titanic. ⬆