Summary: Nepotists in charge of major patent offices (not court systems) are just striving to grant as many patents as possible irrespective of rules, laws, caselaw and so on

AT the start of this year the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) angered a lot of people by pretending that he can just bypass the courts and bring software patents back. He cannot. Doing so would entail the granting of patents that would certainly perish in court (if tested there).

With such autocrats in positions of power (Iancu was a Donald Trump pick and his firm had worked for Trump; similarly, Europe has a patent chief chosen by a fellow Frenchman and old friend) we're bound to see obscene misuse of power. It needs to be investigated and reported. One might say that patent examination itself needs examining, especially because examiners are governed by rules drawn up by nontechnical people.

"One might say that patent examination itself needs examining, especially because examiners are governed by rules drawn up by nontechnical people."Consider the European Patent Office's (EPO) strategy document from António Campinos -- a document which turns out to include bits about software patents being promoted not only in Europe but also elsewhere. As Benjamin Henrion put it, "search for IP5. They say they will lobby other patent offices around the world to adopt swpats." (software patents)

"The paragraph "In the strategic areas of Computer Implemented Inventions (CII)"," he continued. That was about an hour ago, not too long after he had researched the EPO's newly-announced "finalists for the European Inventor Award 2019" (warning: epo.org link). We'll deal with this in our next post. ⬆