Bonum Certa Men Certa

An Office of Patent Extremists

Maximum volume of patents so that signal gets lost in the noise

Maximum volume



Summary: With maximal quantity of patents the litigation 'industry' hopes to start as many legal battles (or 'assertions') as possible, in effect taxing Europe rather than spurring innovation in it

LAST year every weekend was spent writing a great deal about 35 U.S.C. €§ 101/Alice (court cases in particular) and USPTO affairs. This year, seeing that EPO President António Campinos promotes software patents in Europe, we must turn almost all our attention to Europe. Patent maximalism is ruining the continent. Not only patents on mathematics are a symptom; there are also patents on life and nature. It's just insane. Last night Hanns-Juergen Grosse, partner with D Young & Co, had this post republished by a site of patent maximalists from the US, citing the EPC in relation to double patenting. To quote the gist of it (we covered this subject before):



The approach of the European Patent Office (EPO) to prohibition of double patenting is well established and may, at a first glance, also seem well founded.

Broadly speaking, the prohibition of double patenting is meant to mean that two patents cannot be granted to the same applicant for one invention (in the same jurisdiction). At a closer look, there is a plurality of facets, layers and aspects, producing an exhilarating spectrum of double patenting.

[...]

After the Examining Division decided to refuse European patent application EP 10 718 590.2 in accordance with the applicable Guidelines for Examination at the EPO (Guidelines), G IV, 5.4 under Art. 97(2) EPC in conjunction with Art. 125 EPC, allowing subordinate application of principles of procedural law generally recognised in the contracting states of the EPC, the applicant appealed the decision and auxiliary requested, as occasionally done, that the responsible Board of Appeal (BoA) refers a pivotal question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBoA).

The BoA did not, as usually done, discard the idea of referring the question to the EBoA, but also helped to develop the applicant's question into a two-tier question, and decided at the end of oral proceedings held on 07 February 2019 in appeal case T 318/14 to refer a detailed set of questions to the EBoA.

[...]

For answers to the questions raised in T 318 /14, the EBoA may have to probe the real intentions of the legislators by going back to the archives and interpreting the Traveaux Préparatoires, the draft documents and minutes produced when the EPC was conceived back in the early 1970s.


Well, the EPC is already violated routinely, including against the Boards themselves.

We worry that the EPO nowadays measures everything in terms such as quantity of patents, never quality. It's distracting from it all by conflating quantity with quality -- a contradictory thing to be doing as one cancels the other (assuming a steady set of resources). We also know, based on leaks, that the EPO prioritises large businesses. It's all about size and quantity. Of course IAM has done a puff piece for the EUIPO and the EPO, based on their joint 'study' (which they sponsored to glorify themselves and portray themselves as small businesses' friends).

"The bottom line is, today's EPO and the likes who lobby the Office don't care about science, they just want lots of litigation, which necessitates and lot of patents, including low-quality (and invalid) ones."Again on Sunday this was brought up by IAM, summarised with: "A report by the EUIPO and EPO shows that SMEs which file for patents, trademarks and other IP rights are more likely to enjoy high growth and increasing incomes."

The EPO mentions "SMEs" several times a week; it's hoping to distract from its betrayal of SMEs. There's systematic discrimination against them. It's a serious credibility issue in a continent with so many SMEs. Does the EPO work for Huawei or for European SMEs? Does it protect monopolists or innovation?

Either way, it certainly seems like the EPO became a lost cause when the litigation 'industry' took it as hostage, putting in charge nontechnical people who rarely speak to or meet with scientists. It's like another Watchtroll, a site of patent extremists that lobbies the US and to a lesser extent Europe as well (and today's EPO gleefully associates with it!). During the weekend (June 1st) Watchtroll published something titled "A Proposal for Reforming the Current UK Patent Law System Post-Brexit" by Oskar Luong, who "is a law student at Heidelberg University, Germany" (his own description). He claims to know that programmers absolutely need patents and lobbies for software patents in another country. Never mind if he never wrote any software. That doesn't seem to matter to him. He just lobbies for software patents here in the UK (and no, he's not a programmer!) and speaks of "Post-Brexit" (as if Brexit is a certainty; it isn't). Typical Watchtroll, amplifier of parasites vandalising industries for legal fees. “The UK legislator should reconsider its current position" he wrote, "especially vis-à-vis computer programs, which are of paramount importance in today’s business world.”

This logic is illogical. Many businesses use software, hence we need patents?

Many people also breathe air, so let's start patenting air and lawyers will tell us all how much we 'owe' them. Right?

The rest speaks of a “technical contribution” or a “technical effect” -- the usual nonsense that the EPO uses to bypass if not grossly violate the EPC. The EPO has been trying to do the same thing (to spread software patents everywhere in the world) while British courts keep telling it off.

The bottom line is, today's EPO and the likes who lobby the Office don't care about science, they just want lots of litigation, which necessitates and lot of patents, including low-quality (and invalid) ones.

Recent Techrights' Posts

Sounds Like IBM is Preparing for Mass Layoffs/Redundancies in Red Hat, Albeit in "PIP" (Performance Improvement Plan) or "Relocation" Clothing
This isn't the "old" IBM; they're applying pressure by confusion and humiliation
Gemini Links 17/04/2025: Role of Language and Back to Mutt for E-mail
Links for the day
Microsoft's Attack Dogs Have Failed. Now What?
It would be utterly foolish to assume that Microsoft has any intention of changing
All Your "Github Projects" Will be Gone One Day (Just Like Skype)
If you have code you wish to share and keep, then start learning how to do so on your own
Fedora Already Lost Its Soul Under IBM
Fedora used to be very strict compared to many other distros and it had attracted very bright volunteers
 
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Friday, April 18, 2025
IRC logs for Friday, April 18, 2025
Links 18/04/2025: "Fentanylware (TikTok) Exodus Continues", Chinese Weapons Allegedly in Russia Already
Links for the day
Gemini Links 18/04/2025: Price of Games and State of Tinylog
Links for the day
"Sayonara" (さよなら), Microsoft
Windows had fallen below iOS in some countries
Links 18/04/2025: Layoffs at Microsoft Infosys and Qt Becoming Increasingly Proprietary (Plus Slop)
Links for the day
Google News is Dying
treating MElon's algorithmic/biased site as a source of verified news
To Understand Who's Truly Controlling You Follow the Trail of Censorship (or Self-Censorship)
Do not let media steal and steer the narrative; CoCs are not about "social justice", they're about corporate domination
Microsoft is Still Attacking GNU/Linux and the Net
Microsoft bribed the government using money that did not even exist
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Thursday, April 17, 2025
IRC logs for Thursday, April 17, 2025
Gemini Links 18/04/2025: Pinephone Pro and Linux is too Easy
Links for the day
Links 17/04/2025: Calling Whistleblowers at Microsoft, Slop Doing More Harm Everywhere
Links for the day
Links 17/04/2025: Russian Bot Farms Infect TikTok (Which US Government and SCOTUS Decided to Block January 19), US Hardware Stocks Crash Due to Tariffs
Links for the day
Gemini Links 17/04/2025: Sticking to Free Software, Smolnet, and Counting the Reals
Links for the day
Open Source Initiative (OSI) Privacy Fiasco in Detail: In Conclusion and Enforcement Action Proceeds Against OSI at the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA)
There's too much to cover in one single part
When You Fail to Filter Your Clients You End Up SLAPPing Reporters on Behalf of Bad People From Microsoft in Another Continent
“American Psycho”
Links 17/04/2025: LayoffBot and Tesla Cheats Buyers
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, April 16, 2025
IRC logs for Wednesday, April 16, 2025