Summary: Response to smears and various whispering campaigns whose sole purpose is to deplete the support base for particular causes and people; these sorts of things have gotten out of control in recent years

MOMENTS ago we wrote about photo ops (the above photo is real by the way, only the text was added) and their longterm ramifications, such as guilt by association. We don't think that the terrible management of the EPO is some kind of conspiracy to undermine the European Patent Office (EPO). This awful leadership is actually beneficial to patent trolls with low-quality patents such as software patents (which both Campinos and Battistelli support).

It's frustrating to see just how self-harming the Administrative Council has been, perhaps in expectation of funds, such as massive amounts of 'cooperation' money. Why else would they be harming Europe (unless there was personal gain)? Why would they allow the injustices to persist? Why would they fail to acknowledge the collapse in patent quality and the measurable brain drain?

"It's frustrating to see just how self-harming the Administrative Council has been, perhaps in expectation of funds, such as massive amounts of 'cooperation' money."Over the years I've learned the patterns of smears against people who expose corruption. I used to speak with Julian Assange before he was arrested on behalf of the United States, which he 'embarrassed'. Then, several years ago (it happened only once), I saw some anonymous fool trying to insinuate I was connected with "Daesh" or Russia. This is how nonsensical rumours start and grow feet. People with connections to Hillary Clinton manufactured lies about Assange being a pedophile -- a subject rebutted here and elsewhere. A couple of years ago I saw Team UPC spreading false rumours about the UPC complainant (that someone must be secretly funding him). They didn't say anything publicly; they had defamed him through the grapevine, so to speak (a malicious whispering campaign). This is pretty serious. They try to belittle people who raise or simply highlight serious and legitimate constitutional violations.

"My goal was always to fix the EPO, not to ruin it."Throughout the years I've always supported the EPO and gave coverage to their staff protests (even going back more than a decade). I myself could probbaly be a patent examiner. My goal was always to fix the EPO, not to ruin it. If one wanted to crash the EPO, then one would put an incompetent, corrupt politician in charge.

I strongly object to the idea that those merely talking about the corruption at the EPO try to make it less stable; the target is always the irresponsible management, whom even examiners loathe. This is why they nearly went on strike -- a strike ballot for later this month (it was likely just postponed).

My disclosures have always been abundantly apparent (in my personal Web site, which goes 18 years back). I'm not an 'agent' or a 'shill' or anything like that. In fact, I rarely associate with anything or anybody. I know the risk of abundant affiliations. I'm also extremely careful who I respond to online.

"My disclosures have always been abundantly apparent (in my personal Web site, which goes 18 years back)."Russian TV channels like RT and Sputnik invited me to interviews several times; not only did I decline, I didn't even respond to their invitations. Never.

If people want to question this site's motivations, instead of nitpicking style or typos, go for it. They won't get far. Later this year we'll probably publish our 26,000^th blog post and longtime readers know that we rarely need to issue corrections; we stick to just a handful of topics that we understand very well. Over the past half a decade one of those topics was the EPO. This and only this is why we 'obsess with' or focus on it. Other sites barely cover it. It's a blind spot. ⬆