THE European Patent Office (EPO) is once again openly associating with Watchtroll, a site that attacks judges (even Federal Circuit judges who merely apply the law, notably 35 U.S.C. €§ 101), much like Battistelli did (António Campinos hasn't undone that and he's still pressuring judges in defiance of the EPC).
"How does the EPO hope to attract any talent?"This does not shock us anymore. Seeing the EPO glorifying patent extremists after Campinos had notorious patent trolls on EPO panels is merely more of the same or "business as usual".
Why does the EPO make it so obvious that it disregards science and actively oppresses innovation for the sake of litigation? How does the EPO hope to attract any talent? If the EPO was a law/litigation firm, that might be fine. But if it is trying to attract scientists to work an examiners, whose sort of appeal does it have? Judges aren't the enemy; they make money and keep their positions by ruling accurately (low rate of overturned decisions), not granting as many patents as possible. But if judges can be removed by companies and by dictators (or receive bribes from them), then that's another kind of problem. ⬆
"Their documents display a clear intent to monopolize, to prevent any competition from springing up. And they have used a variety of restrictive practices to prevent that kind of competition."
--Judge Robert Bork, former US Supreme Court nominee (on Microsoft)
--Judge Robert Bork