THE notorious Guidelines for Examination (or similar wordings, something to that effect) must always adhere to the EPC. In practice, however, this hasn't been happening for years and when the issue is referred to the Boards of Appeal they don't even have the autonomy required to sternly state so. It seems likely that later this year the question about simulations on a computer being patented (in effect software patents) won't be answered reliably because the Office is shamelessly meddling in the case (referral).
"As one can expect, the author does not understand software (trying to debate Watchtroll's founder on the topic proved to be laughable, even beyond laughable, and he ended up running away after losing the technical argument)."The so-called 'consultation' about the guidelines was mentioned here in a video the other day. The Office arrogantly assumes that only people who profit from patents count; the 90% (or more) of the population that lacks patents doesn't seem to matter. This is wrong on many levels, including the fact that economic wellbeing and health are profoundly affected (e.g. patents on vaccines).
A few hours ago Andrea Perronace over at Watchtroll was promoting illegal European software patents using EPO corruption (which these people deny; they're happy to piggyback any form of abuse for profit). The title: "What to Know About the European Patent Office 2021 Guidelines for Examination: Part I – CII and Procedural Changes"
Screenshot only, no link (at the top).
As one can expect, the author does not understand software (trying to debate Watchtroll's founder on the topic proved to be laughable, even beyond laughable, and he ended up running away after losing the technical argument).
It's like a religion (litigation) to these people. They don't care what actual coders/developers want or need. They just really don't care. As an aside, Watchtroll has long been a carrier of EPO propaganda and a media partner (they reciprocate links and favours) of Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos, who cannot even do an exam, organise an exam, does not understand software, yet outsources everything to it (American firms), even when it's unlawful and objectively unsuitable.
The blunder IP Kat is willing to talk about does not concern the corruption, the union-busting, abuses against the EPC etc. They focus on some accidents. They also won't mention the fact that the Boards lack independence (instead lying about them, incorrectly stating that Haar was ruled to be part of Munich). There's a new comment there which says something about the standards of "fair trial" in today's EPO. "If we take, as an example, the case of a criminal trial: imagine you sit, wrongly accused of course, in jail. You are sure the judge will judge you fairly. You are lead to a VC room with a few screens. There is no judge - only the video stream of a judge," said this new comment (hours ago).
It's hardly surprising that moreover the EPO's corruption begets massive technical blunders. "And I didn't get the English until 30 min in, AFTER I got the added time, it disappeared again. I complained, but I got kicked out of the system at 11 am," one person said some hours ago. Soon to be followed by "it [sic] shame because the events yesterday affected my performance today. I was so anxious about the system that it did take away my concentration and focus for today. I'm not making excuses but the reality is I massively panicked yesterday, couldn't settle (sleep) last night and it has affected my performance today for Paper A. A system that is flawed affect your confidence, focus and trust in it.
"I cannot help but this has really affected me so far this week. I hope to recover a bit for the rest of the exams."
So the EPO now depresses people outside the EPO the way it does its own workers. Remember that they hired several law firms to bully yours truly. This EPO "Mafia" needs to be stopped. It harms Europe's reputation.
Another new comment says: "The EPO really needed to take into account the tremendous amount of time and effort candidates have put into complying with all the admin burden placed on them leading up to the exam. There was so much changes/chopping/testing that no one really got a decent run of revision. Everyone I knew were merely trying to keep up with update after update. Then the disaster happened on Tuesday which ultimately has a knock on effect for the rest of the week."
Maybe one day we'll hear about EPO stakeholders committing suicide, not just EPO insiders. There are many more comments to that effect, but comments that bring up EPO corruption are being banned. IP Kat has been doing this for years and we don't suppose AstraZeneca wishes to rock the EPO boat by bringing up criminal aspects. AstraZeneca relies on the EPO for monopoly protection and I've long known scholars whom AstraZeneca bribed for self-serving purposes, just as the EPO does. ⬆