LAST night at around midnight (i.e. the usual) we resumed the 40-part series after we had already published 30 parts (mostly in October). Tonight at around midnight we'll publish Part 32 regarding Belgium.

"Large, monopolistic, international/multinational conglomerates that leverage patents in bulk and cross-license do not have this issue because rarely do their patents get challenged (it does not scale economically)."The series isn't limited to just one awful decision or one outlier. It's certainly not a 'fluke'; it is part of a long-running pattern wherein governance at the EPO assumes the Office President is a person of integrity acting out of goodwill; this hasn't been the case for at least a decade and those entrusted to govern the institution willingly participate in the abuse to the detriment of EPO staff and of Europe in general. The video above contains very personal thoughts and views on the matter; the bottom line is, the mis-governance or the maladministration at the EPO harms everyone, but delegates who are often just heads of national patent offices simply don't care, or they cannot coordinate any effective resistance. Maybe they need something like a union -- like SUEPO -- for national delegations. It's well overdue because the institution will otherwise drive straight into a wall. As we shall show in Daily Links later this weekend, nowadays a lot of patents -- including European Patents -- perish in courts. In other words, they should never have been granted in the first place. Large, monopolistic, international/multinational conglomerates that leverage patents in bulk and cross-license do not have this issue because rarely do their patents get challenged (it does not scale economically). ⬆