Bonum Certa Men Certa

The EPO Bubble — Part X — A Leaked E-mail Provides Some Clues...

Overview: [Teaser] The EPO's Deflating Patent Bubble and Pursuit of Illegal Software Patents (With Kangaroo Courts, UPC, and Bullied Examiners)

Series parts:

  1. The EPO Bubble — Part I — An “Unprecedented Surge”
  2. The EPO Bubble — Part II — Signs of a Deflating Bubble?
  3. The EPO Bubble — Part III — Dividing Up the Spoils...
  4. The EPO Bubble — Part IV — A Cashflow Problem Looming on the Horizon?
  5. The EPO Bubble — Part V — Propping Up the Bubble?


  6. The EPO Bubble — Part VI — From Humble Examiner to CO€³
  7. The EPO Bubble — Part VII — A Multifaceted Man of Letters
  8. The EPO Bubble — Part VIII — The “Algerian Skirmisher” Replaces the “British Grenadier”
  9. the Faustian pact with the EPOnian "deep state"
  10. YOU ARE HERE ☞ A Leaked E-mail Provides Some Clues...


EPO software patentge grant rate
Despite a significant surge from 2016 onwards, the grant rate for "IT methods for management" (G06Q) remains relatively low, currently hovering around the 10% mark. However, rumours on the EPO grapevine indicate that a recent "changing of the guard" at managerial level is likely to lead to dramatic changes on this front.



Summary: European software patents have been ushered in by Benoît Battistelli (grant rates soared from 2% to 10%) and leaked communications suggest that António Campinos intends to take this disturbing trend a lot further (whilst attempting to replace European patent courts with his 'UPC' kangaroo courts)

In this part we will discuss the contents of a leaked e-mail which reportedly emanates from a EPO directorate in the ICT sector. According to informed sources, the directorate in question is the one responsible for computer-implemented "business and administrative methods" (CPC class G06Q).



The E-mail provides some clues about the results that António’s "Algerian Skirmisher" is expected to deliver from his side of the Faustian pact with the EPOnian "deep state".

"...between 2015 and 2020 the G06Q grant rate rose from the ultra-low 2% mark to its current level around the 10% mark. Nevertheless, this figure remains far below the EPO’s overall grant rate of 69%."As noted previously, grant rates in the G06Q area remain relatively low despite a noticeable upward "surge" from 2015 onwards.

To be more precise, between 2015 and 2020 the G06Q grant rate rose from the ultra-low 2% mark to its current level around the 10% mark. Nevertheless, this figure remains far below the EPO’s overall grant rate of 69%.

However, in recent months there has been been a "changing of the guard" at managerial level in the directorate in question. Rumours on the EPO grapevine suggest that this is likely to be accompanied by a dramatic shift in granting practice.

During the recent EPO "reorganisation" which took effect on 1 April 2022, the previous director in charge of this area, Christian Platzer from Austria, was replaced by his compatriot Georg Weber.

Christian Platzer and Georg Weber
EPO director Christian Platzer (l.), formerly in charge of the G06Q area, and his successor Georg Weber (r.)



Weber is known to be a zealous advocate of "software patenting". His reputation in this regard gives rise to a suspicion that he has been entrusted with the task of pushing through a major change in examination practice in the G06Q area.

This suspicion is further fuelled by the contents of the leaked e-mail referred to above.

Weber for G06Q
A leaked e-mail suggests that plans are already afoot to increase the grant rate in the G06Q area.



According to reliable sources, the e-mail was not personally authored by Weber himself but is understood to reflect his views on how examiners under his authority should carry out their work.

An excerpt from the e-mail is reproduced below with some emphasis added to highlight passages that are considered to be of particular significance.

1. Search stage — An all-feature whole application search consideration should be taken, with all necessary classes considered - leading to 2. ESOP/WOISA with comparison point by point with prior art in PSA [problem-solution approach] with all features which imply, involve or affect a real world application or use given full consideration in differentiation. All these features then taken towards constructing an objective technical problem and a positive appreciation of how they technically solve that OTP.

[...]

3. For sufficiency (and clarity) it should be remembered that if there is a difference then it may well be that difference, however defined, which forms the inventive step. Care should be taken against unnecessarily limiting an applicant, if such a difference exists, to a narrowly construed version. 4. Where two options exist for how to analyse a claim (e.g. a priori consideration of what is technical/non-technical vs not doing so) then the former is considered to be 'circular' and would ‘never lead to allowable claims’. Accordingly the other option should be taken, to the benefit of the applicant. 5. The appropriate 'test' of the validity of approach is considered to be opposition, and appeaI-after-opposition. It should be remembered that the existence of appeals may be open to interpretation as a sign of low quality. 6. High levels of grant (99.6% in some cases) are not considered exceptional in the Office, and may even be a sign of high quality when user satisfaction is also high. 7. A change from a negative track to a positive one, even late in the substantive procedure, should be understood as a success in adherence to the high quality procedure above.


The content of the E-mail is formulated in arcane EPO-Speak and managerial jargon, so its significance may not be immediately apparent to the uninitiated.

"The content of the E-mail is formulated in arcane EPO-Speak and managerial jargon, so its significance may not be immediately apparent to the uninitiated."Nevertheless, according to insiders, this internal communication - reportedly directed at EPO examiners - can be understood as heralding a significant change of policy for patent examination practice in the G06Q area.

The most relevant points derivable from the e-mail can be summed up as follows:

â—¦ Examiners are advised that "[c]are should be taken against unnecessarily limiting an applicant" and that applications should be interpreted "to the benefit of the applicant".

â—¦ Examiners are discouraged from issuing refusals. The rather dubious rationale given here is that this could lead to appeals and "the existence of appeals may be open to interpretation as a sign of low quality". It is not explained who might advance such an interpretation and whether or not it might have any substance. It seems that the mere fact that someone might do so should be enough to deter examiners from refusing an application.

â—¦ Examiners are encouraged to regard "high levels of grant" as a desirable objective. A passing reference is made to 99.6% grant rates "which are not considered exceptional in the Office" but without any further details being provided as to the technical fields for which these grant rates apply. It is further asserted that such high levels of grant "may even be a sign of high quality when user satisfaction is also high".

â—¦ Examiners are also encouraged to view "change from a negative track to a positive one" as a "success". This means that wherever the examination procedure starts out with a negative opinion that points towards a refusal, if the examining division happens to change its mind later on in the procedure and decide to grant, then this will be considered as a "success" [by EPO management].

The underlying "takeaway" from all this is that - as far as EPO management is concerned - "refusals are bad" and "grants are good".

"The underlying "takeaway" from all this is that - as far as EPO management is concerned - "refusals are bad" and "grants are good"."In other words, the E-mail sends a clear signal to examiners that "high levels of grant" are "a consummation devoutly to be wished" – irrespective of the kind of subject-matter contained in the patent application.

There can be little doubt that examiners in the G06Q area are being gently "nudged" in the direction of less refusals and more grants.

G06Q: EPO operator
There can be little doubt that examiners in the G06Q area are being gently "nudged" in the direction of less refusals and more grants.



Of course, it goes without saying that if such "nudging" fails to produce the desired results, then more drastic France-Télécom-style measures might have to be adopted in due course…

In the next part we will take a look at the person entrusted with implementing the predicted shift in examination policy, namely Georg Weber, the EPO director who - according to inside sources - has recently taken over responsibility for the G06Q area.

Recent Techrights' Posts

Microsoft Bankruptcy
"Microsoft unit in Russia to file for bankruptcy, database shows"
Techrights Does Not Compete With LLM Slop, It Exposes the Bastards, Plagiarists and Scammers Who Do That
People like Scam Altman, still facing a lawsuit from his own sister for sexual abuse against her
 
Links 01/06/2025: Windows TCO, Openwashing, "It's FOSS" Still Promoting Microsoft
Links for the day
Gemini Links 01/06/2025: Simplification and Networks Everywhere
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Saturday, May 31, 2025
IRC logs for Saturday, May 31, 2025
Google Bribes EFF. EFF Promotes LLM Slop as 'Fair Use'. To GAFAM It's a Low-Cost Lobby Hedge.
So the bribes pay off ("slush fund") and the word spreads
Slopwatch: Fake Text and Images, Financial Bubbles, and Scams in "Intelligent" Clothing
Sometimes what they mean by "AI" is just cheap labour somewhere else, as we discussed in IRC a few hours ago
Why Microsoft is Collapsing (Similar to What's Happening at IBM), As Insiders See It
IBM seems like one heck of a mess
Reliable Computing Means Free (Libre) Computing
Sites that want to promote security ought to deal with the biggest issues
Links 31/05/2025: US Court Orders Sides With RFE/RL, War Updates From Ukraine
Links for the day
Gemini Links 31/05/2025: ARM Server and power_supply Subsystem
Links for the day
Links 31/05/2025: Slop Stigmatised as Disinformation, Catalyst/Driver of "Death of Communication"
Links for the day
Common Sense 101: Do Not Write Blog Posts Saying You Want to Murder Colleagues (or Yourself)
Only crazy people would think stabbings are a joke
Links 31/05/2025: Microsoft-Connected Builder.ai is a Fraud and US is Purging Students Based on Race/Nationality
Links for the day
Gemini Links 30/05/2025: Limmat, Doomscrollers, and Arguments Parsing
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Friday, May 30, 2025
IRC logs for Friday, May 30, 2025
The "AI" (Slop) Bubble Already Popped, But It's Not an Overnight Collapse
where Microsoft put its money
No More Steven Astorino at IBM, Chatter About Weekly/Nonstop Layoffs at IBM
What happened? Good luck guessing.
Looking at Corruption in Europe, Going Beyond the EPO
Expect a new series to kick off very soon
Slopwatch: Security SPAM and LLM Slop for SEO and FUD Purposes, Perpetually Tarnishing the Perception of Linux and (Open)SSH Security
A lot of this Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt (FUD) comes from Microsoft and its LLMs
Links 30/05/2025: Google's LLM Slop Pushers Are Killing Journalism and Shira Perlmutter Fails to Stop Bribed Regime From Legalising Plagiarism (in "AI" Clothing)
Links for the day
Links 30/05/2025: Offline Arts and "Threshold of Patience"
Links for the day
Signing Off Serious Lies With a Statement of Truth is No Joking Matter
It's not hard to see what's happening here
Links 30/05/2025: LLM Slop Already Ingests and Vomits Its Own Garbage, Facebook Exec Admits Copyrights a Concern Too
Links for the day
Mass Layoffs at Microsoft Result in More Whistleblowers From Microsoft
Microsoft's predatory pricing is further
Slopwatch: Planet Ubuntu Became LLM Slop and Some People Fail to See the Immorality of Plagiarism
it lessens the incentive for people to publish real articles
EPO Poll: 68% Dissatisfied With Quality of Slop (Wrongly Framed as "AI") for Patent Classification
Slop does not work, it's just falsely advertised with extra hype (funded by slop pushers that sponsor the major media)
Big Crowds Gather to Learn About Software Freedom From the Man Who Started GNU/Linux in 1983
"It was a great success"
Microsoft Layoffs Again in Bay Area
Microsoft relies on people's false belief that being "in LinkedIn" will get you a job; well, seems like even working inside LinkedIn really sucks and you lose the job
Gemini Links 30/05/2025: Fighting Against the Bad News, and Slop is Dehumanisation Disguised as "Intelligence"
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Thursday, May 29, 2025
IRC logs for Thursday, May 29, 2025