05.28.16
Posted in Europe, Patents at 9:23 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: An English translation of documents involving the Organised Crime Section of the Criminal Police Department in Zagreb, where the Vice-President of the EPO faces criminal charges
THE other day we made public a document in Croatian. Translation of this Croatian document is now available for use, with few redactions. An English translation can be found below, but here is some background information.
The articles of the Croatian Criminal Code referred to in the document seem to be the following:
Article 340 – Treason (“Veleizdaja”)
The basis for this charge seems to be an allegation of an unlawful change in the structure of the state administration (abolition of the Copyright and Related Rights department of the SIPO) which it is claimed undermined the constitutional organisation of the Republic of Croatia.
Article 291 – Abuse of position and authority
Article 125 – Violation of equality
Article 131 – Violation of the right to work
Article 293 – Accepting a Bribe
Article 294 – Giving a Bribe
There’s more coming soon, based on sources of ours in Zagreb, who heard from people close to these matters that it would get even worse. █
REPUBLIC OF CROATIA
County State Attorney
Number: XXXXXXX
10 March 2016.
Zagreb Police Administration
Criminal Police Department Zagreb
Organised Crime Section
Please find enclosed a criminal complaint of the injured party V. S., …, Zagreb,
lodged against Ž. T., …, Zagreb and S. M. …, Zagreb for the criminal offences under
Article 340 of the Criminal Code, Article 291 of the Criminal Code, Article 125 of the
Criminal Code, Article 131 of the Criminal Code, Article 293 of the Criminal Code and
Article 294 of the Criminal Code.
In accordance with Article 206, paragraph 4, and referring to the provision of Article
206.h paragraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act, I order an investigation to be
carried out:
The carrying out of an interview with the applicant V.S., …, Zagreb (tel. …………..)
concerning the circumstances of the allegations of the filed appplication in which are
detailed observations concerning the exact time and manner in which the reported
Ž.T. changed the structure of the state administration in relation to Copyright and
Related Rights, for which reason is the applicant relieved from the position of
Assistant Director of the SIPO for Copyright and Related Rights, what is the amount
of material damage suffered, about what exactly is legally forbidden and undesirable
behavior, the position of the reported person in dealing with the injured party acting
without reasonable justification and without legitimate objective and based on
discrimination, as a result of which the violation of the right to work occurred
(whistleblowers) and to explain about any justified reason and the existence of which
facts about something that is or happens which could lead to legal proceedings
against the reported person, between whom, when and in which form of bribery or
corruption has taken place, what exactly was required of the official or responsible
person to whom the bribe was given, whether the reported act was carried out
independently or through an intermediary, wherein the negligent performance of duty on the part of the reported person S. M. is reflected and what kind of criminal offence in relation to the same has been committed when the specified abuse has occurred and in which manner, etc.
It is also required to carry out interviews with the reported persons concerning the
circumstances of the crimes alleged in the submitted application.
Interviews are to be carried out with other people who might have knowledge of the
offences of which the reported persons are accused.
It is also necessary to obtain from the victim all available documentation which
supporting the stated accusations (a copy of the decisions concerning the same from
the civil and criminal courts in respect of the termination of employment and criminal
offences against the plaintiff) and to obtain information from the State Intellectual
Property Office for the plaintiff with respect to the status of the persons responsible,
together with a description of jobs and tasks (contracts), a payslip that the same
received in the workplace where she worked prior to termination of employment (with regard to the question the level of material damage inflicted) as well as
documentation related to the termination of employment for the injured party V.S.
Concerning investigations or measures undertaken, you are obliged to report to me
no later than 30 days from the receipt of orders, delivering a report on what has been
done and the evidence which has been obtained.
Please also send me the official notes and statements and other material that can be
useful for the successful conduct of the proceedings.
DEPUTY MUNICIPAL STATE ATTORNEY
ANNEX:
Criminal charges et al.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 9:02 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Jesper Kongstad, the Chairman of the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation, helps demonstrate that not even the EPO is intelligent enough to spot an obvious scam
JUST before the weekend we mentioned the 'Nigerian' scam (E-mail pleas for funds) that the EPO had become a victim of, which is curious as the EPO, over at its Twitter account, warns people like applicants about bogus requests for payments (while the EPO itself falls victim to that). We saw that about half a dozen times in recent months alone. Speaking of the EPO’s Twitter account, the EPO’s PR people are working weekends again (this one is from today, Saturday) and for 3 days in a row now the EPO promotes the UPC over at Twitter (not hiding the agenda and its meddling beyond its scope of authority). No sense of integrity there. We are frankly not sure who’s worse, the scammers or the EPO’s management whose abuses cost a lot more money.
“Here is the story behind Jesper Kongstad “Nigeria-Fraud”,” one person told us. It’s actually a translation of an article we mentioned the other day. “Remember this article in the Danish press,” this person asked us, “Nigeria-Svindel – Jesper Kongstad” (article in Danish).
“Well, here is the translation into English, so let’s call it the (official) story…”
The DKPTO is ended up in an embarrassing situation after a ‘managerial employee’ was tricked by a sham-mail and transferred 900.000 EUR to a Chinese bank. Even though the money were returned to the DKPTO in the end the director JK is aware that something has to happen as a consequence of the embarrassment.
On 11 May this year a ‘managerial employee’ of the DKPTO, which is arranged under the Ministry for Trade and Growth, was targeted by a so called ‘CEO FRAUD’ -sham.
The employee got a mail from a person who pretended to be the director of the DKPTO, and the mail stated that the director wanted a transfer of 900.000 EUR to a Chinese bank for purchase of shares in a Chinese company – all done with discretion.
Following that the employee had exchanged mails with the person pretending to be JK, a transfer of the considerable amount of 900.000 EUR was arranged.
Only two days later when the fake director again contacted the DKPTO in order to have another 900.000 EUR transferred to a Chinese bank, the employee became suspicious and contacted his superior who contacted the director [JK].
Internal investigation
The money were returned few days later with the help of the police and the ‘Danske Bank’. But, important damage had happened which is basis for investigation by the police and internal investigation in order to understand how the DKPTO could be tricked by what in general is known as a ‘Nigeria-mail’ – though an extremely sophisticated specimen.
Right now status is that we are in the middle of an investigation. We have lawyers working on the investigation and the police is involved. The first couple of days we were busy recovering the money but now we are going to have an investigation of how it could end up so wrong says JK to BT.
How could it happen that a managerial employee was tricked by what many knows as a sort of Nigeria-mail?
The core problem in this situation is that control can be put in place but if the employees are not sufficiently attentive mistakes can happen. Right now I focus on the personnel. Con-persons like in this case are becoming more and more sophisticated. It is possible that we should have realized that something was wrong in this correspondence, but it was carried out in a really smart way. Technically seen the resemblance was very good and the persons behind had done an elaborate job. They had written the mail in a manner similar to how I write, explains JK, who also explains that the mail was written in Danish which means that the mail distinguishes itself from most sham-mails that end up in the in-tray of ordinary persons.
We do not know who is behind
When you say that they had copied both the technical characteristics and the way you write, do you then suspect that it relates to something internal at the DKPTO or someone who knows you?
Right now the police is carrying out an investigation so I cannot say before we know more, but I do not think that it is something internal. And, we do not know who is the person behind.
What are the consequences for the managerial employee?
This is a personnel issue and I will not comment on that.
What will be the consequences for the DKPTO?
Even though we managed to have the money returned we have had a slap in the face. And, it will result in increase of control among other for transfer of money, such that in the future three signatures will be needed instead of two. I have been in contact with our IT-technicians who say that nothing can prevent mails like the one the employee received. And, it is not certain that anything can be done concerning the procedure. So, it is about the human factor where we have to improve in spotting when people try to trick us. And, these people who try to trick – not only us – are at least as skilled as we are or even better.
The key point here, the intelligence of the EPO (and DKPTO) should come under scrutiny. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 7:52 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Megalomania and paranoia are not so far apart
Summary: Battistelli is wrecking what’s left of the EPO’s reputation (after decades it took the Office to earn it) as the media continues to scrutinise his appalling regime
IN SPITE of an effort to keep a low profile, the EPO is receiving unwanted attention from European TV, from European politicians, and even Croatian authorities. There’s more on the way, based on our sources. In the mean time, judging by this article from earlier today, patent scope at the EPO comes under fire again. To quote:
In May, a record 65,000 people from 30 countries and 32 organizations have backed the complaint issued to the European Patent Office due to the approval of a Syngenta tomato discovered in South America and cultivated by traditional methods.
The tomato was accepted as an “invention” in August 2015, with patent EP1515600, which further describes a “flavonoid pathway in the production and domestication method of the tomato.” This gives the Swiss company Syngenta the power over all plants with the characteristics mentioned, including seeds and even fruits and foods derived from them.
“This so-called “invention”, however, is simply a crossing of tomatoes originating in Peru and Chile, with varieties currently grown in industrialised countries,” said via email to La Gran Época María Carrascosa, of the association Red de Semillas, which joined the international coalition “Against patents on seeds”.
There should be similar movements against software patents at the EPO. This relates to the UPC and we are aware of organisation against it (work in progress apparently).
Regarding the presidential bike story (updated thrice by now), one person asks: “Why would an (alleged) tampering with brakes matter at all? I can’t imagine BB [Battistelli] braking for anyone or anything…”
There is now even a whole article about it, published earlier today at The Register. To quote some bits: “Every CEO knows it’s impossible to be universally liked. But when staff start cutting your brakes, maybe it’s time to consider moving on.
“The president of the European Patent Office (EPO), Benoit Battistelli, has already been on the receiving end of an official censure from his board, a series of strikes, several highly critical news reports, and a zero per cent confidence rating. But an announcement sent to all staff on Wednesday topped the lot.
“”Deliberate damage to personal property of the President,” read the subject line in an email sent from EPO vice president Željko Topić and seen by The Register.”
Here is a new fact. Battistelli apparently has nothing short of six (6!) bodyguards now. That’s insane and no wonder it's so expensive. To quote: “That’s not all. According to reports, the EPO has recently hired no fewer than six bodyguards to provide “close protection” of Battistelli for six months for the princely sum of €550,000 ($615,000).
“The irony of the EPO paying hundreds of thousands of euros to protect Battistelli from his own staff while cutting the salaries and benefits of staff representatives that stood up to his reorganization plans has not been lost on people.
“Incredibly, however, despite an ever-increasing outcry against Battistelli and his executive team and several meetings of the EPO’s Administrative Council focused solely on how to overcome the breakdown in staff-management communication, Battistelli is still refusing to budge an inch.
“Despite being told to fix the situation and scale back the problems in March, Battistelli has instead proposed reforms that have angered staff even more. They are now planning yet more protests to take place during the organization’s annual PR showpiece, the EPO European Inventor Award in June.”
“It is worth explaining that EPO has been granted sovereignty status by the European Commission, hence no local laws apply and its president has status almost equal to that of a head of state (totalitarian one).”
–AnonymousThis is very negative publicity for the EPO. “The EPO Also Ranks No. 1 in Having the Most Unpopular President,” wrote Patent Buddy, perhaps alluding to the IAM nonsense (also published earlier today).
Looking at some of the comments on this article, there is no sympathy at all for Battistelli. One person says: “There’s a line in HHGG about “waiting for the right…price”. I’d sack the whole board as well, they are supposed to ensure that situations like this never occur.”
Another comment says: “It is worth explaining that EPO has been granted sovereignty status by the European Commission, hence no local laws apply and its president has status almost equal to that of a head of state (totalitarian one).”
The number of bodyguards is then brought up: “SIX bodyguards?
“I assume that means he has 24×7 protection and more than one bodyguard much of the time. Apparently they’re worried about a team coming after him, not a single disgruntled individual.”
Many jokes ensued, e.g.: “Good job no one tried to kill the VP
“I mean if he needs bodyguards surely a bicycle isn’t an option.”
–Anonymous“That would be going off Topic”
Here is another joke: “Do the bodyguards have bikes too and how exactly would that work?
“Do they flank him either side? Follow from behind at a safe distance?
“I mean if he needs bodyguards surely a bicycle isn’t an option.”
Finally: “From now on, he’ll probably use a bullet proof bicycle.”
There is more coming Battistelli’s way in the negative publicity sense. The harder he tries to paint himself as a victim, the worse it gets for him. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 7:30 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: An English translation of a TV program which earlier this month documented some of the glaring problems at the EPO
THE EPO‘s management is receiving unwanted attention again. Recent Italian TV coverage, which we last mentioned yesterday, focused on the value or lack of value of EPO patents. It also featured EPO staff representatives like Hardon and mentioned Techrights material like this.
Below is the English translation of the transcript of the program. It’s just the part related to patents, to paraphrase the translator, or more precisely the few parts related to the EPO. Our contributor translated only the excerpts about the EPO and UPC. This contributor also put the timings corresponding to the video as streamed in this original link. █
Report 15-5-2015 “La guerra dei brevetti” (The war of patents)
By Paolo Mondani
Collaboration with Cataldo Ciccolella
Introduction on the web page with the video
(http://www.report.rai.it/dl/Report/puntata/ContentItem-52eb23d7-fcb8-4fe0-af49-50cdf7a9d8ac.html):
A world war is on, but with no bombs and no tanks: it’s the war to grab and protect trademarks and patents. In the field are multinational corporations and small inventors, investment funds, universities and above all, legions of lawyers. Even the movement of two fingers to zoom in a picture on the smartphone: Apple and Samsung have been heavily beating on each other in Tribunals to establish who invented it first. Behind a certificate, which says, “I invented this”, there are years of research, mazes of bureaucracy, money. We are going to see how EPO works, its central seat in Munich, the European institution which grants patents: the president Benoit Battistelli is at the centre of polemics for his relations with the employees, and what’s more – in spite of being an excellence – EPO is not subject to external controls, with all the risks that this brings along.
Report will also relate about the difficulties of some Italian enterprises, as for the inventor of the “Tutor” (a speed limit control system) in a legal battle against “Autostrade” (enterprise for Italian motorways) for establishing who really has the rights for the idea.
Also the Renzi administration has realized the importance of patents and trademark and for this reason has started a “patent box”, a fiscal discount to make inventors desist from going abroad. Who knows if Ferrari, the most important Italian brand in the world, will decide to export its rights in the Netherlands, where it already has taken a seat for its holding, or if it will remain in Italy. Finally, this enquiry will show what is the impact of patents on the national health system and in the pockets of patients, starting from the battle for the pricings for a pharmaceutical anti-hepatitis C.
- Translation of the audio transcript for five excerpts concerning the European Patent Office.
Excerpt 1: 00:00 – 01:17
Introduction:
Milena Gabanelli in the studio:
Good evening! Mafias are changing skin, and how are we fighting them? We’ll see about this, after the enquiry of today, which will lead us into the world of patents. You got a brand you register it, you got an idea you protect it. But that is not all said, because an industry of counterfeits, as for instance in the world of pharmaceuticals, is operating without a face. And around paper documents extremely violent legal battles arise, often fought over a comma or the slightest pretext. For example, this thing (she shows it on the screen) is called “Pinch to Zoom” and it has been fought over by Apple and Samsung for billions. One invents it, the other copies it, and if you can commercialize it anyway, you might still have to pay one million back, but if you made a 5 millions gain, it was still convenient. Who makes more profits from royalties of their inventions in the world, compared to what they pay for inventions from others, are: USA, Japan, Germany. And how about us, people of inventors? And who rules patents in Europe instead? It’s this mister (she shows Battistelli’s picture on the screen), who is the president of an institution that has almost the independence of a State. Now to our Paolo Mondani.
Excerpt 2: 16:56 – 19:04
Paolo Mondani – voiceover
While we are putting at stake the patents of Italian chemical industry, those who decide are in Munich. Single inventors and small and larger enterprises file here their patent applications for 38 European countries. The EPO, the office where 7000 engineers are employed, examines them and finally grants or refuses the patent. It takes 4 to 5 years. The problem is the cost of it.
Patent Examiner at the European Patent Office – Munich
Well if we add up all the costs including translations, the legal representations and our procedure, we’re about, let’s say, 50thousand €. Then you have to pay some thousands of euro for keeping the patent alive each year.
PAOLO MONDANI
And do you have a favourable attitude towards larger enterprises who send their applications here?
Patent Examiner at the European Patent Office – Munich
Not from our side, as examiners. But I cannot hide that we were rather astonished when recently the management has decided to establish some resources dedicated as an interface with larger enterprises.
Roberta Romano-Goetsch – Principal Director at EPO
But that is an offer that is available to any applicant and any representative.
PAOLO MONDANI
So I should not be malicious and think that you prepared a preferential lane for corporations…
Roberta Romano-Goetsch – Principal Director at EPO
No. No.
PAOLO MONDANI
Well, because actually I read an internal document, of 2015, where it reads that Canon, Philips, Microsoft, Qualcomm, BASF, Bayer, Samsung, Huawei, Siemens, Ericsson and Fujitsu will enjoy a preferential lane on patenting. What does that mean?
Patent Examiner at the European Patent Office – Munich
On the paper it is just a kind of “dedicated assistance”, but in substance it is not like that. It’s them who bring us real money, and for that reason they will get more attention.
Paolo Mondani – voiceover
Small inventors do not seem enthusiasts of the European patenting system. Sergio D’Offizzi is an engineer that has been working for (Italian enterprises) Enel and Sogin in the safety of nuclear power plants.
……………
Excerpt 3: 20:05 – 20:38
Paolo Mondani – voiceover
Please, where did you file your patent application?
SERGIO D’OFFIZZI – former manager at Sogin.
I filed it in the USA and China, from where I could get a notification in 2014. Being European, I also filed it at the EPO, and it’s nine years that I am still waiting, I’m not saying for an answer, but at least for a notification about where my invention will ever get.
……………………
Excerpt 4: 21:56 – 22:29
PAOLO MONDANI
When did you patent the “reflexometer”?
GIORGIO MARCON – Technical legal consultant for Tribunals
In 2013 I started submitting the documentation, having started 3 years before all the procedures to develop all the rest.
PAOLO MONDANI
And did you finally get a patent?
GIORGIO MARCON – – Technical legal consultant for Tribunals
End of 2015
PAOLO MONDANI
And why did you not file it also at the EPO in Munich?
GIORGIO MARCON – Technical legal consultant for Tribunals
Exactly because I knew that there are some deceptions behind the patenting, and not a protection of the patent.
PAOLO MONDANI
Which deception? What are you suspicious about?
GIORGIO MARCON – – Technical legal consultant for Tribunals
In essence, the information is leaked, it goes to industries who then can speculate.
……………………
Excerpt 5: 23:40 – 31:31
PAOLO MONDANI
Where did you get it patented? At the EPO in Munich? (Asking an entrepreneur about his patented compass system)
SERGIO SULAS – Enterpreneur
Yes, then in ten European countries, then in the USA, Australia and New Zealand. In my experience I could see that in the USA it is more difficult to patent, but smaller enterprises have it easier. And there are some advantages that the European system does not offer.
PAOLO MONDANI
For instance?
SERGIO SULAS – IMPRENDITORE
It is 15 to 20 times less expensive.
Milena Gabanelli in the studio
We also have a Patent Office in Italy. You go there only if you want to patent only in Italy. The highest waiting time is 2,5 to 3 years – depending from complexity – the costs are about 5000 €, plus a yearly fee for each year of patent life. For those who go to Munich (EPO), time can be longer. But between filing and obtaining the patent, the costs can reach 50.000€. Is it too much? Is it too little? It depends from the success of the invention. But that does not mean that once you have the patent you’re safe, because often a larger enterprise comes up and says “You stole part of that idea from me!”. And even if that is not true, they can just arrange a whole legal battle, most expensive and that takes forever, so if you are big enough, you line up all your own lawyers, but if you are small you can only handle on royalties for a possible future development, or you simply sell the patent to them, usually at the price that they decide and goodbye.
Some commercials now, then we’ll be back to Munich, to the Patent Office there, where, according to those who work there, they have the same freedom of opinion that you get in North Korea.
(After the commercials break)
We’re back again. We’re talking about patents and we are going to see: a battle between a man who says he invented the “Tutor” (Speed Limit Control) and the “Autostrade” (enterprise for Motorways in Italy) who says the invention was actually anticipated by Galileo; Universities are incubators of ideas, the Sapienza University (Rome) will have its ones managed by Mr Carrai, the consultant of the Italian Prime Minister, then we’ll see the most complex problem, which is about pharmaceuticals. What is the border between the need of saving human lives and the need of refund the expenses for research first and then of making profits? Well, but first let’s got back to the office in Munich (EPO) where patenting is too expensive, as everybody says, but truth is that in this office made of glass, you really cannot see anything.
PAOLO MONDANI
EPO is not controlled by the European Union, up to the point that you are an extraterritorial institution, with particular guarantees of immunity. But who is controlling you then?
Examiner at the European Patent Office – Munich
In theory member states should do it, through their representatives in the Administrative Council, but it happens more than often that these make agreements with Battistelli on specific points: you give something to me, I give something to you. You know, a bit like what was happening at FIFA with Blatter.
PAOLO MONDANI – voiceover
In front of the building in Munich, also the employees say that the president, Benoit Battistelli, administrates EPO in an obscure way.
ELIZABETH HARDON – Unionist at EPO
A month ago we have been dismissed, Jon and I, and Malika has been downgraded. We were asking for more transparency and a control on finances of EPO. This is the reason why the president has zeroed on us.
PAOLO MONDANI
Corruption cases here at EPO?
Examiner at the European Patent Office – Munich
Not if you mean like getting ten thousand euros in an envelope. But you know, at times the exchange of favours may mean a jump in career steps, the obtainment of a position of power or prestige. To a manager this can be granted in change of making a patent application fly.
PAOLO MONDANI
EPO makes 2 billions € a year. What do you do with all this money?
Examiner at the European Patent Office – Munich
There is no transparency on how it is being used. We don’t even know how much the president gets.
ELIZABETH HARDON – Unionist at EPO
Today we oppose the reforms of the President, which are infringing freedom of association, freedom of speech and our privacy. And we’ll keep protesting until the office won’t return to its function of servicing European citizens rather than the careers of some megalomaniac manager.
Examiner at the European Patent Office – Munich
Please consider that we have to make a request to strike or for having discussions among us. And if the President says no, well, we can’t do it.
PAOLO MONDANI – voiceover
Mauro Masi is member of the Administrative Council of EPO since 2006. What do you think of Battistelli’s methods?
MAURO MASI – Italian delegate at the Administrative Council of EPO
Battistelli behaves in a way, (that) he respects all formal rules of EPO. The issue is whether such rules are still valid or should be changed. In my opinion they should be changed.
Examiner at the European Patent Office – Munich
They had newspapers writing articles in which we’ve been described as a bunch of spoiled engineers, earning 8000€ a month who dare asking freedom to strike.
PAOLO MONDANI
Well, 8000 a month seems an huge sum to me.
ESAMINATORE UFFICIO EUROPEO BREVETTI – MONACO
Yes, but it is a work of highest quality and we are paid also for not being corruptible.
PAOLO MONDANI
EPO does not depend from Europe, it’s not part of European Union. It is a private institution, you even enjoy immunity. But who’s controlling you?
ROBERTA ROMANO-GOETSCH –Principal Director at EPO
Representatives of the member states compose our administrative council, which is also our legislator, so to say. Therefore it’s them, our administrative council. Then we have also a commissioner from the European community, who is an observer inside the administrative council.
PAOLO MONDANI
But, let’s say, don’t you have a supranational body, or any authority independent from the administrative council, that could perform a control on your activity?
ROBERTA ROMANO-GOETSCH – Principal Director at EPO
No.
PAOLO MONDANI – voiceover
The patent office in Munich is an anomaly, yet as such it will be responsible for the unitary European patent, where English German and French will be allowed as languages.
RENATA RIGHETTI – President of “BUGNION” – Industrial Property Consultants
The unitary patent is an intellectual property document covering all 28 countries of the European Union. This is its intention, seen in terms of homogeneity of the Country Europe. Various states have joined little by little. Initially Italy and Spain remained outside of it, but now only Spain is out of it. The unitary patent cannot enter into force until the Unified Patent Court won’t enter into force. The UPC will have jurisdiction on all appeals, on infringement, on counterfeits or related issues, concerning the unitary patent and the European patent in general.
PAOLO MONDANI
Unitary European Patent, five seats: Munich, Berlin, The Hague, Brussels and Vienna. Three languages: German, French and English. Three seats for the Unified Court: Paris, London and Munich and a Court of Appeals in Luxemburg. Italy will be good just for the holidays.
MAURO MASI – Italian delegate at the Administrative Council of EPO
These choices are ratified by single parliaments, therefore at a higher level, Politics with a capital P. So about that, you have to ask at that political level.
PAOLO MONDANI – voiceover
The parties of the coalition of the Renzi government have approved the unitary patent with a majority. With the new patent, the small and medium enterprises will have fewer expenses, but won’t be the larger enterprises, those who’ll get most advantages?
RENATA RIGHETTI – President of “BUGNION” – Industrial Property Consultants
Oh well…. Yes, I believe this is a legitimate doubt. It is legitimate because a legal lawsuit to protect one’s own rights for a patent before the Unified Court will be much more expensive than what it is today, one can easily imagine.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Content is available under CC-BY-SA