Editors • About the Site • Comes vs. Microsoft • Using This Web Site • Site Archives • Credibility Index • OOXML • OpenDocument • Patents • Novell • News Digest • Site News • RSS

02.18.16

EPO Management Reportedly in a State of Collapse, Rumours Suggest Battistelli Possibly Out Soon, Events Canceled

Posted in Europe, Patents, Rumour at 4:51 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: The latest word from inside and outside the EPO, serving to reinforce rumours that a post-Battistelli era isn’t a distant dream anymore

THE media is saying nothing about the EPO (except puff pieces repeating an EPO press release/propaganda regarding Rospatent) and people keep asking us what’s going on.

Here is a concise summary of what’s known and what’s speculated.

“Board 28 is preparing (or has prepared) a doc,” said an earlier comment, “to be discussed at the AC in March which is putting BB against the wall. Directors in DG1 are already informing some selected staff that the situation is very difficult for BB and that the confrontation with the AC will be so harsh to convince him that he has to go. [...] Let’s keep the finger cross and keep the EPO under pressure. Many of the explicit and implicit supporters of BB will try to recycle themselves like some Nazis did after Hitler’s fall. Beware of the hypocrites!”

We also have the following document which is in German (English/French/Spanish translations would be more than welcome). This document was addressed to the Praesidium of the AC. It says:

European Patent Office | 80298 MUNICH | GERMANY

An das Präsidium
des Verwaltungsrats
der Europäischen Patenorganisation

OPEN LETTER

Sozialstudie 2016 – Position des Zentralen Personalausschusses

Sehr geehrte Präsidiumsmitglieder,

Sie hatten die Vorbereitung und den aktuellen Stand der Sozialstudie 2016 auf der Tagesordnung Ihrer 69. bzw. 70. Sitzung. Auch für heute steht die Sozialstudie wieder auf Ihrer Agenda. Wir bedauern es, dass die Amtsleitung die vom 16. bis 18. Februar 2016 geplante Sitzung des ZPA nicht genehmigt hat, so dass wir – entgegen unserer Absicht – nicht persönlich mit Ihnen in Kontakt treten können. Daher erlauben wir uns, Sie schriftlich darüber zu unterrichten, dass der ZPA aufgrund aktueller Anlässe seine Haltung gegenüber der anvisierten Studie ändern musste. In der Sitzung des Allgemeinen Beratenden Ausschusses am 9. Dezember 2015 zeigten sich die anwesenden Mitglieder des ZPA in ihren Bemerkungen zum dort kurzfristig auf die Agenda genommenen Dokument zur Sozialstudie 2016 noch vorsichtig optimistisch. Insbesondere die Federführung durch den Verwaltungsrat und die Bereitschaft, Bemerkungen und Vorschläge des ZPA aufzugreifen, erschienen uns als unterstützenswerter Ansatz, sich von den einseitigen Darstellungen des Amtspräsidenten zur sozialen Situation im EPA lösen zu wollen. In der vergangenen Tagung des Verwaltungsrats unterstrichen wir in unseren Ausführungen noch einmal, dass ein besonderes Augenmerk auf die Unabhängigkeit des externen Auftragnehmers, auf die Gewährleistung der absoluten Anonymität der teilnehmenden Bediensteten und auf die Einschätzung des Personals zur Auswirkung der aktuellen Arbeitsatmosphäre auf die Qualität der geleisteten Arbeit gelegt werden muss.
Am 7. Januar 2016 wurde uns mitgeteilt, dass der Präsident entschieden hatte, den ZPA einzuladen, einen Beobachter zum Vergabeausschuss zu nominieren. Dieser Einladung kamen wir innerhalb der kurzen gegebenen Frist am 15. Januar 2016 nach. Am 21. Januar 2016 übermittelten wir

dem Verwaltungsrat und dem Amtspräsidenten weitere Anmerkungen und Vorschläge zur Sozialstudie 2016 in Schriftform. Trotzdem behauptete der Amtspräsident am 4. Februar 2016 in seiner Veranstaltung „Meet the President“ vor der Amtsöffentlichkeit, der ZPA habe trotz Einladung niemals Kommentare zur geplanten Sozialstudie abgegeben.
Unser Beobachter wurde leider nie zu einer Sitzung eingeladen oder anderweitig an der Vorbereitung der Studie beteiligt, sondern erhielt erstmalig am Nachmittag des 11. Februar 2016 Unterlagen zur Ausschreibung, die für den 12. Februar 2016 terminiert war. Diese Unterlagen umfassten mehrere Dokumente mit einem Umfang von über 100 Seiten, für die nicht einmal klargestellt war, inwiefern sie an den ZPA weitergegeben werden durften.
Wir betrachten diese Art der Konsultation als mangelhaft und nicht als bona fide. Vielmehr fürchten wir, dass versucht werden könnte, die Teilnahme eines ZPA-Beobachters im Vergabeausschuss später als Argument für eine angebliche Unabhängigkeit der Sozialstudie 2016 anzuführen. Daher stellen wir an dieser Stelle deutlich klar, dass der ZPA seine anfängliche Unterstützung für die Durchführung der Studie vorerst zurückzieht. Uns erstaunt im Übrigen, dass offenbar niemand mehr aus dem Verwaltungsrat – nicht einmal aus seinem Präsidium – an der Vorbereitung, Ausschreibung und Durchführung der Sozialstudie 2016 beteiligt ist, zumal Artikel 32 EPÜ doch entsprechende Möglichkeiten für den Verwaltungsrat vorsieht.
Da also demnach die Federführung aufgegeben wurde und auch keine Vorschläge des ZPA aufgegriffen wurden, sind unsere wesentlichen Gründe für eine Unterstützung der Studie nunmehr hinfällig. Wir können daher den Bediensteten des Europäischen Patentamts eine Teilnahme an eventuellen Interviews und Umfragen im Rahmen der Sozialstudie 2016 derzeit nicht empfehlen. Uns bleibt lediglich, dem Amtspräsidenten für die Unabhängigkeit und Glaubwürdigkeit seiner Sozialstudie 2016 viel Glück zu wünschen.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Der Zentrale Personalausschuss

Wir bestätigen, dass das obige Schreiben ordnungsgemäß vom
Zentralen Personalausschuss beschlossen wurde.

cc.:
Mr B. Battistelli, President of the EPO
Mr Y. Grandjean, Director Council Secretariat

It sure looks like the Battistelli era is almost finished. “I am hearing rumours that he has gone,” one person told us a short while ago, but “it’s unconfirmed however,” said another person, “something seriously is going on right now! PANIC ON THE TITANIC and that is NO rumor” (we heard it from quite a few separate sources).

“Hold your breath,” this person added, “here is another rumour! Apparently a big IP event scheduled for next week got canceled!”

It’s apparently not the propaganda event in which FTI Consulting is involved but “the IP5 event!”

“IP5 heads of the big 5 patent offices,” clarified this person in response to a question (more here and here). “Let’s call it the begin[ning] of the end of an awful era,” it was later added, “however remember that more rotten heads need to be removed!” █

Open Letter Explains Why Disciplinary Committees at the EPO Have Become a Sham Under Battistelli’s Regime

Posted in Europe, Patents at 3:09 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Fair trial

Summary: Dysfunctions in the EPO’s disciplinary procedures are explained in a 5-page letter, which emphasises tyrannical tendencies in the Battistelli-led EPO

THE EPO‘s management has been ignoring the recommendations of the disciplinary committees when it fired two representatives and downgraded another. This is widely known by now and even European politicians have spoken against this injustice. Last week the following open letter was circulated and now is a good time to show it publicly to everyone. We highlight some bits of interest (in yellow) for those who want to read through the text quickly.

OPEN LETTER TO ALL STAFF

Dysfunctions in the EPO’s disciplinary procedures

Dear Colleagues,

The independence of the Disciplinary Committee (DC) and its members is an essential prerequisite for a just and fair trial, not only for the individuals facing grave accusations, but also for confidence in the EPO as a whole. It is neither the CSC’s role nor its intention to interfere with this independence, let alone issue instructions to the DC. However it is the CSC’s duty to comment on and if necessary propose actions that favour the smooth running of statutory bodies, all in the best interests of staff. It is in this context and taking into consideration that six disciplinary sanctions have been taken against staff representatives consecutively over a very short period of time, the CSC believes it is urgent to “Pause, Reflect, (Re)connect”, that is to learn from past events.

As highlighted in a letter dated 12 November 2014, the EPO no longer has a properly functioning disciplinary procedure, a claim that was reiterated in an open letter to the AC Chairman, dated 4 March 2015.

I – Nominations to the DC: loyalty vs. independence

A DC is a statutory body comprising two members appointed by the President and two by the CSC, drawn at random from a pool of possible candidates.

The President appoints the chairpersons of the DC. Until 2013 all DC chairs were chosen from the DG3 Boards of Appeal, whose independence from the President is guaranteed by the EPC. He stopped this long-standing tradition in 20141.

Following the introduction of the new career system, the EPO President decided that the CSC may no longer nominate members of DG3 to DC procedures involving staff in job groups 2 and 3. Since it remains a requirement under Article 98(4) ServRegs that DC members shall not be of a lower job group than that of the accused, this does not leave the CSC any other option than to select their nominees from the few willing managers and directors employed in those groups2.
_______
1 CSC members have legally challenged this change. Internal appeals are pending.
2 The President has also repeatedly interfered with CSC nominations: for example, the nominations of the CSC for 2015 and 2016 were disregarded (see the nominations retained by the President versus the CSC 2015 nomination letter).

In stark contrast, the President almost exclusively nominates Directors and Principal Directors as members for all job groups whereas he should in principle nominate non-managers for procedures in job groups 4 to 6 to more faithfully reflect the staff demography. As a result, the members appointed by the President drawn from the list of potential nominees for a particular case will always be managers, except if the defendant is in job group 6.

Besides being an explicit requirement written in the job description of all EPO staff members, loyalty (obedience) is to be expected of today’s management. The present Administration has demonstrated on several occasions that this obligation applies in particular for managers and those taking actions that are perceived to be disloyal should expect to be punished severely.

Further, since senior managers nominated by the President are often employed under some form of renewable contract (where continuation may depend on Presidential approval), staff may doubt that they can act fully independently in performing their function as DC members.

The Office has endorsed a structure that the European Court of Human Rights found objectionable3: the convening officer (President) appoints the court (is their superior officer) and acts also as the confirming officer (President). Such a DC framework no longer meets the requirements that the ECHR consider necessary for a fair procedure4.

II – DC recommendations systematically ignored

After Aurélien Pétiaud, Michael Lund and Els Hardon (1), now it is the turn for Malika Weaver, Ion Brumme and again Els Hardon (2) to be severely sanctioned for activities carried out in their capacity as staff representatives, union officials and/or CSC appointees.

In his Communiqué No.2, the President insists that the DC recommendations were all “unanimous”, “justifying high sanctions, including dismissal”, which in our opinion (mis)leads the uninformed reader to believe that he is merely following the DC recommendations. This is not the reality – in most cases the DC concluded that many of the serious allegations could not be founded in facts.

The harsh reality is that in all six (!) cases, the President has effectively disregarded the unanimous DC recommendation and decided upon sanctions (up to immediate dismissal with reduction of pension) that are far more severe than the recommendations of the DC. Indeed, in cases where the DC rejected as unsupported allegations made against staff representatives, the President
_______
3 see case Findlay vs United Kingdom or a summary why such a model is unfair
4 http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_Art_6_ENG.pdf

nevertheless seems to have ignored this and based his judgement and decision on such allegations being proven.

The CSC is well aware that the DC is not responsible for the President’s final decision itself. We assume the DC will have attempted to weigh diligently all the available facts and then assess the consequences of their recommendation. In some cases they may even have sought to find prudent compromises to reduce sanctions in case of doubt. Unfortunately, not only has the President chosen to cherry-pick the harshest of the recommendations, he has in fact gone much further than any of them, applying blatantly disproportionate sanctions with dramatic consequences for the individuals themselves.

III – Six Staff Representatives sanctioned in short lapse of time

Because of the quite extraordinary aggressive attitude presently shown by senior management and in fear of further reprisals, the concerned individuals do not wish to publish more specific, personal information related to their disciplinary procedures. We can, however, provide you with the following insights into their individual predicaments:

  • Not only is Mr Brumme fired from the EPO with immediate effect, but the normal daily life of his newly established family will be disrupted and put under enormous strain in the future.

    If any staff member had been found guilty of very serious charges in a fair trial, such sanctions and their consequences might be understandable. However, this is certainly not the case here: indeed, it appears that it is not the original charges that Mr Brumme has been accused of that are the basis for the sanction. Rather, it is the fact that he denied them publicly, i.e. defended himself against any wrongdoings, that was apparently considered to severely breach “the confidentiality obligation” of the procedure.

    Firstly, it should be remembered that confidentiality is primarily meant to protect the accused staff member – who is presumed innocent until proven guilty – and not to be used to render him guilty for an alleged procedural error. We also note that this charge was only added during the course of the procedure. Last but not least, it should be remembered that as an elected staff representative, Mr Brumme has a mandate from staff to act on their behalf. Hence his informing staff on any issues in relation with his mandate and personal integrity is not only legal, it is a moral and professional obligation for all Staff Representatives towards their constituency.

    It is a sad outcome that today, at 41 years of age, Mr Brumme faces being an outcast. How can ruining a staff member’s life be seen as a “justified and proportionate” sanction, particularly for a staff representative simply defending himself in “public” (actually EPO internally) from an attack on both his functions and his integrity?

  • Similarly, Ms Hardon sees her pension, a deferred remuneration accumulated after many years of active work in the EPO, arbitrarily reduced by 20%. This is a very rare sanction that is normally reserved for extreme cases where individuals have been convicted of the most serious crimes and felonies like corruption or gross misconduct. How can such a sanction be “justified and proportionate” in her case?

IV – No particular protection for staff and union representatives in the EPO

In most European countries, and certainly in France and Germany, staff and union representatives enjoy particular protection and external instances5 other than their employer are in place to decide what sanctions are appropriate to be applied against them. The employer cannot simply publicly declare that the cases “relate to personal failures of the employees”, impose heavy sanctions and de facto disregard “the fact that the employees involved are staff representatives who should enjoy a higher level of protection and freedom of expression, having in mind their particular duties.”6

V – The work of the DC has changed in the new world of “political trials”

The EPO “culture” has changed to such an extent that the disciplinary procedures seems to have mutated into a fully conscious and demonstrative policy of the President to apply the most ruthless and excessive sanctions, presumably with the intention of having an oppressive, intimidating effect on all staff. In this context, such disciplinary procedures can be seen as “political trials”.

In this sense, the CSC makes the following observations:

  • The President seems to be instrumentalising the DC: the recommendations are represented in a biased manner to give the impression that there is unanimous support for the sanctions taken. At the same time, the statutory confidentiality clause is abused to prevent any third party from knowing the findings of the DC and thereby removing transparency from the procedure.
  • Arbitrariness and abuse of power: even though the DC may strive to write a fair, balanced and coherent recommendation reflecting the established facts and taking into consideration any doubts or uncertainties, only parts of a recommendation are being cherry-picked or misrepresented, presumably to arrive at a desired outcome. However, in the absence of any internal review and without any effective recourse to fair and timely legal remedies, the President can take any decision he likes with virtually total impunity.

_______
5 Inspection du Travail in France and Betriebsrat / Arbeitsgericht in Germany
6 «Les salariés investis de fonctions représentatives par voie de désignation ou d’élection bénéficient, en cette qualité, d’un statut protecteur.», Article 48 in the «rapport Badinter» on “THE ESSENTIAL PRINCIPLES OF LABOR LAW”, January 2016

  • The DC is rapidly becoming an integral part of political “show trials”, especially in cases against staff / union representatives: in all (6 out of 6!) cases, the accusations appear to be politically motivated, as were the expected outcome of the procedure. The DC exhibits traits of a reincarnation of the 17th Century Star Chamber7.

The above dysfunctions are equally valid for the Internal Appeal Committee8 where no members are at present appointed by the CSC. Both bodies are equally hazardous for not only their nominated members, but also individual staff members involved and Staff at large.

VI – Lack of judicial review in a reasonable time frame

In view of the flaws in the disciplinary procedures, a genuine independent judicial review is all the more essential. However, the ILO Administrative Tribunal (ILOAT) chokes under a workload mainly caused by the EPO and it does not foresee any accelerated procedure for considering cases with sanctions as heavy as dismissal, let alone issuing any form of injunction. Instead, the cases have to wait their turn, which currently will result in delays of several years before judgement. Should the ILOAT persist in refusing to fast track such cases, then the national courts in the member states should declare themselves exceptionally competent, lift the immunity of the Office and review themselves the decisions of the President.

The Central Staff Committee
_______
7 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Chamber
8 Please note the Board of Auditors’ review of the Internal Appeals procedure in CA/20/15 & CA/21/15: according to these studies, the President does not follow recommendations of his own Appeals Committee and (almost) systematically rules against staff. The ILO-AT is ill-equipped to act as a trial court (Judgment No. 3291). “There is no social peace without access to Justice”. (for more details please refer to the CSC report on the EPO justice)

Things are heating up right now and we urge anyone who has further details to contact us securely. The more the public knows, the bigger the trouble EPO tyranny will face. █

Team Battistelli Tries to Bend the Rules to Prevent the European Patent Office From Going on Strike

Posted in Site News at 2:13 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: The Central Staff Committee of the European Patent Office refuses to be intimidated by Battistelli’s inner circle and insists on the right of staff to go on strike next month

TWISTING the law in its own favour isn't atypical a practice at Battistelli’s EPO (the high-level management). The man revels in autocracy. One person asked me today: “Is there any truth in rumours that the big man has gone?” Rumours that Battistelli has been sacked or resigned (sounds familiar) are most likely false. As one person put it, “the place is bristling with rumours following yesterday’s B28 meeting.

“There is something going on, but I can’t separate the wheat from the chaff.

“All I can say is that it appears to have been a very rough meeting.”

One thing we do know is that as of yesterday, there was a fight over staff's intent/thoughts of going on strike. The following letter is self-explanatory as context is included/alluded to:

European Patent Office | 80298 MUNICH | GERMANY

Ms Elodie Bergot
PD Human Resources
Isar – R 718

Interlocutor and representatives to the ballot committee

Dear Ms Bergot,

We refer to your e-mails of Friday 12 February 2016, one addressed to us and one addressed to the colleagues who signed a recent call for strike in accordance with Circular No. 347, initiated and organised by staff (Annex 1).

In the above-mentioned mails you acknowledge that the quorum of 10% of staff has been reached and confirm that the Office will organise a ballot within one month, i.e. on 9 March at the latest.

The call for strike designates an external lawyer as the contact person representing the undersigned. In the e-mail to the petitioners, you state that “strike shall be a means of last report and the time of preparation of the ballot should be used to discuss the claims presented in the call for strike.”

According to your mail “external attorneys cannot be considered as social partners to engage into meaningful discussions regarding to EPO’s internal matters.” The petitioners are therefore invited to designate representatives from among active EPO staff members.

We wish to point out the following:

  • There is no basis in law or in reason to reject any given person as an interlocutor. Specifically, there is no rule dictating that the European Patent Office
    interlocutor must be an active EPO staff member.
  • It is not clear how the petitioners could designate their representatives. The petitioners do not know each other and in any case cannot send e-mails to more than 50 persons with their EPO e-mail account.
  • The petition concerns central staff matters. The CSC is the elected staff representation responsible for central matters.

In order to avoid endangering the strike ballot, the external lawyer has asked the CSC to accept delegation of his mandate for any further process or action with regard to the upcoming procedural steps foreseen by the EPO administration. We intend to accept this delegation.

Concerning the mail addressed to us, we designate the following representatives to the ballot committee:

Stéphane Écolivet
Ansgar Wansing

Yours sincerely,

The Central Staff Committee

We confirm that this letter was legitimately decided and produced by the Central Staff Committee1.

__________
1 Pursuant to Article 35(3) ServRegs, the Central Staff Committee shall consist of ten full and ten alternate members.

The CSC presently consists of 17 members, because two have resigned in Dec 2014 and one has been dismissed in Jan 2016 (against the recommendation of the Disciplinary Committee).

One full member of the CSC has been downgraded in Jan 2016 (against the recommendation of the Disciplinary Committee). In fact, the Office has launched investigations and disciplinary procedures against other Staff representatives as well, affecting negatively their health.

Here is the original with all the signatures included:

Letter to Bergot - page 1

Letter to Bergot - page 2

Letter to Bergot - page 3

Letter to Bergot - page 4

Stay tuned as there’s more on the way. █

The EPO’s Patent Coup in Europe Moves on With Conflict of Interests-Plagued German Authorities for UPC

Posted in Europe, Patents at 1:22 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Trojan horse

Summary: Germany, careful not to reveal its bias and gross nepotism (not to mention self interest) in this matter, is starting to push for the Unitary Patent Court (UPC), which would potentially destroy Europe’s wealth by passing a lot of it to very few (already affluent and usually non-European) actors

THERE is an increasingly urgent and incredibly big EPO scandal that many EPO insiders haven't been paying enough attention to (or were thoroughly misinformed on, as part of the secretive and expensive PR campaign for UPC, let aside the internal censorship). Dr. Glyn Moody wrote about it earlier this month and the EPO's official responses to him only served to reinforce beliefs that the UPC is quite a scandal (against democracy) in the making. The vast majority of European citizens know nothing at all about the UPC, probably by intention — as obscurity serves the UPC's architects and lobbyists. The UPC is not for Europeans. It’s steered by scope maximalists, as FOSDEM recently explained (Stallman too spoke about it).

“The vast majority of European citizens know nothing at all about the UPC, probably by intention — as obscurity serves the UPC’s architects and lobbyists.”“Breaking news is that Germany has produced draft bills for implementing the UPC,” wrote this new commenter, who spreads terrible news that we have been dreading for months (EPO-funded media repeatedly pressured Germany — even by shaming — to do this).

“BMJ is financed with EPO fees,” Benjamin Henrion correctly noted, “and they do have a bad record with the swpat [software patents] directive, where they trumped the econ ministry” (we previously wrote about this role of nepotism in UPC promotion inside Germany, putting the country’s justice system/ministry to great shame, having led the way in software patents promotion). Spain shows the better way forward and explains the reasons.

Here is the comment in question in its entirety:

Breaking news is that Germany has produced draft bills for implementing the UPC.

https://www.bmjv.de/SharedDocs/Gesetzgebungsverfahren/Dokumente/RefE_Uebereinkommen_EinheitlichesPatentgericht.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2

https://www.bmjv.de/SharedDocs/Gesetzgebungsverfahren/Dokumente/RefE_Begleitgesetz_EuropaeischePatentreform.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3

My German may be a little rusty, but I cannot see anything in the two published documents that indicates how German national law will be amended in the light of the substantive provisions of the unitary patent package.

Can anyone shed any light on this situation? I would have thought that at least some modifications of national patent law would be necessary.

“The document of your second link,” added another commenter, “proposes all necessary amendments of German Law, particularly for the international patent act and the patent act. But the first link is the more interesting…”

“UPC is a cash cow for patent lawyers in Germany.”According to this morning’s post from IP Kat: “In its proposal for the legislation implementing the Unified Patent Package in Germany, the German Ministry of Justice suggests a compromise: double patenting vis-a-vis unitary patents is not prohibited, but if an action regarding a unitary patent for the same invention is pending before the Unified Patent Court or is made pending during the national proceeding or has been finally adjudicated by the UPC, then the German court will dismiss the action brought based on the national patent insofar as the patents concern the same invention, provided that the defendant raises the objection before the beginning of the oral hearing (see proposed Article 18 Gesetz über internationale Patentübereinkommen, p. 6 of the linked PDF).”

UPC is a cash cow for patent lawyers in Germany. They would make a lot of money from it, and guess at whose expense…

No wonder it’s mostly patent lawyers who are pushing for the UPC, usually behind closed doors. It’s an attack on democracy. It is a coup. The UPC is yet another rogue project, maybe on par with (or along with) efforts such as TPP. They are hoping to bypass the European public and covertly impose the 1%’s wishes on all who live inside Europe. Deception, propaganda etc. come into play as soon as the public begins to discover what’s going on, whereupon it antagonises. That’s when they start pretending that it’s good for European SMEs and perpetually spread other such myths.

“BristowsUPC”, an LLP rebranded for UPC marketing, has just written about the above. Longtime UPC booster Annsley ​Merelle Ward (also of IP Kat) said: “The German Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (BMJV) yesterday published the first draft of legislation that will make it possible for Germany to ratify the Unified Patent Court Agreement. The draft bill was published, together with a second draft bill to implement the Unitary patent system into German law. After a period of consultation, it is anticipated that final draft bills will be introduced into the German parliament before summer 2016. These will then pass through the legislative process in parliament for debate, any amendment, and then a final vote.”

“The EPO’s autocracy is now expanding onto other European institutions.”Only patent lawyers (and their media) rejoice right now (see the positivity, with optimistic phrases like “A significant development for the #UPC.”) while the rest of the public is totally unaware. It is an unacceptable attack on European democracy. “DE, UK & 2 more need to ratify for #UPC to begin,” said the patent maximalists (MIP in this case). As Henrion put it last night: “There should be a call to abolish fiscal priviledges for royalties over any type of IP right, and tax it as the same level as labour #fraud”

The EPO’s autocracy is now expanding onto other European institutions. This too is a cause for alarm. They don’t care what the public thinks; they just do whatever the heck they decided is good for Europe (or for themselves and their mates). It’s like with the EPO the EU is increasingly shadowing the worst practices of the Kremlin; oh, lo and behold whose hands Battistelli is now shaking (warning: epo.org link). To quote the latest puff piece showing Battistelli in Russia: “On the occasion of a visit to the EPO in Munich by Grigory Petrovich Ivliev, the new Director General of Rospatent (the Russian Federal Service for IP), the two institutions have committed to further strengthen their co-operation.”

That was published yesterday. It’s self-serving propaganda disguised as ‘news’ (and Google News indexes it as such).

“While the EPO says (right there on national television) that it intends to ignore the law and refuse to obey the highest court at The Hague it sure feels comfortable to do its patent brainwashing right there at The Hague.”Congratulations, Mr. Battistelli. Having just collaborated with Cubans (who parked Russian nukes just a short distance away from your American masters), you now go visit their old masters in Moscow. Having refused to obey orders from The Hague (renowned for international criminal justice), your obedient PR bunnies now set up shop in The Hague. Irony is not dead yet. While the EPO says (right there on national television) that it intends to ignore the law and refuse to obey the highest court at The Hague it sure feels comfortable to do its patent brainwashing right there at The Hague.

The EPO is officially a rogue institution out of control. The UPC is its latest project and the main threat to this project is European democracy (meaning, people actually becoming aware of what’s going on and then voting on it, i.e. against it). █

Danish Left’s Alternate for European Parliament Slams the European Patent Office While Staff Protests Are Again Ignored by the German Media

Posted in Europe, Patents at 12:23 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

As if this patent institute is totally unchallengeable, like immigration law in Merkel’s Germany

Karen Melchior

Summary: The latest information from and about the European Patent Office/Organisation, where there has just been a major protest (in Munich), albeit nobody would know it based on or due to the silence of the media

THE Administrative Council (AC) of the European Patent Organisation (EPO) is led by a Dane and some rumours suggest that it may be pursuing (or at least exploring) removal of Battistelli and his team, who have become a disgrace and source of great shame to the Organisation. Karen Melchior, a rather popular (on the Web) Danish diplomat/lawyer*, has just said “Shame on @EPOorg” (European Patent Organisation, led by a Dane), the context being software patents in Europe (context about the EPO in general can be found in our corresponding Wiki).

“Willy Minnoye, as head of internal services was in fact promoted after being found guilty of breaching fundamental rights several years ago when he confiscated private union mail (see ILO judgment 1547).”
      –AnonymousThankfully we have many sources (more than before, especially after the EPO foolishly chose to censor and threaten us), both outside and inside the EPO. “Willy Minnoye,” told us a source privately, “as head of internal services was in fact promoted after being found guilty of breaching fundamental rights several years ago when he confiscated private union mail (see ILO judgment 1547).” It sure looks like Battistelli and his team have quickly become a massive liability for the Organisation as a whole. “Dear Roy,” wrote to us a person, “thanks for the great work.” But it’s becoming harder to do such work without further input from readers. A partial media blackout in the whole of Europe prevents people from finding out what really goes on inside the EPO. EPO members of staff find themselves fearing communication even with their colleagues and German media might not want to remark negatively about the EPO for reasons we explained here before [1, 2]. All we know so far about the protest and surrounding developments comes from this comment:

Latest news from The Staff Committee is that they have informed the AC that they no longer support the planned Social Survey. Their version is that while BB invited them to nominate an observer for the organising committee, the nominee then wasn’t invited to any meetings and was given the results at the last minute as a fait accompli. The SC consider that their nominee is just a fig leaf to show that BB had dealt with them but that this was not bona fide consultation. Also it seems that no AC members are part of this either so that it is all being organised by BB. Quelle surprise!

In his 4th Feb speech to staff, BB gave the impression that his door was open but that the SC kept refusing to come on in! I wonder how he’ll organise an independent study if no staff will speak to the survey.

Meanwhile, SUEPO is organising a follow-up to a survey from a couple of years ago. Should be revealing but I presume BB’s PR gurus are already writing their rebuttals…

If anyone can please send us material which is related to the protest or the second Board 28 meeting of this year, that will help a great deal and enable dissemination of information. This is the worst nightmare of the abusers: a flow of reliable information, not Battistelli-led propaganda. The pressure on Mr. Kongstad has grown over the years because of letters (including from Transparency International), protests, and so on. Will he listen more carefully if fellow Danes speak speak out?

“Danish is not an official EPO language,” Benjamin Henrion pointed out yesterday. “And DK companies won’t get a legally binding translation.”

“Only about 10% of European patents get validated in DK [Denmark] currently. Polish gov’t report made similar observation.”
      –Jesper LundThere’s a reason why some of last year’s protests targeted the Danish Consulate (this actually received press coverage from several Danish newspapers), and it’s not just Mr. Kongstad’s complicity by silence (letting Battistelli totally off the hook and helping Battistelli hide his salary from the European public).

Jesper Lund, who is Danish, responded to Henrion by saying “we happily swallowed the EPO pill in 2014 and accepted a 10-fold increase in patents valid in DK :( [...] That’s “over time”. Only about 10% of European patents get validated in DK [Denmark] currently. Polish gov’t report made similar observation.”

“The 10x increase is not there yet? With the UPC many countries will see drastic patent warming,” Henrion added.

In order to keep this concise, we shall cover these matters in a separate post about the UPC.

Despite the fact that we are now better equipped to quickly capture any morsel of information about the EPO, we are still not seeing anything about yesterday’s protest, so input from readers is sorely needed right now. Here is how to get in touch. █
______
* Melchior prefers “Danish radikale politician.” According to her Web site, she is “a foreign policy professional with an academic background in law [who] worked more than 7 years in the political systems of the EU, Denmark, UK and France.” She attended “Transparency International Summer School on Integrity 2014,” which brings back memories of the EPO’s relation (good and bad, implicating the Danish AC Chairman and Control Risks Group) to Transparency International.

La Universidad de Harvard se Vuelve un Vasallo de Microsoft y Maquilla a Famosos Criminales

Posted in Bill Gates, Microsoft at 11:04 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

English/Original

Publicado en Bill Gates, Microsoft at 7:06 am por Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Parte de un ampli esquema implicado a Microsoft en CORRUPCIÓN SISTEMÁTICA, transformando escuelas y universidades en puestos de Microsoft a cuesta de los contribuyentes

Harvard Wreath

Sumario: La universidad de elección de Gates sobre la cuál todavía saca ventaja, se vuelve una agencia personal de Microsoft para INDOCTRINAR, convirtiéndose parte de su asistida por el gobierno conquista de la educación de Ciencias de la Computacion en los Estados Unidos.

BILL GATES nunca se graduó de Harvard (grados honorarios en realidad no cuentán para nada, virtualmente están a la venta). Abandonó su educación. Sin embargo Gates tomó control de Harvard así como otras universidades en los Estados Unidos (y en un menor grado en el extranjero también). Al ´donar´ dinero bajo falsas pretensiones SECUESTRÓ la agenda/curricula de su Ciencias de la Computación (echándola a su favor) e incluso nombró instalaciones como a sí mismo. Algo realmente anti-academico de hacer. Es lo anti-ético a la noción de educación.

Después de sobornar oficiales para asegurarse contratos SOBREVALORADOS (como cubrimos anoche)) Microsoft ahora se apodera de universidades, no sólo escuelas. Como lo puso Slashdot ayer:

¨¿Supo usted que Microsoft ha apoyado a Harvard en crear una nueva versión (de su muy popular CS50 curso) llamado CS50 AP, designado especialmente para educadores de secundaria?¨ preguntó una publicación Aprenda a Blogear Microsoft. Si le gustaría enseñar CS50 AP (y en turno Principios de AP CS) en su salón de clases este año,¨ Harvard informa a posibles profesores, ¨estan cordialmente invitados a unirse a nosotros en uno de nuestros entrenamientos para profesores workshops a llevarse a cabo en varias partes alrededor del país y el mundo!¨ Pero antes de matricularse están requeridos a responder a lo siguiente y Harvard no aceptará un NO como respuesta: ¨Nuestros AMIGOS en Microsoft nos están ayudando a distribuir materiales de apoyo para los profesores para esta versión de CS50 para profesores y estudiantes de educación secundaria. Al chequear la cajita de abajo, ustedes están de acuerdo que podamos ´compartir´ los datos que usted sometió a traves de esta forma como parte del proceso de planificación.¨ Microsoft esta DIRIGIENDO a la educación secundaria estos días – carajo, la Casa Blanca incluso deja al presidente de Microsoft Brad Smith reunir a periodistas y relatarles sus planes de gastar $4 B de impuestos en una nueva CS para toda iniciativa secundaria antes de que el Presidente lo anuncie a los contribuyentes. A propósito, la CS50 AP Wiki contiene una forma de autorización y deslindación por la cual, entre otras cosas, requiere a estudiantes tímidos estar sentados en una zona de ¨no cámaras/film¨ sin protestar si no quieren sus fotos o videos usados por Harvard para promover un curso promovido por Microsoft.¨

Cubrimos la nata acerca de Brad Smith a principios de mes.

Para citar las palabras nauseabundas: ¨Nuestros amigos de Microsoft nos están ´ayudando´ a distribuir los materiales para apoyo del maestro de esta versiond de CS50 para profesores y estudiantes de secundaria. Al chequear la cajita de abajo, ustedes están de acuerdo que podamos ´compartir´ los datos que usted sometió a traves de esta forma como parte del proceso de planificación. [...] Esto es requerido, por favor entre un valor.¨

“Harvard ahora es MIERDA,” nos dijo un lector que solía trabajar para una univesidad grande estadounidense. “Que VERGUENZA para ellos y para los Estados Unidos en general.”

“Esto parece sembrar un montón de preguntas,” una persona me dijo esta mañana en Twitter, “ética, legalmente, y acerca de integridad – en los Estados Unidos, Microsoft, UE, Romania etc.”

Microsoft es todavía un cáncer en la educación. Sobre todo es acerca de convertir a la gente joven DEPENDIENTE (encerrádo dentro) de código secreto con puertas traseras. Harvard debería avergonzarse de sí misma. Ocasionalmente invitaba a un famoso CRIMINAL, Bill Gates, a dar discursos allí, como si esto fuese un ejemplo a seguir por los estudiantes. UCLA también hace lo mismo con el más grande TROLL DE PATENTES [1, 2], quien es amigo personal de la rata Bill Gates. Todo se resume a corrupcción y política podrida. █

De Nuevo Es Confirmado: Microsoft Esta Sobornando a Oficiales

Posted in Fraud, Microsoft at 10:53 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

English/Original

Publicado in Fraude, Microsoft at 1:53 pm por el Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Pero no esperen que alguien de Microsoft sea sentenciado a pasar unos años en prisión (alas, es notorio)

Rumanian flag

Sumario: La epidemia de CORRUPCIÓN DE Microsoft es resaltada en una corte de leyes, pero ya que Microsoft es un moustrou bien conectado políticamente no esperamos castigo por tal comportamiento CRIMINAL

EL año pasado Microsoft fue atrapado chantajeando políticos Británicos [1, 2] y días atras escribimos acerca de su extorsión y chantaje (con patentes) contra Android OEMs.

El último fin de semana un lector nos hizo enterar de un viejo artículo que sobrepasamos al momento. Después de reportajes acerca de muchos casos de SOBORNO por parte de Microsoft (lo que lo trajo bajo una prueba en los Estados Unidos) escuchamos muy poco, como sí la investigación no era más investigada. Recuerden que el Presidente Obama fue ya pagado (algunos dicen sobornado) por Microsoft, which rápidamente uno de sus más altos contribuyentes antes de las elecciónes, como bien dijo Bill Gates, su esposa, Steve Ballmer y su esposa también. Haciéndo su influencia en le gobierno estadounidense pegajosa (vea nuestra página Wiki titulada ¨La influencia de Microsoft sobre el gobierno Estadounidense¨) seguramente que vale la pena.

Aquí esta el reporte de noticias titulado ¨Antiguo Ministro Rumano admite haber recibido un soborno de €4mn bribe in un caso de Microsoft” (recordándonos que Microsoft todavía es una COMPAÑÍA CRIMINAL). Dice:

El previo Ministro de Comunicaciones Rumano Gabriel Sandu admitió en una audiencia ante una corte el pasado Octubre 12 que recibió un soborno de €4mn en el llamado caso de Microsoft. Otros ocho previos ministros también estan bajo investigación en el caso, pero Sandu es el único en haber sido acusado por el momento.

Las implicaciones del caso permanecen inpredecibles, ya que envuelve ministros de tres gobiernos de varias orientaciones políticas. Fue instigada por el Primer Ministro Victor Ponta del Partido de Centro-Izquierda de Social Demócratas (PSD) quienes desearon una investigación sobre los contratos firmados bajo su predecesor y rival político Emil Boc durante el 2009-2012. Pero abrió la puerta a una más ancho escándalo que ha arrastrado a políticos de ambos partidos.

El Directorado Nacional Anticorrupción (DNA) empezó investigaciones sobre la venta de licensias de software para las escuelas Rumanas en Septiembre del 2014. Los nueve antiguos ministros son sospechosos de RECIBIR SOBORNOS A CAMBIO DE FIRMAR Y LUEGO EXTENDER CONTRATOS PARA LICENCIAR SOFTWARE DE mICROSOFT A PRECIOS MÁS ALTOS QUE EN EL MERCADO.

Sandu fué el primer previos ministro en dar su testimonio delante de la corte. Afirmó haber contribuído los €4mn de soborno que recibió al Partido de Centro-Derecha Demócratico Liberal (PNL) para su campaña electoral y la de Traian Basescu, el exitóso candidateo de las elecciones presidenciales del 2009.

“Eso es Rumania,” nos dijo un lector, ¨¿qué acerca de Rusia y los otros? ¿Cuál es el status?¨ Bueno, previamente escribimos acerca de Rumania en:

Todavía esperamos por el resultado de las investigación de los Estados Unidos contra Microsoft (por corrupcción), pero permanecemos escépticos hasta que veamos la luz del dia. Microsoft tiene a MUCHOS CABILDEADORES E INCLUSOS POLÍTICOS EN SUS BOLSILLOS, como hemos cubierto a traves de los años extensivamente.

Rumania es simplemente uno de varios países donde Microsoft debería someterse a una extensiva examinación, incluso la EVASION DE IMPUESTOS que esperamos que el IRS finalmente lo tome más seriamente. En algunos de los articulos de arriba ya hemos discutido los trucos de contabilidad de Microsoft en Rumania.

Cuando leemos algo de lo de arriba se hace más evidente que Microsoft está básicamente ARRIBA DE LA LEY, rodeado de POLÍTICOS CORRUPTOS quienes están muy asustados (or envaselinados) para realmente hacer algo al respecto, sin mencionar sus socios que hacen mucho de su trabajo sucio (como fue el caso en los días de OOXML con elecciones ARREGLADAS). ¿Cuál es el ruido acerca de este ´nuevo´ Microsoft de todas maneras? Nada más que una sobreusada campaña de mercadeo y relaciones públicas, alrededor de las lineas: ¨Microsoft ama a Linux.¨

A la gente no le gusta Microsoft porque es bueno. A la gente típicamente le disgusta Microsoft por que ellos entienden la historia y saben que Microsoft es… bien, especial. █

Links 18/2/2016: New Ubuntu Phone, Go 1.6

Posted in News Roundup at 10:34 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

GNOME bluefish

Contents

GNU/Linux

Free Software/Open Source

  • 7 Reasons Why Open Source Code is Better Than Proprietary

    I’m always surprised when users wish that Microsoft Office or PhotoShop would be ported to Linux. Probably, some just want to be able to use standard industry software on their favorite operating system. But so far as I am concerned, applications like LibreOffice Writer or Krita are not just substitutions — even without my ideals, I would choose them as the highest quality software available for my needs.

  • Top 4 open source issue tracking tools

    So let’s take a look at four excellent choices for managing bugs and issues, all open source and all easy to download and host yourself. To be clear, there’s no way we could possibly list every issue tracking tool here; instead, these are four of our favorites, based on feature richness and the size of the community behind the project. There are others, to be sure, and if you’ve got a good case for your favorite not listed here, be sure to let us know which is your favorite tool and what makes it stand out to you, in the comments below.

  • How to make sense of any open source mess

    Open source development and collaboration takes place online, in places made of information. From individual commit messages to project websites and even larger digital structures, each piece of information we create is part of a mess. This is not a slight against open source; all human endeavors are messy, because that is just the way we are as human beings. We all bring our own strengths and failings, wisdom and ignorance, to everything we do.

  • ONF Offers OpenDaylight Support in Latest Atrium SDN Stack

    The embrace of the OpenDaylight SDN controller follows the support of the ONOS controller in the first release of the Atrium software last year.
    Open Networking Foundation officials are hoping to accelerate the adoption of network virtualization by including support for the OpenDaylight SDN controller in the latest release of its open-source Atrium software distribution.

  • Wikimedia: We’re Building Something, But It’s Not A Search Engine To Challenge Google

    The Wikimedia Foundation has rejected the media reports that claimed that the non-profit is working on some search engine that will be a one-click replacement of Google.

  • ReactOS 0.4.0 Released
  • Open source Windows-clone ReactOS hits version 0.4 (ten years after 0.3)

    The developers of ReactOS have been working to develop an open source operating system capable of running Windows software since 1998.

    It’s been slow going: version 0.3.0 was released in 2006. Nearly 10 years later, ReactOS 0.4.0 is available for download.

  • Skytap Supports the Modern Developer Toolchain with Vagrant, Open Source Contributions
  • Here’s why Bottle Rocket is contributing open-source code

    Bottle Rocket has stepped out from behind its proprietary code and expanded its reach into the open-source market.

    The Addison-based company, which creates custom mobile applications for business customers, has released its first few pieces of code for Android and plans to build on the code it has shared with the development community.

  • IBM Contributes Thousands of Lines of Code to Blockchain Efforts
  • IBM Goes Open-Source For Better IoT Apps

    Putting limits on what the Internet of Things can do to transform everything from in-store retail operations to multinational logistics is a great way to hamstring a potentially revolutionary technology. So too is keeping the way IoT apps and services are developed locked away behind the closed doors of intellectual property laws.

    Fortunately, IBM has seen the light of publicly supported solutions and is releasing a new open-source IoT development tool by the name of Quarks. Supported by the IBM Streams platform that specializes in compiling and analyzing gigabytes of live data in real time, Quarks might be used alternatively by hospitals to share designs for vitals monitoring apps that can be used with wearables and by industrial companies outfitting their workers’ uniforms with safety sensors, TechCrunch reported.

  • IBM’s Open Source Quarks Pushes IoT Analytics to the Edge

    IBM has open sourced new technology called Quarks to push Internet of Things (IoT) analytics from centralized systems out to the actual edge devices that are collecting and spewing out vast amounts of data.

  • The Grid: Web Design by Artificial Intelligence

    Flow-Based Programming (FBP) is a software development paradigm where applications are built by “wiring together” various reusable components inside a graph.

    Since running into the concept in 2011, I’ve built the NoFlo environment, which brings Flow-Based Programming to the universal runtime of JavaScript, allowing flows to be run on both Node.js and the browser.

  • Google’s TensorFlow Serving Goes Open-Source
  • Google ups the ante in the machine learning wars
  • Alphabet Inc (NASDAQ:GOOGL) Google Introduces TensorFlow Serving
  • Google Delivers TensorFlow Serving, Advancing Machine Learning
  • Google’s TensorFlow Serving goes open source for large scale machine learning model creation

    Google has released TensorFlow Serving to the open-source community, a fresh addition to computer learning software for large-scale modeling projects.

  • Events

    • Devconf – Amazing place for a developer

      As a fresh start of 2016, I got a chance to be part of Devconf – an annual conference which takes place in the beautiful Brno city of Czech Republic. From past three years, its been happening in February month’s first Friday to Sunday and hence this year it was from 5th to 7th February.

    • Get ready to Fork the System at LibrePlanet

      Hundreds of people from around the world will meet at LibrePlanet 2016: Fork the System, March 19-20, 2016 at MIT in Cambridge, MA. This year’s conference program will examine how free software creates the opportunity of a new path for its users, allows developers to fight the restrictions of a system dominated by proprietary software by creating free replacements, and is the foundation of a philosophy of freedom, sharing, and change. Sessions like “Yes, the FCC might ban your operating system” and “GNU/Linux and Chill: Free software on a college campus” will offer insights about how to resist the dominance of proprietary software, which is often built in to university policies and government regulations.

  • SaaS/Big Data

  • Oracle/Java/LibreOffice

    • LibreOffice 5.1 Offers Reorganized User Interface for Its Apps

      The Document Foundation (TDF) released LibreOffice 5.1 on Feb. 10, providing users with a new milestone update of the popular open-source office suite. LibreOffice originated as a fork of the open-source OpenOffice suite in 2011 and has been downloaded more than 120 million times since then. LibreOffice includes Writer document, Calc spreadsheet, Impress presentation, Base database and Draw drawing programs as part of the integrated suite. In the LibreOffice 5.1 update, a key area of improvement is the user interface throughout the suite’s programs, which all benefit from a reorganization as well as menu additions. With the 5.1 update, the office suite’s integrated programs can now load and save files from remote locations directly through menu dialog box. LibreOffice is the default standard office suite in many mainstream Linux distributions, including Red Hat Enterprise Linux, SUSE and Ubuntu. LibreOffice is also available for both Microsoft Windows and Apple OS X. In this slide show, eWEEK takes a look at some of the highlights of the new LibreOffice 5.1 release.

    • LibreOffice Is Getting Better GTK3 Support

      Last year LibreOffice made much progress in receiving GTK3 support that it also began running on Wayland. The battle though is not over and more GTK3 improvements are still forthcoming.

  • Pseudo-/Semi-Open Source (Openwashing)

  • Public Services/Government

    • Tallinn schools piloting open source software

      Schools in the city of Tallinn (Estonia) are gradually moving to PC workstations running on free and open source software. A pilot in March 2014 switched 3 schools and 2 kindergartens. Students, teachers, school administration and kindergartens’ staff members are using LibreOffice, Ubuntu-Linux and other open source tools.

  • Openness/Sharing

    • 2016 Open Source Awards Finalists Named

      The Benjamin Franklin Award is a humanitarian/bioethics award presented annually by Bioinformatis.org to an individual who has, in his or her practice, promoted free and open access to the materials and methods used in the life sciences.

    • Open Data

      • Geography students bring open-source mapping group to State College

        Two geography students have started a Maptime chapter in State College to support community cartography and teach people how to use and create maps. The endeavor is co-sponsored by The Peter R. Gould Center for Geography Education and Outreach in Penn State’s Department of Geography.

        “I really want to put State College on the map—literally,” geography graduate student Carolyn Fish said. “So much open-source mapping is centered in large cities, such as New York, Washington and San Francisco.”

    • Open Access/Content

    • Open Hardware

      • Open Source CowTech Ciclop 3D Scanner Kit Available on Kickstarter for $99

        Montana-based startup CowTech launched an affordable 3D scanner kit on Kickstarter and they easily breezed past their funding goal in the first 24 hours. The CowTech Ciclop is a $99 3D laser scanner kit that was designed specifically with owners of 3D printers in mind. The buyer can print most of the scanner parts out on their own 3D printer and the parts were designed to fit on virtually any desktop 3D printer with a print bed volume of 115 x 110 x 65 mm (4.5 x 4.3 x 2.6 in) or higher. Once all of the components have been printed, the assembly process is quick and simple, and the Ciclop can start scanning in less than 30 minutes.

  • Programming

    • Go 1.6 is released

      Today we release Go version 1.6, the seventh major stable release of Go. You can grab it right now from the download page. Although the release of Go 1.5 six months ago contained dramatic implementation changes, this release is more incremental.

      The most significant change is support for HTTP/2 in the net/http package. HTTP/2 is a new protocol, a follow-on to HTTP that has already seen widespread adoption by browser vendors and major websites. In Go 1.6, support for HTTP/2 is enabled by default for both servers and clients when using HTTPS, bringing the benefits of the new protocol to a wide range of Go projects, such as the popular Caddy web server.

    • Go 1.6 Released
    • Women write better open source code on GitHub than men [Ed: conveniently (and wrongly) concludes from that it’s FOSS (not CS) that discriminates against women]

      Woman may be more competent than men at writing code but still there is evidence that they are discriminated against in open source communities because they are women.

    • A New Study Suggests That Women Write Better Code Than Men

      A recent study conducted by researchers from the computer science departments at Cal Poly, San Luis, Obispo and North Carolina State University reports that women write better code than men.

    • If Women Are Better at Coding, It’s Because They Have to Be

Leftovers

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channels: Come and chat with us in real time

New to This Site? Here Are Some Introductory Resources

No

Mono

ODF

Samba logo






We support

End software patents

GPLv3

GNU project

BLAG

EFF bloggers

Comcast is Blocktastic? SavetheInternet.com



Recent Posts