06.01.16
Posted in Europe, Patents at 1:33 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: The Team Battistelli-leaning union, FFPE-EPO, responds to criticism in the worst possible way
“STAY CLASSY,” goes the famous saying. Well, having received this letter from FICSA several weeks ago, Sam van der Bijl sends out an internal response to the few people who can call themselves FFPE-EPO members.
“From the (in)famous EPO pro-management union FFPE,” told us our source, came the following new text (earlier today).
“Another piece of very noble prose,” the source added. Before even reading any of the accompanying remarks I was rather appalled to see nationality brought into it. Our source later added “see at the end that illustrates the essence of what FFPE truly is” (indeed so)…
Reply to those who deny our right to sign an MoU
Submitted by S van der Bijl on Wed, 01/06/2016 – 12:29
In the past month FFPE EPO received to scandalous letters. On of the came from USF and other from FICSA. The content of these two letters to which we will not officially reply is that FFPE EPO is a minority union and should shut up and listen to decisions taken by a bigger union. It is true that an international organisation is not a democracy but however that des not mean that certain democratic principles do not apply. One of the pillars of any democracy is the rights of minorities to express their opinions and beliefs and to defend their interests. This is exactly what FFPE EPO is doing. We are a minority union which has different values, different tactics, different beliefs and even a different composition of members. Our members have interests and ideas and it is the role of the FFPE EPO committee to defend as well as we can these interests and ideas. I don’t see at all why non members should have any say at all in the decisions that FFPE EPO takes. The only people who have the legal right to tell the committee what to do and not to do are the members in a general assembly. Our members vote for our committee and it’s policy. For the members of other unions, the message is therefore mind your own business! As for mr. Diab Tabari from FICSA who signed this shameful letter, I think he did not read very carefully what he signed. How would he, as a worker for UNWRA in Libanon, like it if the majority leader of for example Libanon wrote a letter to the refugees to tell them to shut up because they are a minority?
“Libanon” should be Lebanon, but never mind that, it’s not Sam’s first language.
“Remember that union whose chairman was elected by NINE (9) members,” our source reminds us. We covered this whole affair before, e.g. in:
- In the EPO’s Official Photo Op, “Only One of the Faces is Actually FFPE-EPO”
- Further Evidence Suggests and Shows Stronger Evidence That Team Battistelli Uses FFPE-EPO as ‘Yellow Union’ Against SUEPO
- “FFPE-EPO Was Set up About 9 Years Ago With Management Encouragement”
- Fallout of the FFPE EPO MoU With Battistelli’s Circle
- The EPO’s Media Strategy at Work: Union Feuds and Group Fracturing
- Caricature of the Day: Recognising FFPE EPO
- Union Syndicale Federale Slams FFPE-EPO for Helping Abusive EPO Management by Signing a Malicious, Divisive Document
- FFPE-EPO Says MoU With Battistelli Will “Defend Employment Conditions” (Updated)
- Their Masters’ Voice (Who Block Techrights): FFPE-EPO Openly Discourages Members From Reading Techrights
- Letter Says EPO MoU “Raises Questions About FFPE’s Credibility as a Federation of Genuine Staff Unions”
- On Day of Strike FFPE-EPO Reaffirms Status as Yellow (Fake/Management-Leaning) Union, Receives ‘Gifts’
- Needed Urgently: Information About the Secret Meeting of Board 28 and Battistelli’s Yellow Union, FFPE-EPO
- In Battistelli’s Mini Union (Minion) It Takes Less Than 10 Votes to ‘Win’ an Election
With ‘unions’ like these, who needs union busters? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Google, Microsoft, Patents at 6:26 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Microsoft reminds us that it is still engaging in patent extortion by signing yet another patent settlement deal which requires surrendering to Microsoft
JUST over a month ago Microsoft officials made it clear that the patent war against Android was still on. Now it’s confirmed by actions.
Today’s post is reactionary, as usual, and it will be about Microsoft extortion. We shall provide some background information to help explain why European regulators should put Microsoft on trial instead of taking Microsoft’s lobbying in Europe seriously, imposing fines on Google and acting as Google watchdogs.
Microsoft’s patent extortion against companies in China isn’t entirely new. Remember what it did to ZTE 3 years ago. Chinese authorities got visibly irritated by Microsoft’s patent shakedown and released a previously-secret list of patents Microsoft uses to extort companies in China, compelling them to obey Microsoft’s demands so as to avert costly litigation. Xiaomi is the latest victim, but to Microsoft the high-prized deal would be with Huawei, which is a growing force and dominant OEM in the Android domain. Huawei, based on reports we mentioned in past years, doesn’t surrender.
“Xiaomi is the latest victim, but to Microsoft the high-prized deal would be with Huawei, which is a growing force and dominant OEM in the Android domain.”More patent extortion from Microsoft serves to remind us that there is no strategic change at Microsoft. Microsoft cannot coexist with Linux and leave it alone/live in peace; it cannot help itself, it’s a scorpion (riding on a tortoise/turtle as per the famous parable) and it just keeps pinching that which it’s exploiting for a free ride (Android in this case) while relying on regulators — through lobbying — to prevent defensive reaction from Google. Horacio Gutierrez may be gone, but nothing substantial happened or changed. Don’t believe for a second that just because Microsoft’s patent Mafia don has left it somehow means the extortion strategy stopped. Microsoft never rescinded or withdrew this, except on April 1st (as a prank).
For those who are not sure what Microsoft is doing here, how it misleads the media, and what it means in practical terms, see this article about Acer. The above is repetition of the same strategy. They are putting lipstick on a pig again.
“This has nothing to do with access to services, it’s just how they dress up patent extortion and the coercion which comes with it.”In short, Microsoft tells Xiaomi, “do what we say or we’ll sue you with patents.” In other words, Microsoft threatens litigation and gives a “get out” clause (make Android become just a Microsoft platform). Having just killed Windows on mobile, this is all Microsoft has left. It uses blackmail tactics to impose its malware/spyware on potentially billions of phones. The ‘official’ announcement says this:
Microsoft Corp. and Xiaomi Inc. have expanded their global partnership to provide innovative user experiences on mobile devices. As part of the agreement, Xiaomi will ship Microsoft Office and Skype on Xiaomi Android smartphones and tablets. As a result, tens of millions of consumers and business customers in China, India and around the world will have new ways to work, collaborate and communicate. The companies’ new collaboration also includes a cross-license and patent transfer agreement.
Don’t be misled by “cross-license and patent transfer agreement.” It’s a settlement basically. The FFII’s President responded to this as follows: “Microsoft is the biggest patent troll.”
This has nothing to do with access to services, it’s just how they dress up patent extortion and the coercion which comes with it. And they tell us Microsoft “loves Linux”… does anybody still believe that? Not even Microsoft’s marketing staff should be gullible enough to believe it. █
Update: Based on updates given to relatively high-profile reporters (and those who updated their puff pieces accordingly), Microsoft managed to get ‘protection’ money too, albeit not in the traditional form. Xiaomi has just been pressured to have paid (unless it just wanted to pay) Microsoft for useless patents; this is either a novel way to disguise another case of blackmail against Linux or part of Xiaomi’s patent hoarding efforts. Either way, it’s starting to become apparent that Xiaomi paid Microsoft, one way or another (the amount is not known). “The Wall Street Journal reports that Xiaomi will purchase 1,500 patents from Microsoft as part of the deal,” says one writer, citing an article that says “Xiaomi Corp. has agreed to purchase around 1,500 patents” (the term “agreed to purchase” suggests that it came from Microsoft, not from Xiaomi).
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 5:50 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: The latest developments in Zagreb, where Battistelli’s ‘bulldog’ faces many criminal charges for the chaos he had caused (resulting//culminating even in suicide)
New documents from Croatia have begun reaching us and sources in Zagreb suggest some big things are about to happen (we mentioned or alluded to these before).
A copy of a “Special Report” dated the 28th April 2016 (i.e. one month ago) from the Zagreb Police Authority is shown above (plus translation at the bottom). Quoting our source: “This document indicates that the police have already compiled around five investigation reports in response to a number of complaints against Željko Topić,” who now viciously attacks EPO staff. He’s like Battistelli’s ‘bulldog’ and rumours suggest that Battistelli will soon ask for extension of his term. Reports (police investigations) already compiled include (but may not be limited to):
- 24th of June 2013
- 13th of November 2013
- 18th of November 2013
- 22nd of November 2013
- 24th of June 2014
“It seems that there was no follow-up on these police reports by the State Attorney’s Office,” our source told us. “It is suspected that this was due to some kind of political interference during the Presidency of Ivo Josipovic who was voted out of office in January 2015.
“The justice system in Croatia now seems to be slowly gathering momentum so there could be some interesting developments on this front over the coming weeks.”
Some other sources of ours (in Zagreb) suggest so as well. Below is the full English translation. █
REPUBLIC OF CROATIA
MINISTRY OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS
ZAGREB POLICE AUTHORITY
CRIMINAL POLICE DEPARTMENT
Economic Crime Unit
Number: XXXXXXXXX
Zagreb, 28 April 2016
DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
Reference: Your number XXXXXXXXX of 10 March 2016
Pursuant to Art. 206 h. no. 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the following is submitted:
SPECIAL REPORT
We note that the police officers of the Economic Crime Unit, Zagreb Police Authority, carried out a criminal investigation based on an anonymous submission received by the National Police Office for Suppression of Corruption and Organized Crime (hereinafter: PNUSKOK) on 14 June 2013, alleging abuse on the part of a former official and director of the State Intellectual Property Office, Z . T., which was submitted to District Attorney’s Office in Zagreb on 24 June 2013 and on which a criminal investigation was carried out.
During this criminal investigation, the police officers of this unit again received from the PNUSKOK a criminal complaint with submissions dated 09 January 2013 filed by V. S. against Z. T. and S. M. of the Ministry of Business and Trade with the Office of the District Attorney in Zagreb, the listed criminal charges being identical to the criminal complaint attached to your order, number and date as referred to above.
Please note that we conducted an investigation into the said criminal charges and that everything which we have done was reported to the Municipal State Attorney of Zagreb in our special report number XXXXXXXXX of 24 June 2013, 13 November 2013, 22 November 2013 and 24 June 2014, their number XXXXXXXXX of 18 November 2013.
Police officer
[Signature]
HEAD OF UNIT
[Signature]
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 5:25 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Astronomical amounts of money are being given to private companies and even broadcasters (i.e. buying the media) to create a silly festival for Team Battistelli (mirroring what FIFA habitually does)
UNDER Battistelli, who is worse than Blatter of FIFA in many ways, huge secret contracts are given to private companies, including rather dodgy contracts. We have already explained why this is wrong. Battistelli is wasting EPO budget to help distract from his never-ending abuses and now he prepares a political event dressed up as "science" with high risk and paid-for coverage.
“For information,” told us one reader, some numbers are available to highlight the huge degree of Battistelli’s lavish spendings/waste. “Estimated costs,” this reader told us “of “European Inventor of the Year” (2015)” (which was probably cheaper than this year’s) were as follows:
For the costs of “European Inventor of the Year” in 2015 the estimates range from 3 to 7 million Euros.
It is documented that 1.5 million Euros went to CNN which is one of six “media partners” paid for covering the event. Figures for the payments to the other “media partners” are not available.
Another 800.000 Euros went to VOK DAMS Events.
When other costs such as catering, travel and accommodation for all invitees and working time for EPO staff are factored in, the total is at least 3 million Euros and it has been estimated it could be as much as 7 million Euros.
This unaccountable (after so-called ‘reforms’) President is nuts and evidence we have (albeit not sufficiently well verified) suggests he is lying about his salary. Is he also lying about the so-called ‘bicycle affair’. He had an extremely dodgy guy deliver the message. Were bicycles of Battistelli damaged at some EPO parking lot? A better question to ask is, do such bicycles exist in the first place? We would not be shocked if Battistelli (whom someone told us wants his own limousine) only found out that the EPO had gave him a bicycle upon the nonsense used to justifysix bodyguards that cost a fortune at almost the same time as the budget meeting. Does anyone know anything about a limousine and a private lift? We keep hearing rumours about these, but it’s hard to substantiate. Either way, here is a new comment about the ‘bicycle affair’ (as some people now call it):
All this leaves me with a question:
Is there anybody who would know BB’s bicycle from all the other bicycles present in the bicycle parking lot? Or does it carry a plate saying: I am BB’s bicycle? Another question: Does he own the bicycle or is it EPO owned and is BB merely allowed to use it? If there really is really a bicycle at all….. One just wonders……
Here is a new ode about it:
F reshly pumped up and ready to pedal
I deas of reform,threatening to meddle
V ery high increases that could brake the bank
E xtremely tyresome,is this some kind of prank?
F or these proposals he must Raleigh the troops
O ne spokesperson referred to too many holes in the loops
L et’s not get saddled with another fee hike
D on’t vote for it! Get on yer bike!
Even caricatures are now circulating or being circulated, demonstrating just how much EPO staff loathes the crazed boss (0% approval rate). █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 5:00 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Mutiny against the man who thinks he’s King [1, 2]
Summary: The feud between the independent (in principle) boards and the man who believes he’s King/Caesar of Eponia escalates, as new details emerge about the latest attack from the ‘King’ against these independent boards whose role is to assure quality at the EPO
THE EPO‘s current President is not a change agent but a demolition agent. Ask Board 28 what they think about this. They recently called it a "crisis".
Things are heating up for ‘Sun King’ (megalomaniac President with a God complex) as leaks have reached The Register which show the latest pushback. In the author’s own words:
Undeterred by staff cutting his brakes, president of the European Patent Office (EPO), Benoit Battistelli, has now enraged his organization’s Boards of Appeal.
In a letter [PDF] leaked to The Register, the boards – which act as the EPO’s judicial body – make a series of severe criticisms of Battistelli’s proposed structural reforms that would in effect make him King.
Noting that the aim of the reform was to increase the autonomy of the boards, the association that represents all 28 global boards complains in a letter sent earlier this month that it would in fact “decrease the level of autonomy and independence.”
The Association of the Members of the Boards of Appeal (AMBA) also points out that the proposed reforms do not follow “the main internationally recognized principles of judicial independence.”
As with an agreement that the EPO management has been trying to force on worker unions – leading to a series of strikes – one of the biggest complaints that AMBA has is that the new agreement gives the EPO President the ability to completely change the system at a future date.
[...]
As to how such changes ended up in the proposal without being challenged, well that’s because Battistelli and his team didn’t consult with the boards that it was seeking to reform. From the letter: “The Boards have been given little or no opportunity to comment on central aspects of the current proposal. Many of them have not been presented to the Boards at all.”
The boards did make suggestions and proposals, but so far they have gone precisely nowhere. “The vast majority of our proposals, comments and concerns have not been taken into account in the proposed rules and are not reflected in any other way, for example in the explanatory notes or in the ‘Alternatives’ section, which is conspicuous by its absence.”
In short, it’s not just the EPO staff that the wildly unpopular president is trying to become king of, he’s also trying to take over the very independent processes that are supposed to hold his organization’s decisions to account.
All hail King Battistelli!
The above does not merit further comment. We have covered these affairs for years and based on this exclusive new post from Merpel, having failed to send the boards to exile (due to some resistance from the Administrative Council), ENA graduate Sun King is trying a new strategy that can destroy the boards by reducing workload/demand (same tactics which Conservatives in the UK employ against the NHS). It’s all about astronomical price hikes that would make the boards’ reviews too financially prohibitive for most parties. To quote Merpel:
Merpel thought that nothing at the European Patent Office could surprise her any more. How wrong she was. She has now received news of a draft of the latest proposal from the EPO administration to reform the EPO Boards of Appeal. The background is given in her previous post, second and third headings.
As she wrote before, the previous proposals from the EPO President to the Administrative Council for the reform of the Boards of Appeal were criticised since they conflated independence with efficiency and seemed fixated on moving the Boards to another physical location. The new proposal suffers from all the same defects, but now adds another one – the Boards are not sufficiently self-financing, according to Battistelli and his team.
[...]
An increase of the appeal fee is suggested in the draft proposal, from the current level of €1880 to €2940 in 2017, and rising to €7350 by 2021.
Merpel thinks that this is completely outrageous.
Firstly, one reason for appeal is that a refusal by the Examining Division is wrong. As examiners are put under greater pressure for productivity, wrong refusals are expected to be more, not less, common. Applicants will be penalised by such a massive fee increase. There is a provision for refund of the appeal fee in the case of a substantial procedural violation, but it is perfectly possible for the examination to be shoddy without amounting to a substantial procedural violation.
Secondly, considering substantial procedural violations, are the Boards now going to be under pressure not to adjudicate that one has taken place, because it will reduce their funding? That would have the complete opposite of the alleged effect, to decrease their independence not increase it.
Thirdly, Merpel has seen no corresponding proposal to decrease other EPO procedural fees to offset the effect. She will be very surprised if one is forthcoming.
[...]
The next Administrative Council meeting is at the end of June. Merpel sincerely hopes that this mad proposal will be ditched before then, or rejected by the Administrative Council.
This post has attracted insightful comments pretty quickly, presumably from EPO staff and lawyers/attorneys based on the nature of the comments. Here is why Battistelli should be sacked this month:
This is another example of how Batistelli’s changes result in exactly the opposite of what the AC told him to do and how they go completely against the interests and criticisms of the users.
Here is some discussion about the bogus economics:
More analysis needs to be done on the costs of the boards.
An applicant who appeals a decision refusing the application generates a massive annuity windfall for the office. For an applcation refused after ten years experiencing a four year appeal procedure, the extra annuity payments which the office receives would be €6,000 odd. Similarly, a proprietor in an opposition appeal against a decision revoking the patent effectively generates cash for the EPO thorugh the national renewal fees. Once these have been factored in, I am sure the 4% figure would rise to around the 25% mark
And more on the costs:
CA/90/13 (point 31) seems to indicate that the recent increase in appeal fees from €1240 to €1860 would result in a “cost coverage per appeal” of about 6%. Was this found to be overly optimistic or is 4.2% an outdated figure? One assumes that the further increase from €1860 to €1880 did not make much difference. Presumably, neither the 4.2% nor the 6% figures include any renewal fees. This seems unfair since it would seem that a significant portion of those renewal fees result from applications that would be refused (or granted, resulting in shared fees) without the appeal, such that the fees would not reach the office if the appeal was not filed.
The following comment echoes what we have warned about for many years (almost a decade), using the USPTO as a warming sign/testament. Having doubled the number of granted patents there, the USPTO is not much different anymore from a registration/filing system (92% of applications wind up being accepted to be granted). Here is the comment in full:
I think that Merpel has got this right apart from one glaring error. The increasing productivity demands on examiners are far more likely to lead to an increase in “wrong grants” rather than “wrong refusals.” The purpose of the the productivity increases is to raise renewal fee revenue and there are no renewal fees for refusals. The whole system is set up to pressure examiners to grant more patent, so from a production point of view, it is still far easier for an examining division to grant a patent than to refuse it. The German Federal Patents Court and English Patents Courts both revoke the vast majority of hi-tech patents that come before them. Of the ones that survive, it is rare for the claims to survive in the form in which they were granted. That would appear to suggest that the EPO examination is becoming redundant.
My guess would be that in the future, the EPO will be refusing very few patent applications. They may even stop examining (or pretending to examine) them at all. So, let’s not worry too much about the BoAs. They will probably redundant in a few years anyway.
More comments on this take into account renewal fees:
As others have commented here, if the Office really wants to fund the Boards differently, then it would seem equitable to credit the Boards with at least a proportion of the renewal fees earned while a case is under appeal.
On the other hand, since the Office is obliged by TRIPS to provide recourse to a court/board of appeal, one could instead say that the Office should just suck it up and pay for what is a necessary running cost (part of the “deal” that it has to grant EP patents).
Here is another interesting comment which is probably too much for neoliberal ENA graduates to digest considering the financial bubbles and crises they repeatedly led to for decades:
As far as I understand, presently EPO appeals are funded similarly to a car or health insurance.
For example, in case of car insurance, everybody pays a small amount every month to cover a very rare/expensive case of a car accident.
The same, I guess, happens with an EPO appeal fee.
I.e., everybody pays various fees during patent prosecution. In each of those fees, a small percentage (%) is reserved for a relatively rare case of appeal. In this way, a high one-time appeal payment is avoided by paying it in parts with various ‘office actions’.
A proposed increase of appeal fees would mean decrease of all other EPO fees, respectively?
Putting the costs in perspective:
The suggestion of a five fold increase to cover the costs strikes me as being spin to hide the real intentions behind the suggestion. Raising the appeal fee to such a punitive level will dissuade parties from filing appeals except in the most important of cases. The net result will be a reduction in workload and a corresponding shrinkage in the BoAs. A punishment, therefore, for having dared to say boo to the President.
In response to this we have:
Comparing filing, search, examination, designation and a few year’s renewal fees with the proposed level of appeal fee, the phrase “double or quits” springs to mind.
And here comes a tongue-in-cheek remark:
For the EPO president, the quality of the search and the examination at the European patent Office is the best of the world.
For obscure motivations, a small group of applicants (a minority) is challenging this excellent quality, and are lodging appeals to the BoA.
It is logic that such bad behaviour can not be encouraged. A way to improve the system, is to increase the fees of the appeals.
The obligatory FIFA comparisons:
How is it that, at the AC, a large number of the smaller EPC Member States support BB? Does it not remind you of the support Mr Blatter could count on, within FIFA? Could it be that BB (from his palace on the top floor of the Isar building) just like cunning old Seppie, pays these Member States each year an ever-bigger dividend? At the EPO, how might he do that? Here are some possibilities:
1. Shrug off the costs of DG3 (but keep the filing, prosecution, opposition and annuity fees high).
2. Hold annuity fee income high by giving Applicants the possibility to defer patent grant more or less for ever. Take care though to provide, for those few who want it, a quick and dirty grant (and the huge burden of multiple national annuities that goes with it).
3. Squeeze ever more output from ever fewer highly paid employees. “Never mind the quality, feel the width” as the cynical old saying goes.
Seen through that lens, everything BB does makes sense. Sad isn’t it?
Another reminder that the EPO harms Europeans SMEs and discriminates against them:
I do not know why sloppier examination (i.e. more grants) would reduce the number of appeals. It will certainly cause an increase in the number of oppositions and since the number of oppositions is more or less proportional to the number of appeals with an increase of oppositions also the amount of appeals will increase.
It would be illogical (and indeed I agree with Merpel) injust to ncrease the appeal fees to credit the balance of the costs of DG3. If that would be the case also the fee for opposition should be increased in the same way (but I probably should not raise this, because it might give BB some ideas). Anyhow, the idea to only raise the fees for appeals seems to be very biased.
High costs of appeals indeed would seem very harsh in appeals from decisions of the Receiving Section and/or the Examining Division. But how about appeals in disciplinary cases: do our EQE candidates who want to protest about the decisions of the Exam committees need to suffer by paying an appeal fee that they hardly can afford? Or can we see a reduction scheme? Maybe also some reductions for the poor SMEs?
I would suggest to allocate the budget that is needed for the inventor-of-the-year festival (which can easily be discarded with) to DG3. In any case that will already make up for a large part of the current deficit.
Then comes defeatism:
It is the attitude of the member states that I do not understand. Inside the Office, almost everybody would agree that we are heading against the wall – and still speeding up. Now I can understand that the President and his friends favor short term profits; most likely, he will not be in charge any more when the bubble bursts. But the member states should have long term interests in maintaining the European patent system (and their most cherished unitary patent, which is built on it) alive. Why would they let the President kill the goose that lays the golden eggs and even applaud? I really do not get it. They are either extremely naive (but normally they are not when their national interest is involved) or strangely apathetic. Even the Albanian representative who hardly knows what a patent looks like must understand that his country will get less money once people realize that a German patent might be better value than a European one, must he not?
I am afraid we get the world we deserve.
Waste and abuse is then brought up:
Millipede rightly suggests to allocate the budget that is needed for the inventor-of-the-year festival (which can easily be discarded with) to DG3, which would make up for a large part of the current deficit.
The same applies to the budgets for media “partnerships”, body guards, investigators, “technical” cooperation with members states, “medical care” for AC representatives, incompetent VP´s and secret remuneration of the president and many more. As a result the appeal fee could be dispensed with entirely.
Regarding the above-mentioned “inventor-of-the-year festival”, we will soon publish details about the costs associated with it. In order to help our research, may we suggest that people send E-mails or call up “media partners” of the EPO to figure out the financial arrangements?
People have also just noticed the aforementioned report from The Register:
The Presidium and AMBA have commented on the proposed reforms of the BoAs:
https://regmedia.co.uk/2016/05/31/amba-epo-reform.pdf
as reported by The Register:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/01/epos_boards_of_appeal_rail_against_king_battistelli/
We have got a lot to publish about the EPO today, so stay tuned and please send any relevant/additional material to us (e.g. regarding yesterday’s session in the Bavarian Parliament, which grew worried about the EPO). Things are getting hot on Battistelli’s seat ahead of the Administrative Council’s meeting later this month. As one new comment put it: “So who has the power to fire this guy?” Some compare him to Donald Trump over at The Register. One person responded with: “And more importantly, who has the power to fire the guy who has the power to fire this guy, because he clearly hasn’t been doing his job by not firing this guy, so he’s undeniably either dirty or incompetent, and needs to go along with Mr. Kingie. I’d rather not wait until the guy who has the power to fire the guy who has the power to fire this guy needs firing too for the same offence…”
The problem is, Mr. Kongstad, who is able to get rid of Battistelli, not only fails to do so but also keeps his contracts secret, which makes him rather complicit. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 4:09 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
English/Original
Article as ODF
Publicado in Europa, Patentes at 3:48 am por el Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Sumario: Todavía otro astuto contrato entre la EPO de Battistelli y contrátantes privados del extranjero, esta vez en un esfuérzo de lavar o blanquear la imagen del current régimen de la EPO
“El tipo detrás del OHSRA [Encuesta de Salud Ocupacional] “, nos explica un lector, es alguien que es ahora objeto de chismes y rumores.
“Aunque la EPO sistemáticamente dejó de lado las advertencias todos los riesgos ‘emitidos por la SUEPO/representantes del personal durante los últimos años”, este lector continúa, “después de 5 suicidios algo se tenía que hacer lo antes posible: la EPO está organizando actualmente un ejercicio de blanqueado de imágen -Le dice al público que se preocupa por su personal, mientras que la presión para producción nunca ha sido tan alta y el nivel de estrés psicológico explota, según ciertas informaciónes privilegiadas.
“Mientras que por un lado la EPO dispara a lo grande en mensajeros (por ejemplo, los funcionarios SUEPO alertando al personal e informar de que las políticas de recursos humanos llevadas a cabo por” la señora/esposo de Battistelli – brazo derecho -”son conocidos por ser peligrosos), por otra parte la EPO contrató a una empresa muy raro (véase más adelante) para llevar a cabo una oficina de toda la Encuesta de Salud Ocupacional (como se puede esperar sin la participación genuina de la representación del personal y después de un procedimiento de selección que no fué público, mientras que pretenden lo contrario.
“He aquí la información acerca de este “proveedor serio”.
First Company
WELLKOM LIMITED
Verifiquen historia de aplicación y el primer PDF.
La compañíá es registrada en una casa privada, tiene dos dueños (Sr Phillips y su presunta esposa, 2nd PDF), tiene masivos activos: GBP 2 (sólo más que 2 euros).
Luce como una concha vacía.
Second Company
WELLKOM CORPORATE SERVICES LIMITED
Miren el primer PDF:
Misma dirección postal que la de arriba. El 2014, fué de GBP 87,000 assets… a GBP 190,000 en deudas.
“…la EPO está organizando actualmente un ejercicio de blanqueado de imágen -Le dice al público que se preocupa por su personal, mientras que la presión para producción nunca ha sido tan alta y el nivel de estrés psicológico explota, según ciertas informaciónes privilegiadas.”
–Anonymous
“Pero no se preocupe,” nos dijo nuestro lector, “ahora la EPO está aquí para ayudar.” Este no es el único ‘estudio’ en curso o ‘encuesta’ cuyas supuestos “descubrimientos”, basándose en la información que hemos recibido, fueron más o menos decididos de antemano. Dimos ejemplos de estos antes. Si no hay un proceso de licitación o contratación abierta, entonces hay mucho espacio para el robo/arreglo/coimas, por ejemplo, personal de conseguir un viejo amigo (o peor – de la familia) un contrato arreglado. Recordemos la historia sobre el acuerdo de Questel con la EPO y su relación con Jacques Michel, que ahora recibe información confidencial de la EPO, bajo el paraguas de Europatis [1, 2, 3, 4]. A medida que la gente aquí en Gran Bretaña dice, “es tan poco fiable como f% $ #”.
Como señálamos hace varias semans, Battistelli hizo tales contratos privados virtualmente invisibles para todos (mucho por “transparencia”!), a menos que alguien salga con el soplo.
Ahora sabemos que la EPO (no una entidad privada) está pagando una fortuna por seis guardias pretorianos para ir a todos lados con Battistelli incluso al bañó, pagando una fortuna (casi un millón de dólares) aun una compañíá basada en los EE.UU, y pagar por los conectados con los militares Control de Riésgos (todavía no sabemos del precio pagado ya que no datos de ello nos han sido alcanzados). La EPO está tan pódrida que incluso no se considera a la policia, y sus premisas son vigiladas por un maleánte Croata quien enfrenta muchos cargos críminales en su propio país. Para citar un comentario de ayer:
Si alguna vez hubo algún tipo de fraude (algo que yo poderosamente duda), entonces el presidente debe llamar a la policía para llevar a cabo una investigación adecuada en la OEP, y no tomar el asunto en sus propias manos, o fideicomiso una de sus criaturas para hacer girar un poco teoría de la conspiración.
IIRC, hay precedentes, donde se le permitió a la policía nacional para entrar en las oficinas de EPO para casos de hurto. Pero, por otro lado, a partir de mi propia experiencia, es casi imposible conseguir un policía alemán de levantar su derrière de la silla por un caso de robo o vandalismo que implica una simple bicicleta.
¿Qué hace el Presidente tiene que temer, si sus afirmaciones son ciertas? Casi no podía invocar su impunidad personal, lo siento, la inmunidad del EPOrg, para justificar su barricadas.
Una versión de este sórdido asunto podría convertirse en pocos años la lona por un episodio de la serie espantosa “El lugar del crimen”
¿Cuántos astutos arreglos/contratos la EPO necesita estar envuelto e (no importa tantos suicidios y abusos de los derechos humanos) antes de que las autoridades alemanas envién investigadores independiéntes al lugar? No puede continuar así. Como recordatorio, mañana en la tarde esta materia será discutida en el Parlamento Bávaro (cubriendo Munich), y no por primera vez tampoco. Basado en un reciénte programa de la televisión Bávara, por lo menos algunos de los suicidios en la EPO fueron la culpa de la gerencia (tuvimos que remover copias de este programa). El trabajo de Wellkom aparéntemente es mentir acerca de ello o fabricar una falsa narrativa con la cual los chácales de Battistelli puedan cabildear o alterar los hechos.
Como nota aparte, en los últimos 2 años hemos recibido mensajes alarmantes sobre médicos en pánico por que están muy preocupados por las tendencias suicidas entre el personal de la EPO, causada directamente por el lugar de trabajo (expectativas, la intimidación, la carga de trabajo y así sucesivamente). Se nos pidió amablemente no citar éstos directamente (ya que estos mensajes pueden revelar sus identidades), pero ese tipo de mensajes son relativamente antiguos Seguro ayuda a corroborar lo dicho anteriormente. Pretender lo contrario es engañar, o producir propaganda para su beneficio personal. ¿Está Wellkom tan desesperado? Teniendo en cuenta su situación económica sombría, pueda ser que sí.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 4:02 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
English/Original
Article as ODF
Publicado en Europe, Patentes at 11:27 am por el Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Estilo Topićanda
Sumario: La promoción de la EPO disfrazada como reportajes o noticias, como son vistas en los socios de los medios de la EPO mucho antes de que estas sociedades empiezen
El departamento técnico de la EPO parece estar infatuado con Microsoft y no le va a hacer ningun favor a la EPO. ¿La fuga de cerebros ha llegado a tanto? Talvez por eso hay tanta ayudad de afuera de los medios, seguridad, investigación, etc. Neoliberalismo y privatización usando contratos secretos.
Mientras tanto, mirando a las diaris tonterías de la EPO en Twitter, la gente PR estan cada vez más desesperados para crear distrácciones del horrible record track de la EPO. Preguntan: “¿Quién de los finalistas de este año se merece el Premio Popular?”
“¿La fuga de cerebros ha llegado a tanto?”
“Tienen para decidir hasta mañana,” dicen, pero no se olviden de las tácticas (como muchos votos por persona y especial promoción spammy [1, 2]) empleada por ellos el mes pasado.
Temprano hoy la EPO promovió esta link a una nueva pieza de hojaldre de los medios Franceses acerca de este evento. Los “socios de los medios” de la EPO, Les Echos (que se censuró a sí mismo por Battistelli y sus chácales), ya hace piezas de hojaldre, incluso antes de que el evento propagandistico tenga lugar. ¿Qué sigue? ¿Cuánto costará este defile? Como es usual es un secreto; en la pura tradición de Battistelli.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Content is available under CC-BY-SA