01.15.16
Posted in Europe, Patents at 7:43 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Protests by EPO staff against the EPO itself have grown large enough to become comparable/competitive with antiwar protests (below)
Summary: Actions against the EPO’s union-busting moves (culminating in mass firing of union leaders) quickly multiply and readers are urged to contact their delegates as soon as possible
IN SPITE of the spontaneity of today’s EPO protests (just a couple of hours to plan), nearly 2,000 people from Munich protested in support of the fired representatives (details in a previous article). The numbers were even greater when there was time to prepare, e.g. when petitioning anonymously or attending a scheduled protest.
“Contact delegates immediately to make them informed of what just happened.”We have lots of EPO-related articles to be published tomorrow. They are all related to firing of staff as this is a huge scandal. It only gets worse when one sees what actually happened behind the scenes. Contact delegates immediately to make them informed of what just happened. This is a huge injustice that even Pierre-Yves Le Borgn' condemned very strongly. To explain this in relatively simple terms, what the EPO just did (or tried to do) is to make it harder/impossible for staff to join the unions! It’s classic union-busting action and look which firms the EPO has recruited/contracted to help with this task. The attack on staff unions may be only the beginning. UPC critics should now beware… the surveillance is still in place and was never removed (the pretext was a fishing expedition for sources, not an attack on dissent and self-censorship though Big Brother-esque methods).
Browsing or reading through some comments for anonymous updates, this is the most informative comment we have found so far. The commenter is “feeling so sad with these terrible news. Employees in the Hague heard the news at 11.30 and spontaneously gathered at 12.00. There were a few hundreds of people, including managers.”
“To explain this in relatively simple terms, what the EPO just did (or tried to do) is to make it harder/impossible for staff to join the unions!”So there was also an EPO staff protest in The Hague today (we heard of it but didn’t have the numbers), not just in Munich. There were probably more (we might write about that later).
Among other comments there are some that allude to WIPO for timely analogies, e.g. this one which says: “Interestingly, this reminded me that WIPO is the other place were a Union representative that exposed bad practices within the organisation was happily dismissed. What the f#*k is going on in these patent organizations? Why do they all seem to think that they are above the law?”
The commenter links to this report from over a year ago. It says: “On 19 September 2014, the World Intellectual Property Agency (WIPO) fired Mr Moncef Kateb, president of the WIPO Staff Association, the accredited trade union of the UN specialized agency’s staff, in retaliation for his defense of staff and continued opposition to alleged misconduct by the WIPO Director General and his administration.”
Remember that WIPO’s managers also threaten bloggers, not just their own staff. Great resemblance there. Just hours ago, IP Watch, often a critic of WIPO, showed how WIPO tries to expand its cope of power with so-called ‘IP’ in Africa.
But anyway, we digress.
“Battistelli and his supporters,” said another comment, “have sacked staff representatives based on mock trials and bogus evidence.” Here is the comment in full: “In the past few months this and other blogs have published a huge number of contributions and evidence in respect of the manifest violations of human rights and of the rules of law by Mr Battistelli and his clan. A number of press articles have also appeared with highlights of the arrogance and cynicism of Mr Battistelli and members of his magic circle, and the negligence and apathy of the Administrative Coucil. Enough evidence to trouble and irritate any normal thinking mind. Unperturbed by the mounting criticism, Mr Battistelli and his supporters carried on implementing their programme and now they have sacked staff representatives based on mock trials and bogus evidence. What really angers me is the total indifference of the host countries, in particular Germany. The Germans hide themselves under the smoke screen of the special status of the EPO. How hypocritical! I have now completely lost my trust in their democracy as I’m convinced that for their own sake they would not hesitate to tolerate any misbehaviour. They could gain my respect back only if, in retaliation for the EPO dictatorship, they will refuse to ratify the Unitary Patent convention.”
The part about “indifference of the host countries” is quite true and this is why we urge people to Contact delegates immediately. I spoke (and heard back from) the German delegation. They’re listening. But if nobody contacts them, then cowardice will lead to inaction and apathy. Somebody wrote this poem:
We’ve never heard silence quite this loud,
as the mist of our thoughts drifts into a cloud.
Once we could fly and now we are lower than high,
all we can do is flutter & sigh.
EPO used to set us free but now we can’t even get off our feet
from feeling BB’s nasty streak.
The IP universe bleeds through the holes of BB’s moon,
blood dripping in our bodies, making us swoon.
Our heart feels empty and our throat is stuffed,
an inner turmoil that storms us in a huff.
Nothing leads BB and goons into the right path
we are damnations, hell’s wrath.
Crying and rambling, our brain slowly pours,
convoluted thoughts full of depths and closed doors.
“During the last meeting of the Administrative Council,” one person wrote, “Battistelli was ordered to leave the staff representatives alone. In his sentence of today he shows the AC his obedience, and his middle finger.”
Another person wrote: “Today’s news is an utter disgrace, and indeed, as a previous commenter remarked, is Batistelli’s two finger salute to the AC and the whole patent community. Being above the law, he can do what he wants.”
Well, speak to delegates and ensure this thug is held accountable. He has done enormous damage to the international image and reputation of the EPO, where even the staff protests routinely. This one comment says: “The disciplinary committee did not reccommend dismissal for Ion Brumme because he has five children – one is just a baby – and a loan to pay on his house.
“You behaviour is disgraceful Mr Battistelli.”
Another commenter wrote: “Time for the AC to launch an independent investigation against the EPO administration and the EPO president concerning harassment against staff representatives.”
“This whole supervisory system is rigged.”I was told earlier this month that my complaints had been forwarded to the AC and its Chairman. I have not heard back since then, so I assume Kongstad and his colleagues stick to the conspiracy of silence they’ve adhered to even when letters were sent to them from Transparency International (before the conflict of interests). This whole supervisory system is rigged. It’s no longer functional. It got ‘hacked’ by Battistelli, who gradually shut down regulation and oversight, then bragged about it.
The EPO is in shambles for many reasons, not just the above. According to this new article, once again an EPO patent (warning: epo.org link) was found to be invalid by a court (one of many such patents). To quote IP Kat: “Concentration isn’t that hard – Methotrexate patent Accordingly found invalid [...] Accord, a generics manufacturer, initiated proceedings, seeking revocation of medac’s patent (EP 2046332), which related to the use of methotrexate for subcutaneous administration in the treatment of inflammatory autoimmune diseases, wherein the methotrexate is administered in a pharmaceutically acceptable solvent at a concentration of about 50mg/ml. The patent contained Swiss and second medical use claims.”
“Oversight and external/independent investigation are desperately needed.”We have a lot more coming regarding the EPO (not just union-busting) and there are several political actions (at numerous levels) going on regarding the alluded abuse against patent applicants, not just patent examiners. Be patient as it may take time for us to safely disclose information about that. The EPO sure looks like a house of cards right now. Oversight and external/independent investigation are desperately needed. It might already be too late. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 6:55 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Translation below sent to us in a rush
Summary: Two different translations (the above and the below) of the strong reaction from Pierre-Yves Le Borgn’ (French politician most relevant to the abuse against overseas staff) to EPO witch-hunts and mock trials
THE EPO‘s vicious attacks on staff, which it treats like non-humans, was covered here in our previous article, but a lot remains to be said (there’s lots more coming this weekend).
Pierre-Yves Le Borgn’, whom we mentioned here many times before, has just responded. “Here the communiqué de presse of Pierre-Yves le Borgn,” one person wrote. “The words are strong but to the very point. Merci M. le BORGN’ !”
Someone provided us with a translation above and there’s also the following in a later comment at IP Kat:
A comment just published on the website of French MP, Pierre Le Borgn’
(my translation into English)
Sanctions against trade union representatives at the EPO: a disgrace and a deep injustice
15 January 2016
“I learned with astonishment the decision announced this morning by the President of the European Patent Office (EPO), Benoît Battistelli, to punish harshly three staff members of the EPO, all of them Committee members of the SUEPO union and based in Munich. I am deeply shocked. Two of these staff members, one the Chairman of the Munich location branch of SUEPO, the other a former Chairman, have been dismissed. The former is even deprived of a part of her pension rights. The third staff member has been downgraded by a considerable amount. I note that President Battistelli set these sanctions well beyond the recommendations made by the EPO’s disciplinary committees. These acts demonstrate a will to do evil, to frighten, to eradicate all criticism and any intermediate power is thus characterized.
“I contacted the French Government immediately. What has happened is a disgrace and a deep injustice. I expect the member states of the EPO, starting with France, to intervene urgently to put an end to arbitrariness and this tendency that ruins lives, destroys families and undermines the work of the entire organization. It is inacceptable for the immunity enjoyed by the organization to lead to such deviations from the rule of law, based, among other things, on respect for the rights of trade union representatives and staff, the independence of disciplinary committees in relation to the management and proportionality of sanctions, as much as questions largely ignored here.
“An organization has a future only when its staff identify themselves with it, with its governance and its management. This is no longer the case to the EPO. It is urgent for member states to reflect on the reasons that led to to this. And consider seriously replacing the governance of the EPO and its management.”
Thank you, Pierre-Yves Le Borgn’, for doing more than any other single politician has done on this matter, in the face of bullying and intimidation.
Please, dear readers, if you are EU citizens, immediately contact your delegates regarding the EPO. This is supreme abuse from what has become Europe’s embarrassment and shame. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 3:46 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Firing messengers/witnesses rather than the guilty party
Summary: Team Battistelli (or Blatterstelli as Florian Müller calls him) manages to carry on just firing those who speak about abuses at the top (Team Battistelli), rather than be sacked itself
THE THUGS who run the EPO (compared to famous criminals on television, including El Chapo Guzmán who has just been arrested) have done what we knew all along they were going to do. They fired staff representatives. This is coming from sociopaths whose regime allegedly led to a tenfold rise in the number of suicides. Today’s management is undoubtedly causing depression, harming the health/wellbeing of staff, so nervous breakdowns, suicides, etc. are inevitable. Journalists should definitely look into phone surveillance, keyloggers and hidden cameras inside the EPO (targeting visitors too, not just staff). What kind of a work atmosphere is this? How many more people need to die before change takes place? The EPO is rotten at the top and those at the top just try to get rid of those who say so, obviously in an effort to protect their own jobs. This isn’t FIFA. It’s a lot worse than FIFA. People are actually dead. But because this concerns patents (a concept not many people correctly grasp) rather than football there’s insufficient interest from the mainstream media.
“This isn’t FIFA. It’s a lot worse than FIFA. People are actually dead.”There’s a lot left to be said about what EPO management did today. It won’t fit a single article as it’s not some short/simple story and it’s not over yet. They hoped that firing staff would end it all, but we are going to prove them otherwise. Streisand Effect (silencing the messengers) means that the blowback will make the initial action (firing) less than worthwhile and more than inversely proportional in force. Many leaks are on their way now, so stay tuned.
As several important sites have not yet covered the news (Friday is a good opportunity to get bad news out of the day), we are going to rely more on anonymous voices. The short story is, the EPO’s management confirmed what seemed obvious all along. It can only do show/mock trials. To make matters worse, the EPO is trying to openly defend such mock trials. Welcome to Eponia. It’s inarguably worse than Putin’s Russia in terms of human rights.
“Welcome to Eponia. It’s inarguably worse than Putin’s Russia in terms of human rights.”SUEPO wrote this afternoon that “IPKAT reports on the outcome of the disciplinary procedures against three staff representatives/union officials.” Here is what Merpel wrote: “With a heavy heart, Merpel reports that she has just learned that Mr Battistelli, President of the EPO, has just fired the current chair of SUEPO, Elizabeth Hardon, and an ex-chairman, Ion Brumme. SUEPO Treasurer, Malika Weaver has been downgraded. The charges of which Merpel has been aware (see her post here) seemed tenuous to the point of being trumped up, and in all three cases the sanction imposed has been more than was recommended by the Disciplinary Committee: in the case of Elizabeth Hardon, there has been imposed a pension sanction not suggested by the Disciplinary Committee, in the case of Ion Brumme downgrading rather than firing was suggested, and in the case of Malika Weaver the Disciplinary Committee recommended suspension of career advancement, not downgrading.”
A lot of comments are being posted there right now. If someone could please send us the Battistelli-led communiqué (regarding the firing of people who ‘dared’ to highlight his abuse), that would be awesome. We already have a bunch of new documents relating to this. EPO whistleblowers are advised not to use something like GMail unless they do so over Tor. We never compromised any of our sources in nearly 10 years and we wish to keep it that way.
It should be noted that, based on our sources, the EPO fired staff ahead of the scheduled date (which makes the mock trial even more of a sham), probably in an effort to reduce the ability to strike back (late/early afternoon on a Friday is perfect timing).
“It should be noted that, based on our sources, the EPO fired staff ahead of the scheduled date (which makes the mock trial even more of a sham), probably in an effort to reduce the ability to strike back (late/early afternoon on a Friday is perfect timing).”Navigating through some comments in IP Kat, we found just one pro-EPO voice there (anonymous) and the rest are very angry. One person wrote: “A communiqué of the president has just been issued internally. In it, we are informed that “None of the [fired or suspended staff representatives] acknowledged their wrongdoings, nor did they express their intention not to repeat them”. They are guilty, and don’t even admit it. These people are incorrigible. What a nice piece of Stalinist propaganda.”
Yes, this follows a lot of what we saw before. There is no Rule of Law inside the EPO. To assume otherwise would be unwise.
Another person asked: “Is there any way to get rid of M. Battistelli? He is a shame for the whole patent community [...] a shame for EPO and a shame for the french people. We should start a “petition” asking for his firing from EPO. We’re in a democracy, aren’t we?(except EPO apparently)”
On Battistelli one person remarked: “Yes, I did like the President’s puff-piece. What a farce, and what an incorrigible liar he is. Very sad day for the Office, an Office for which I used to proud to work, but no longer. I’m just praying that my director doesn’t “volunteer” me to meet him for his latest propaganda effort.”
One person alluded to British officials, asking: “Mr Alty and Mr Denehey, when are you going to wake up and do something?”
I contacted John Alty and his colleagues regarding abuse from Battistelli and his EPO thugs against myself. These cowards didn’t even reply.
Another person asked: “Where was the voice of the delegates from the UK?” Here is the comment in its entirety:
It has been reported that German, French and Dutch delegates to the AC spoke up at the last meeting to express concern about the “social situation” and the EPO’s actions against SUEPO representatives. Where was the voice of the delegates from the UK? Why did they not also voice concern? They surely cannot claim to have been unaware of the serious grounds for concern.
As a Brit myself, I am truly ashamed of the apparent complicity of the UK’s delegation in allowing this to come to pass. Whilst no single delegation has the power to overrule the will of the majority, surely not even BB could withstand concerted opposition from delegates of all of the TOP4 countries.
Whilst the SUEPO representatives may or may not have been whiter than white, it is not hard to see that the charges against them would not have passed muster before any competent court. I find it particularly ironic that part of (if not the core of) the charges against them relied upon a reference to provisions of German national law. Not only was no one on the disciplinary committee competent to rule on points of German national law, but the SUEPO representatives were unable to rely upon the protections that the national law would offer them!
Quite frankly, I am disgusted that applicant’s money is being wasted on this whole sham – and that waste is made even worse by the fact that the President did not even follow the DC’s recommendations!
I predict that the absence of respect for democracy and the rule of law that is so evident from recent events at the EPO will have profoundly unpleasant consequences. However, my fear is that none of those consequences will touch those who are currently shielding behind the veil of immunity. Perhaps it is time for the AC to lift that immunity?
Here come the FIFA comparisons again. This one person wrote: “The Board to which the President reports needs to do something. The man is out of control. I suspect FIFA will be looking for a new leader soon, perhaps he can take on this role where he’ll do less damage to the reputation of the patent profession in Europe. In the meantime, examiners and applicants suffer.”
If the EPO’s management or Team Battistelli thinks it’ll shut up critics by firing representatives, then it’s very wrong. It opened a can of worms and left it open. “It appears that the reputation of the EPO, and the AC, is being dragged through the mud,” this one comment said. We urged people to contact their delegates and we have published contact details.
One critic who didn’t respond anonymously is George Brock-Nannestad, who had written very detailed reports about the EPO’s abuses. Today he wrote:
I had hoped that the Battistelli administration would have saved face by letting the charges fall.
I cannot understand how a French education can bring about such a scandalous approach to fair trial.
Shame on the petty public servants in the member states who have sat on their hands. Directors General, the lot, but with a moral stamina of worms.
In utter disgust,
Stefan Krempl, a Heise writer (Germany’s biggest online IT newspaper), wrote about the firings, but an English translation is needed (any volunteers would be widely thanked).
“In over a decade of writing about such matters never have I encountered thugs who can get away with this much.”Consider this comment which said: “We need a Europe-wide co-ordinated strategy to finally rid ourselves of this pernicious President, who is harming the EPO, its staff and european industry. I am eager to know what I can do in my Member State to help achieve this. One thing that strikes me is that, as I have read somewhere in a SUEPO publication, it may be possible to sue my government directly as complicit in denying me my rights, e.g., the right to be represented by a Union, the right to a fair and timely hearing, etc, along the lines of the successful Dutch case. If such cases were to be started in every Member State, then indeed our AC members might wake up.”
This is a reign of terror and as one comment put it: “Should explain that BB had demanded that every directorate sends 5 examiners to a presentation from BB to be broadcast through the office on Feb 4th in The Hague (one to follow in Munich). Questions may be allowed but who will dare ask if risking the sack??”
See the sort of hypocritical, ridiculous accusations EPO made against staff representatives. The mock trial against Ms Hardon shows that not even law- or rules-abiding staff can feel safe. Remember how the EPO twisted British defamation law in a failed bid to silence Techrights, having done similar things before. The EPO has a long history of misusing or misrepresenting laws to shoot down critics. These people are thugs. Let’s repeat that to ensure it sinks in. These people are thugs. In over a decade of writing about such matters never have I encountered thugs who can get away with this much.
“What kind of trap do people get themselves into when joining the EPO then?”“I am a mere external observer to these events,” wrote this one person, “but I would wager that this is going to backfire very badly on BB and his clique. SUEPO now has more of a cause than ever for disgruntled or fearful employees to rally around. The numbers attending the demonstrations and taking part in future strikes will surely only grow from this point onwards.
“Then again, perhaps this was BB’s plan all along. In his eyes, SUEPO will no longer be a negotiating partner in view of such demonstrations. Hey presto! An excuse to finally call off the “social dialogue” which the management is (allegedly) committed, despite all its actions and announcements so far having shown that commitment to be a total sham.”
Another new comment said: “Do the ServRegs (or anything else) prevent the now-fired staff members from speaking out? As they are no longer employees of the office, perhaps it is time for the full details of their side of the story to emerge. The EPO no longer has any power over them. Full disclosure of all the documentary evidence might jolt a few of the more complacent AC delegates into action.”
“The office pays their pensions,” one person added, “and i think can force more than a 20% penalty if it is so malign. And BB wants the right to veto future employment. His spite has not been fully tested i fear.”
What kind of trap do people get themselves into when joining the EPO then? There needs to be a warning label on this tin. One of the latest comments (so far) asks: “Can some french-speaking reader please inform the Mr. Pierre-Yves Le Borgn’ of what is going on here?”
A lot of this reporting from Merpel can be traced back to these two comments [1, 2] that said “Hardon also loses 20% of her pension. Staff protesting at 1230 (and in The Hague too apparently). Sad day.”
“Battistelli and his clique should serve to remind us that FIFA is peanuts or small potatoes compared to the EPO, but there is media blackout.”“Mrs Elisabeth Hardon has just been fired,” said the second comment. “Of the other two suspended staff representatives, one (with 3 children, one still a baby) has been fired, the other severely downgraded.”
Battistelli and his clique should serve to remind us that FIFA is peanuts or small potatoes compared to the EPO, but there is media blackout. This is, as one person put it, “a premiere in the world of international organisations under French “leadership”….”
There are many issues at the EPO other than staff crackdown. We’ll come back to some of the other issues some other day. Another EPO patent, for example, has just been granted to help guard monopoly on cancer treatment, based on a new press release [1, 2].
“Worth noting is the fact that the EPO is so abusive that not only does it fire staff but it also reduces pensions (which hard work literally earned).”These mock trials against employees are extremely worrying because if this is where Europe is going (with impunity), then Europe rapidly loses its moral high ground, e.g. over Russia. Worth noting is the fact that the EPO is so abusive that not only does it fire staff but it also reduces pensions (which hard work literally earned). They’re sort of stealing money after causing serious personal losses in terms like legal fees. Europe or China? It’s getting hard to guess… and watch where Battistelli travels to these days.
There was a protest today (unscheduled/spontaneous) at the EPO in Munich and elsewhere, with details to be published soon (next part hopefully). “European Patent Office Munich,” one person wrote, was to have “demo in front of the EPO, today, within 2h! Police spokesman confirms that there were 1.800 participants!”
2 hours is a very good response time. That’s very spontaneous. It is a short timeframe for as many as 1,800 examiners/participants (that’s about half of them) to organise in the face of this kind of alarming news [1, 2].
The EPO has said nothing about this publicly. The EPO’s Twitter account invites people to ask questions today, so I actually asked them: “why did Battistelli fire his critics earlier today?” The EPO’s management never speaks to me, except via aggressive lawyers. While ~2000 EPO staff go to protest against the Office (which they figuratively vomit on) the latest kind of PR campaign starts. Is this part of the FTI Consulting deal? Shame on the EPO. This is far from over. Battistelli is just making himself more enemies. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in America, Patents at 7:17 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
English/Original
Publicado in America, Patents at 9:21 am por el Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Donde el dinero manda, las CORPORACIONES y sus DUEÑOS casi siempre consiguen sus deseos a expensas del público
Sumario: Comentario el el sistema de patentes de los Estados Unidos y por que nunca se ha saneado a sí mismo, ni será capaz de hacerlo si como ahora grandes corporaciones DOMINAN a las figuras políticas.
ANTES que nos enfoquemos en la OEP, habíamos estado escribiendo literalmente miles de artículos acerca de la Oficina de Patentes y Marcas de los Estados Unidos (USPTO), la que está completamente disfuncional, INJUSTA, y DETRIMENTAL al progreso humano.
IP watch, un sitio mayormente crítico del los existentes sistemas o estructuras, reciéntemente ha dicho que ¨Más de 50 miembros del Congreso de los Estados Unidos hoy envíaron una carta urgiendo al Departamente de Salud y Servicios Humanos (HHS) así como al Instituto Nacional de Salud (NIH) a ejercer su autoridad legal para exigir patentes medicas que han surgido de projectos de investigación médica financiados por el gobierno sean razonablemente y con términos posibles para uso público.
“Ayuda mostrar que las patentes frecuentemente tienen que ver con el PROTECCIONISMO que con innovación o servicio público. Es todo acerca de las CORPORACIONES, no el pueblo.”¨La letra [pdf], nacida en una creciente preocupacion del público por la alza de precios de medicinas prescribidas, discuten que la falla de usare esta medida nos lleva a imaginarnos que el gobierno de los Estados Unidos financia projectos con dinero de los contribuyentes que permiten ganancias sobre los pacientes llenos de dificultades y sus familias en vez de conseguir suficiente ganancia para investigación futura y los ingresos de los investigadores mismos.¨
Es fácil notar los problemas inherentes aquí, viendo lo absurdo de otorgar un monopolio de patentes, un monopolio obligado por el gobierno, derivado del dinero de los contribuyentes la cual el gobierno ordena ser dada. Ayuda mostrar que las patentes frecuentemente tienen que ver con el PROTECCIONISMO que con innovación o servicio público. Es todo acerca de las CORPORACIONES, no el pueblo.
Un nuevo artículo de centros de información de los banqueros alude al caso del Banco CLS, que es más conocido por el nombre del demandante, Alice. He aquí lo que dice acerca de las patentes de software:
Un caso prominente en esta área fue la decisión de 2014 acerca de Alice Corp. vs el CLS Bank, en la que la Corte Suprema de los Estados Unidos juzgo que patentes de software relacionadas a pagos de seguridades son unpatentables, ya que los reclamos de patentes fuerón fundados en ideas abstractas.
¨Pienso que hay un movimiento en las cortes y el Congreso para restringir el alcanze de la patentibiildad del software,¨ dijo Knight.
Si, bueno hace tiempo hubo un saludable debate acerca de que las patentes de software deberían ser abolidas. Aquellos días están lejanos después que grandes corporaciones secuestraron los debates y los distorsionaron en debates acerca de trolls de patentes (significando pequeñas entidades (PYMEs) quienes las usan, contra corporaciones grandes). Toda esta ¨reforma¨ (para las largas corporaciones) virtualmente se han desvanecido (de las noticias y la política) después de las vacaciones de verano. Todo quedo aplastado y perdió su impulso. Esto es política. Est totalmente una locura cuando esta OBSTRUIDA por ¨PATRONES¨, ¨DONANTES¨ etc.
“…hace tiempo hubo un saludable debate acerca de que las patentes de software deberían ser abolidas.”Florian Müller dice a IP trackeador de Trolles (Steph): ¨Estoy de acuerdo que el focus en trolss es una justificación pobre para la reforma. Los trolls son simplemente un simptoma del problema.¨ El también pregunta ¨¿Así que también sientes que los promotores de reforma de patentes han sido muy tímidos hasta ahora en su formulación del problema y sus propuestas?¨
Esto fue después de que escribió una larga y emocionada declamación acerca del rol de corrección política (o talvez en el sexto sentido que es dinero para contribuir a campañas) en la reluctancia a deshacernos de un sistema que PROMUEVE chantajeadores de patentes. Para citar la parte apolítica (no promoción del GOP):
Los promotores de reforma de patentes ha sido desilucionados termino trás termino, presidencia tras presidencia. Washington tiene a una reputacion de ¨haz nada¨, pero un mar de cambios se avistan en la esquina, y también pueda ayudar a crear un ambiente en el cual, finalmente los masivos y drámaticos problemas causados por un sistema de patentes quebrado pueda ser corregido más fuerte y con coraje que antes.
Correción política tiene terribles efectos por que evita que los políticos, medios de comunicación y el público en general discutan los asuntos reales sin disfrazar palabras, y cuando tu no puedes incluso hablar de los asuntos reales, estás muy lejos de identificar e implementar soluciones.
Corrección política es la causa raíz de muchos problemas no sólo en tales contextos como política de inmigracion o el problema de ciertas etnías índices de criminalidad.
Hay muchas areas en las cuales un dogma ha sido convertido en un axioma. Aunque soy un ambientalista (mi casa tiene un subterráneo bomba de agua caliente y usa agua subterránea para refrescar), Me gustaría estar allí para una discusión más abierta de las causas del calentamiento global. Sólo un ejemplo.
Corrección política es también un tremendo problema en el debate acerca de la reforma de patentes en los Estados Unidos. Organizaciones e individuos temem ser ¨anti-americanos¨ si simplemente dicen que el sistema de patentes de los Estados Unidos esta quebrado y NO SIRVE a los verdaderos innovadores.
En todos esos reuniones del congreso acerca de la reforma de patentes que he observado, cada uno y todo político repitió el MANTRA del systema de patentes de los Estados Unidos ´siendo´ clave para la innovación y la envidia del mundo, cuando la realidad es que es el motivo de risa de patentes y los profesionales industriales del resto del mundo. A través de los años he hablado a muchos abogados de patentes de Europa, Asia, e incluso los examinadores de patentes (aunque no a los que la OEP acusa de haber estado en contacto conmigo), acerca de la situación, y nadie cree que los jurados de los Estados Unidos están calificados para determinar infracciones e materias de validez, nadie ha mostrado desacuerdo con la calidad de las patentes otorgadas por la USPTO es generalmente más baja que de las patentes europeas.
Una reforma de patentes de impacto en los Estados Unidos no sucederá hasta que por lo menos un porcentaje de politicos y dueños de acciones participando en el debate comienzen a DECIR LA VERDAD, la que es que la mayoria de ciencias de la comunicación e informática patentes son INVALIDAMENTE otorgadas, que un alto porcentaje de todos las decisiones de reclamo son nulificadas a través de apelaciones, que incluso aquellas patentes que no son invalidas son ultimamente infringidas generalmente no protegen nada que justifique un MONOPOLIO DE VEINTE AÑOS, y que no hay objeto en incentivación a ser ¨el primero en someter¨ cuando la combinacion de derechos de autor, marcas y secretos de comercio, asi como el primer movimiento de ventaja en relativamente campos cambiantes son más que suficientes para proteger invertir en innovación. Proponentes de reformas deben poner enfásis en la realidad que ahora más que nunca patentes de los Estados Unidos no son otorgadas a compañías estadounidenses, simplemente como la mayoría de patentes europeas no pertenecen a compañías europeas. Debe ser dicho que la correlación entre patentes e innovación en determinado país es raramente causado por patentes promoviendo innovación, que las patentes sirve como substituto en vez de un incentivo para la innovación, y que estudios que unen patentes a innovación estan basados en lógica circular, considerando cada patente como innovación.
Menos es más. Cómo puede uno seriamente creer que inflación de patentes tiene algo que ver con mayor actividad innovadora? Creería alguién que a mayor cantidad de dinero impreso crea prosperidad? Proponentes de reformas deberían hablar acerca de como gradualmente disminuir el número de patentes por año a una fracción del rango presente.
El systema de patentes de los Estados Unidos noe es el único permitiendo patentes de software. Bajo el régimen (como el ¨tal como¨ salida de Brimelow) muchas compañias aplican y consiguen patentes de software en Europa. A los abogados de patentes les gusta por que significa MAYORES NEGOCIOS (entradas) para ellos. Mirando a sitios de abogados de patentes (IAM por ejemplo), encontramos reciénte evidencia que el sistema de patentes NO FUNCIONA como fué diseñado al principio (cuando leyes de patentes fueron concebidas como medios de incentivar a aquellos publicando sus propias invenciones). Como parte de la campaña de Xiaomi de amasar miles de patentes, está actualmente comprando patentes de Broadcom. Así que vemos de nuevo clara evidencia de patentes de hardware siendo pasadas de mano en mano, vendidas, cambiadas en terminos de propiedad/asignatura, sirviendo para mostrar que como recompensa para innovar NO FUNCIONA, no como la letra escrita. Son como ARMAS o HERRAMIENTAS de COERCIÓN.
“Una manera de enfrentar estos asuntos es informar al público, no a los políticos, quienes son facílmente INFLUENCIADOS POR EL DINERO DE LAS CORPORACIONES (sobórnos, donaciones, puertas giratorias) y son por lo tánto menos creíble de ser parte de la solución.”¨En una assignación fechada Octubre 23 del 2015 y archivada con el USPTO el 7 de Diciembre,¨ IAM escribió, ¨la compañía de conductores Broadcom transferió 19 patentes a una entidad llamada Xiaomi H.K.Ltd.¨
En noticias similares, ¨Qualcomm pidió a la Corte de los Estados Unidos forzar a Apple, Samsumg y otros a entregar documentos¨ y el ¨Indice de Patentes Públic declinó un 24.4% en el 2015¨.
El término ¨compañía licensiadora de patentes¨ puede ser visto como un géntil termino por TROLES DE PATENTES, como la connectada con Microsoft Acacia, que habitualmente ataca a Linux con patentes (chacal de Microsoft) De acuerdo con este reporte de ´IAM´ a Acacia no le está yendo bien. Para citar: ¨Terminó el año de continua caida de precios de acciones y la renunica de su gerente Mattew Vella. Su salida vino despues que la NPE estuvo en el mal sitio de una decisión dañina en el Distrito del Este de Texas cuando un jurado falló a favor de los acusados, incluyendo Alcate, Lucent, decreatando que la patente de Acacia era inválida y no infringida. Si aquel fallo hubiese sido favorable, es justo decir que Vella todavía tendría su trabajo.
Irrespetivamente de este trol de patentes y poniendo aparte el impacto de Alice en las patentes de sofware, el problema esta muy lejos de resolverse y algunas de las observaciones de Muller (no en la dirección política) se han ganado menciones de aprobación de criticos del systema de patentes, como Jamie Love. Una manera de enfrentar estos asuntos es informar al público, no a los políticos, quienes son facílmente INFLUENCIADOS POR EL DINERO DE LAS CORPORACIONES (sobórnos, donaciones, puertas giratorias) y son por lo tánto menos creíble de ser parte de la solución. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
01.14.16
Posted in America, Patents at 6:58 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
The higher one goes, the lesser/lower the quality
Summary: Numerical evidence of the great decline in US patents quality, which in recent years gave way to a lot more patent litigation, patent trolls (that exploit software patents), complaints about the patent system, and invalidations inside US courts
BOTH the EPO and the USPTO pretend that more patents would be better. It’s a dangerous, popular but nevertheless wrong assumption. IP Watch wrote yesterday that:
The number of patent applications filed worldwide continues to increase, up by 4.6 percent in 2014 for a total of nearly 2.7 million, according to the 2015 edition of the World Intellectual Property Indicators. The increasing number of patents filed worldwide demonstrates the strength of ongoing innovation and the value companies put on protecting their intellectual property where they wish to do business. The filing numbers would likely be even higher, and across more countries, if the filers were more prepared for the costs associated with filing patents.
An article by Dennis Crouch says that “the Federal Circuit has ruled that the IPR procedure allowing the same PTAB panel to both institute an IPR and issue the final decision cancelling the claims. in the process, the divided court rejected both a constitutional and statutory challenge.” Another new piece from Crouch says: “As expected, the USPTO issued just under 300,000 utility patents in calendar year 2015. The new number represents a drop from 2014 – the first drop since President Obama took office and appointed David Kappos as USPTO Director. Barring a new radical transformation of the Office, I expect that the grant numbers will hover around this mark for the next several years.”
“IBM has a history of patent aggression and it promotes software patents in Europe and in New Zealand, not just in the US.”Under David Kappos, the Office has been pressuring examiners to just approve faster, leading to the unbelievable situation where 92% of applications are ultimately approved. What’s even the point of examination with such high acceptance rates? Innovation didn’t accelerate, but the number of patents nearly doubled, which means that the quality of patents went down considerably (unless one has another explanation; the economic downturn definitely wasn’t it).
“IBM tops US patent list for 23rd year,” WIPR wrote yesterday, noting that “IBM has topped the list of recipients of US patents in 2015, beating Samsung and Canon to the top spot, but there has been a slight decline in the overall number of patents granted since 2014.”
IBM has a history of patent aggression and it promotes software patents in Europe and in New Zealand, not just in the US.
Here is what Reuters wrote about it: “International Business Machines Corp (IBM.N) was granted the most U.S. patents for the 23rd year in a row in 2015, according to a ranking by patent analysis firm IFI Claims Patents Services.
“There were 298,407 utility patents granted in 2015, down slightly from 2014, IFI Claims said on Wednesday. IBM gained 7,355 patents last year. Utility patents cover function rather than design.”
Who on Earth can conceivably keep track of this many patents. The whole purpose of this system is lost due to overload. It’s good for patent lawyers (and their richest clients), bad for everybody else.
Over at TechDirt there’s a summary of some of these issues, based on a writeup from Masnick. “Qualcomm Says It’s Fighting For The Little Guy, While Really Blocking Patent Reform That Would Help The Little Guy” is the headline. To quote a part which covers trolls and Alice: “Three out of the five panelists — Kate Doerksen, Lee Cheng and Brian Mennell — represented victims of patent trolls. Kate and Brian both have experienced the perils of being a small startup and getting hit with patent lawsuits that have the potential to destroy their businesses. You can read Kate’s story here, in which she’s being sued by a large company trying to keep her startup from competing altogether. It’s even reached the point where Kate agreed to something of a deal with the devil: Erich Spangenberg. As we’ve discussed, Spangenberg, who was one of the most aggressive patent trolls, recently shifted his business into being a sort of reverse patent troll, where he makes deals with small companies like Kate’s, taking an ownership stake in the company in exchange for “helping” the company deal with patent trolls, usually by seeking post-grant review to invalidate the patents being asserted against the startups.
“Mennell has the classic patent troll story of running a startup and getting hit by a patent troll that undermines the ability of the company to stay in business (and also notes that the Supreme Court’s Alice decision made him lose a business method patent, though he doesn’t seem to see that as problematic).”
In this current landscape of patents/patenting it is only good to be a massive corporation such as IBM, a patent troll, or a patent lawyer. Finjan, which has become a bit like a patent troll, isn’t doing too badly.
If examiners are led to believe that more patents mean more “success”, then they probably need to reassess their views. More patents typically mean lower barrier to acceptance or, in other words, lower quality of patents. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 5:45 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“The last thing a political party gives up is its vocabulary.”
–Alexis de Tocqueville
Summary: The EPO, now aided by PR agents from FTI Consulting (at a budget of nearly $100,000 per month), continues to mislead the media and pretend that everything is well, even improving
THE ‘European’ patent office (not really European but based in Europe) has nothing good to say except “think about the children” [1, 2] and some more greenwashing (posted on average once every two days, still, the last time being 2 hours ago, alongside other recurring themes in Twitter).
The SUEPO forums are (or were, before the union-busting) likely a lot more active than the EPO’s own forums, which the EPO management wants people to use (crowdsourcing support). Later this month or next month we shall show how ridiculous EPO ‘support’ really is (we still have many stories on their way).
“Some of the numbers used in the announcement were debunked here before.”Yesterday the EPO made a statement which is flawed in many ways. Did the EPO write it or did FTI Consulting (background deal) help write this nonsense?
Benoît Battistelli is quoted as saying: “The internal reforms we have undertaken to improve the efficiency of the organisation are paying off.” Is he referring to union-busting and making employees terrified?
Some of the numbers used in the announcement were debunked here before. Gross abuse of statistics is an art form. As one person who is familiar with these numbers told us some months ago: “This stupid trick was addressed repeatedly over the last few years in different blogs. The real number is about half of that. I don’t want to go in a course on patent law, but in a nutshell a large part of these applications never make it even to the doorstep of the EPO.”
“Based on what we have been hearing, neither patent lawyers nor patent applicants are happy with the EPO.”No doubt, given what we know and have heard, the EPO is now pushing this nonsense to a lot of journalists, hoping for criticism-free or fact checks-free parroting.
Based on what we have been hearing, neither patent lawyers nor patent applicants are happy with the EPO. They’re complaining. Some patent lawyers, those who have been promoting software patents in Europe (because they are profiting from it) may feel like things work for the better now that Germany ignores the EPC and defends patents on software, but they’re in the minority. In this particular case, the author has been doing this for a while (promoting software patents) and he is visiting the EPO in Munich these days. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 4:43 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
English/Original
Publicado en Europe, Patents at 8:33 am por el Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Calma antes de la tormenta?
Sumario: En la superficie las cosas parecen calmadas en la OEP, pero detrás de esta fachada hay muchos serios asuntos, cuyos afectados están prohibidos de hablar or comentar acerca de los mismos.
Más tarde hoy revelaremos más material de la OEP que recordará a la gente por que es peligrosa. Toda la gerencia de la OEP trata de arrimárnos la Corte de Patentes Unitarias mientras que los ESCÁNDALOS de la OEP continúan revelándose de acuerdo a esta encuesta de la WIPR:
Eventos en Europe concernientes a la reforma de marcas y la Corte Unitaria de Patentes (UPC) fueron notados por los encuestados como los cambios más importantes.
Al cierre del año la OEP anunció que la patente unitaria estaba ¨legalmente¨ y ¨técnicamente¨ lista para despegar. Sin embargo, estados miembros de la UPC todavía están esperando por la ratificación por el Reino Unido y Alemania (como un número de otros países).
En Mayo la UPC dió un mayor salto adelante después de que España desafió la legalidad del acuerdo fue derribado por la Corte de Justicia de la Unión Europea.
¨La Unión de Empleados de la OEP (SUEPO) resumió su publicación en http://www.suepo.org page,” una persona no dijo (su pagina pública fue renovada después de cuatro semanas). Hay también un (corregida) comunicado de prensa acerca de unas controversiales patentes en tratamientos de cáncer en la OEP. Aparte de eso, la OEP ha estado razonablemente quieta. Ha estado invisible, talves intencionalmente. Los forums de la OEP (basado en software proprietario por su apariencia) que han estado allí por muchos años atrayendo sólo unos cientos de threads so miserablemente promovidas en Twitter esta semana. Es probable que incluso los forums de la SUEPO atrayeron más actividad que los forums de la OEP. Hey incluso los comentarios de IP Kat acerca de la OEP son más frequentes que posting en los forums de la OEP. Cuán patético es eso?
Como comentó IP Kat el otro día:
2016!.. otro año de ¨Espiritu de ´servicio´¨ dentro de batallón de payasos de BB (Benoit Battistelli), grupo amigale al extremo, buscando por casa llena en cada materia, con una complete ausencia de enojo o amargura que pueda malograr su imagen. Un consenso confortable creado alrededor de una ilusión que todos en el batallón tiene una adicción al poder. Alguien lo cuestionó. La victima principal del ¨espiritu de servicio¨ de la OEP, aunque es crítico, deja atrás un tracto sucio de acciones irracionales.
Más tarde hoy vamos a revelar algo nuevo. No hay razón para dejar de criticar a la OEP mientras sus ABUSOS PERSISTAN y no reparaciones o revocaciones han sido hechas todavía.
Algunas veces parece que el bajo perfil es la estrategia de relaciones públicas de la OEP este año de 2016. Esa era la estrategia de la NSA antes que el heroico Snowden revelará un montón de documentos a la prensa. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
01.13.16
Posted in Europe, Patents at 6:10 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Germany emulates USPTO/EPO trends by allowing, in spite of the EPC, patents on vague ideas pertaining to software
THE EPO, which seemingly represents (or at least prioritises) multinationals from outside Europe these days, has become an enemy of Europe right at the very heart of Europe (Munich, Germany). The EPO is also an enemy of its own highly-qualfied staff, but this isn’t the subject of today’s article.
“For the time being, in spite of pressure from patent lawyers and the EPO, Germany remains a barrier to the UPC, and that’s a good thing.”The President of the FFII says he “[w]ill speak at FOSDEM on Unitary Software Patents and how to stop it, Sunday 10am” (end of this month). Contrary to the myths still perpetuated because this debate got hijacked (primarily by multinationals and their lobbyists), not only patent trolls are the problem. Patent scope is the problem. Later on Tuesday (yesterday) the EPO released quite a ‘masterpiece’ which is in fact non-factual nonsense (we rebutted some of these claims before). It had been put together and eventually unleashed by the team of Benoît Battistelli, collating and condensing PR talking points, disregarding everything else (again, things which we covered here before). There is one part there which alludes to UPC, one of the mechanisms for expanding patent scope and bringing software patents to Europe. It says: “But while the EPO has successfully worked with our international partners, a number of our own member states have worked in cooperation with the EPO to finalise preparations for the next significant development in patents in the European Union itself. With the support of the EPO, the Select Committee last December agreed a complete secondary legal framework comprising the implementing rules, and budgetary and financial rules for the unitary patent. It was a hugely significant occasion for the European patent system which means that we are now legally, technically and operationally ready to deliver the unitary patent. With the successful ratification of the UPC Agreement by the remaining member states, 2016 really could be the year in which innovators the world over start to benefit from the distinct advantages the unitary patent is set to deliver.”
“We still remember Germany’s support of patents used by Microsoft against a Dutch company, TomTom, whose Linux use came under attack with notorious F.A.T. (FAT not being an offensive term) patents.”For the time being, in spite of pressure from patent lawyers and the EPO, Germany remains a barrier to the UPC, and that’s a good thing. But in the mean time Germany resurrects and reminds everyone of an old tradition. It’s a big problem right now. We still remember Germany's support of patents used by Microsoft against a Dutch company, TomTom, whose use of Linux came under attack with notorious F.A.T. (FAT not being an offensive term) patents.
A new article just published by Dr. Glyn Moody talks about this patent, perhaps in response to some German patent lawyers who celebrated the grant. To quote Moody:
What exactly those two words “as such” mean in this context has been argued over for years. In practical terms, it has led to thousands of software patents being issued thanks to clever framing by lawyers that takes advantage of the “as such” loophole. According to this post on a blog that is called unashamedly “European Software Patents,” it seems that German judges have now gone even further, and granted a patent for a graphical user interface. That’s surprising, because the same EPC Article 52 explicitly excludes “presentations of information” from patentability.
[...]
Just in case that legalese isn’t crystal-clear, here are details of the case considered by the German court. The patent dealt with the display of visual information captured by a swallowable capsule equipped with a camera. Apparently, these cameras produce information too rapidly to be useful for ready examination by the human eye. That problem was solved by showing only a subset of transmitted frames in one window, and different subsets in other windows. The idea is that an expert can scan several of these windows at once, since the images in each are changing relatively slowly.
In the Unites States, in the mean time, some USPTO-granted patents are being used against European companies. Docket Report comments on the case against Metaswitch (British), which we wrote about very recently. It says that ‘The court granted defendants’ motion to strike the report of plaintiff’s validity expert regarding patentable subject matter because the testimony was unhelpful. “[T]he issue of subject matter eligibility under § 101 will not be tried to the jury in this case. No expert will be permitted to testify to the jury about whether the asserted patents claim eligible subject matter under § 101. The Court is responsible for deciding disputed questions of law, and the Federal Circuit has consistently disfavored reliance on expert testimony as the basis for legal conclusions. [The expert's] analysis of the law and his ultimate legal conclusions are not helpful expert testimony and are therefore inadmissible.”‘
“Remember that Texas is where almost every troll can be assumed to be going into.”The litigant is a company from Texas whose software is not so well known (unlike Metaswitch) and its patents are basically software patents. Remember that Texas is where almost every troll can be assumed to be going into. The courts in Texas are biased in favour of aggressive, trigger-happy firms, including — if not notably — trolls.
Mr. Maycotte, a Texan writing for the plutocrats’ media (Forbes), says that Alice does not change much (he just says that an existing issue/riddle now has a name/reference) and that poor startups — yes, software startups of all entities! — should still waste their limited resources and pursue patents. The highest court, SCOTUS, opened the door to invalidation of software patents (there is no sign of that changing as SCOTUS has just declined to hear three patent cases, including, based on this detailed listing, Allvoice Developments US, LLC v. Microsoft Corp. which we covered here before).
“If you are not a troll but a producing company, then all those whom you sue can and will sue you back harder, especially if those whom you sue belong to a large company with a massive trove of software patents.”“Regardless of the outcome of Alice,” he wrote, “there are still plenty of reasons for startups to seek patents. Getting a patent can cost you (I’ll talk more about specific costs in the last section of this blog), but not getting a patent could potentially cost you even more — in lost venture capital, market share and other areas, as patent advisory experts David Pridham and Brad Sheafe suggested in an article in these pages last summer.”
If you are not a troll but a producing company, then all those whom you sue can and will sue you back harder, especially if those whom you sue belong to a large company with a massive trove of software patents. The writer, who looks like the world’s biggest patent troll (Nathan Myhrvold), works in the mass surveillance industry (for corporate gain). Forbes too, with its notorious malware in all Web page (a subject of ongoing scrutiny), is a perfect fit for this kind of view. Why doesn’t Forbes air the views of many startups which demand patent reform?
“The ultimate goal appears to be injunctions with global scope — the kind which best suits multinationals with global presence.”Incidentally, last night the EFF complained about CAFC, a booster of software patents and also their originator. The EFF wrote: “When courts fail to quickly address serious defects in a patent litigation complaint, it can harm not only the parties to the case, but also the public at large. Yesterday, EFF and Public Knowledge filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a case where the Eastern District of Texas is allowing expensive litigation to drag on even though the defendant has already fully briefed validity issues that almost surely will dispose of the case, and stop the patent owner from suing on them in the future.
“Eclipse IP, the patent owner in this case, is a repeat patent assertor. It’s brought over 160 cases in recent years. (Eclipse IP recently changed its name to Electronic Communication Technologies, LLC, but the named party in this case is still Eclipse IP.) The defendant in this case, Marten Transport, is a trucking company based in Wisconsin.”
Imagine what would happen if the UPC became a reality and the same thing became routine in Europe. Imagine Texas courts (ruling on companies in Wisconsin in this case) being the equivalent of some court in Germany ruling against a British company or vice versa, with an effect in the entire continent and beyond. It shouldn’t be hard to see who benefits from such a system. The ultimate goal appears to be injunctions with global scope — the kind which best suits multinationals with global presence. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous Page — « Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries » — Next Page »
Content is available under CC-BY-SA