11.05.16
Posted in Europe, Patents at 7:51 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Thorny business over patents on seeds, plants etc.
Summary: Yet more debunking of the ludicrous notion that the European Patent Office (EPO) maintains patent quality when grants go through the roof, sometimes irrespective of applications’ quality
THE EPO was once the world’s best patent office. Almost nobody would deny that. A lot has changed, however, and further exacerbated (accelerated decline) by Battistelli, who made the Office an unbearable place to work in.
What on Earth is an EP worth these days? Probably nowhere near the value of an EP even a decade ago. An EP is not so hard to get; it’s no longer a ‘trophy’. A whole paid-for press release about one such EP has just been published by Reuters (at great expense) only to say: “European Patent Office (EPO) has announced the intent to grant Respiratorius patent for VAL001, “A Pharmaceutical Composition Comprising a HDAC inhibitor and a steroid and the use thereof.””
So what? Here is another new example:
In the third quarter, The European Patent Office (EPO) confirmed that they had not received an appeal from the opponent regarding BioPorto’s NGAL Forms patent. This means that the patent remains valid. BioPorto has appealed EPO’s decision on the Exclusion patent, which was ruled invalid earlier this year. The NGAL Cutoff patent application has been amended according to the response from the EPO and BioPorto expects an approval to issue the patent within months.
But what is the validity of EPs once tested by European courts in the future? It may be hard to tell until half a decade from now.
“But what is the validity of EPs once tested by European courts in the future? It may be hard to tell until half a decade from now.”Be very careful repeating these latest lies from the EPO (some still repeat these). See our previous posts about gross mis-evaluation of EPs. This latest example links to this puff piece generated by lies, soon to be repeated over and over again by the EPO. These lies and bogus (misleading) numbers from the liars of the EPO would have us drooling over € 5.7 TRILLION, but only a fool would believe that. See this tweet and two more that say [1, 2]: “IPR-intensive industries generated a trade surplus of € 96.4 billion for the EU” and “IPR-intensive industries directly generated 28% of all jobs in the EU” (linking to epo.org).
IAM ‘magazine’ too is dropping some extraordinary numbers, but expecting IAM to lie is more natural than expecting the EPO to lie (until more recently, especially this year).
This brings us to the issue of patent scope. Here is EPO saying: “These are the topics we’ve prepared for this year’s Indo-European conference on ICT-related patents” (pushing for software patents again, clearly against the rules).
“Europe does not really have software patents, except in cases where examiners don’t do their job properly. They’re tricked or misled into thinking that a device — such as a general-purpose computer — makes the supposed invention “hard” rather than “soft” (or abstract).”See this recent article about software patents in Spain and take into account the situation in Germany and in the UK. Europe does not really have software patents, except in cases where examiners don’t do their job properly. They’re tricked or misled into thinking that a device — such as a general-purpose computer — makes the supposed invention “hard” rather than “soft” (or abstract).
EPOPIC too, on the face of it, includes talks about software patents where Philpott promotes/defends these. “We’ll be discussing what clients expect from patent searchers at #EPOPIC,” the EPO wrote, “For conclusions stay tuned!”
They separately wrote: “The Patent Information Conference 2016 starts next week. We look forward to your comments at #EPOPIC” (epo.org links again).
They don’t care about comments. Battistelli listens to and obeys nobody. “There has been enormous progress in Asian patent information in recent years,” the EPO wrote. “Follow #EPOPIC to learn more…”
Naturally, they have said absolutely nothing about major news that we first found out about via Dr. Glyn Moody, who alerted us to this article in German. The EPO’s patent maximalism problem is getting noticed; it makes politicians furious or at least antagonistic. Petra Kramer said about it that it’s “a further indication that patent quality is deteriorating under Batistelli” and she prepared a translation of this article in Dutch, her mother’s tongue. Source here (must accept cookies and other barriers).
European Commission invalidates EPO’s decision to patent tomatoes and broccoli
No patents can be filed on plant breeding in principle. “Improved” properties obtained through conventional, biological breeding methods are not patentable. That is what the European Commission decided on Thursday in an explanatory statement of a 1998 directive designed to protect biotechnological inventions.
The European Patent Office decided in March 2015 that enhanced products may be eligible for a patent under conditions. This would apply, for example, crossed broccoli or tomato species. Brussels now says that it was never the intention of the direction and that it leads to legal problems.
The European Parliament expressed itself last year against the decision of the patent office. MEPs as Jan Huitema (VVD) and Bas Belder (SGP) [both right wing, big business friendly parties – Petra Kramer] would prevent European farmers and growers who breed plants without biotechnology. EPO’s decision prevented them from using patented seeds of their home-grown plants.
Innovation
,,Patents on natural properties of plants stifle innovation and are a threat to the food supply and crop diversity,” Huitema responds. ,, The first battle has been won, the European Patent Office will have to comply by adapting their guidelines based on this new information.”
Netherlands is the second largest exporter of agri-food products worldwide. The Ministry of Economic Affairs has organized a symposium in Brussels in May with the aim to correct ,,imbalance ‘between the rights of patent holders and producers’ rights. There the conclusion quickly came forward that a pragmatic solution had to be made to put an end to the legal uncertainty.
Soon thereafter we also found coverage of something related to this from Switzerland (but in English). Quality of patent examination at the EPO obviously fell under Battistelli. It is now worse than even the USPTO, according to this new report. To quote:
A recently published study finds that, contrary to a conventional view, the United States Patent and Trademark Office undertakes more rigorous patent examination than the European Patent Office and the Australian Patent Office.
The study, published in the John Marshall Law School Review of Intellectual Property Law, provides “an answer to a question that, rather surprisingly, has not been addressed in the academic literature to date: What is the practical effect of patent examination?”
Petra Kramer asked: “How is EPO’s court appointed? Is it private (like ISDS) or public?”
“You mean boards or courts or tribunals maybe,” I replied, but she insisted on “[t]his one: the highest court of the European Patent Office has declared that plants are patentable.”
It’s a 2015 article/report about something that we covered here before. IP Watch has just covered this latest development (behind paywall) and it doesn’t look good for the EPO, which is increasingly disgraced. It grants patents on things that should never have been considered in the first place. Here is a report in English about it:
In a long awaited explanatory statement, the EU Commission takes the view that plants and animals that are obtained by means of “essentially biological” breeding are non-patentable. This statement is in strong contradiction to the current practice of the European Patent Office (EPO), which has already granted more than 100 patents on conventional breeding, e.g. on tomatoes and broccoli.
The international coalition No Patents on Seeds! has for many years been demanding that these patents are stopped. With the support of many thousands of supporters, they have filed petitions and oppositions. They are seriously concerned about the increasing monopolisation of the seed and food production. The organisations in the international coalition are now calling on the political decision-makers to ensure that the EPO fully adopts the EU statement, and the rules for the interpretation of patent law become legally binding.
Next time Battistelli brags about maintaining patent quality (probably next month in the Administrative Council’s meeting) show him the above. Battistelli is a chronic liar who turned the EPO from world leader into a public fiasco. This tarnishes Europe’s reputation and severely harms its competitiveness. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 7:18 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Systemic takeover by patent maximalists who measure “production” in terms of patents (“products”) granted and broadened in terms of applicability spells doom for the Boards of Appeal and the EPO as a whole
THE QUALITY of patents at the EPO (and oversight thereof in particular) has slipped away. This is a subject we’ll tackle in our next post.
Apparently, IP Kat continues to ‘lose’ comments because, as this new comment puts it: (“resettlement” is a euphemism for exile by the way)
Apparently my post from last week went lost…
Anyway, the real question is how long is this supposed to last? It is becoming quite clear that quite a few problems are still open:
-the one cited in this article: is this all what is going to happen? The President can dismiss a board of appeal member (or put it in a legal limbo, which is effectively the same thing) at will and violate judicial independence and… that’s it?
-the one with the dismissed union representatives: they are just out and that’s it? They are not going to be reintegrated?
-the ridiculous resettlement of the boards. Really?
-and there is really no real control of the finances of a PUBLIC body which produces hundreds of millions euros every year? Did I hear that correctly?
Am I the only one to wonder?
We have already explained why the above is done. A lot of it may have to do with paving the way to massive overhaul, not reform — one that may also have examination itself abolished in favour of a system more like INPI or EUIPO. Such a system would hardly necessitate any appeals at all. Examiners too then become a luxury.
The other day we mentioned MIP’s report on WIPO ambitions of automating patent translations — something which relates both to the UPC and to patent filings. They cannot really manage the translation from Mandarin to European languages (not reliable), but that’s just a method for issuing more patents that are applicable in more places. Sounds familiar a goal? So-called ‘production’ and patent maximalism? Read this new report from IP Watch and see the latest developments regarding the UPCA (they can’t quite call it UPC if London is out and Italy/Milan is in). To quote this Italian site:
The bill that authorizes the Italian government to proceed with ratification of the Unitary Patent Court Agreement was definitively approved by the Italian Senate on 18 October 2016.
The bill, to become Law No.2524/2016 after publication in the Italian Official Journal, also amends the Italian Industrial Property Code to introduce rules on contributory or indirect patent infringement.
No specific provisions are currently in place in Italy concerning contributory or indirect patent infringement. The bill will introduce into the Italian Industrial Property Code a provision that very closely resembles Article 26 of the Unified Patent Court Agreement.
If UPCA (or whatever they’ll call it in the future) becomes a reality, expect even less appeals, more patent trolls, higher damages, and more litigation. Cui bono? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Patents at 7:00 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“Mercifully,” one person writes, Battistelli “decided against reducing pension rights as well.”
Summary: The union-busting resumption by Battistelli, in spite of warning from the Administrative Council of the EPO, means nothing at all has changed and the downfall of the EPO continues
ON the heels of this prank video (humour is the best medicine sometimes, some say) we take a more serious note and adopt a more serious tone in relation to EPO scandals. There’s nothing funny about Battistelli ‘satrocious behaviour, which we wrote about twice yesterday, first when we got the leak (as soon as it was made available) and later on when this leak led to media coverage.
For those who pursue or need background about the case, we have some background in the following older articles:
Concerned people have sent us additional input about what happened. French MEP Philip Cordery’s statement on Laurent Prunier, for example, was published on the same day. Our source told us that “this statement from MEP Philip Cordery was posted on SUEPO’s FB account. Sorry no translation available but it will follow in a few days.”
Here it is:
Philip Cordery
Paris, France
Laurent Prunier, secrétaire général du syndicat Suepo La Haye de l’Office européen des brevets (European Patent Office) et représentant élu du personnel vient d’être licencié avec effet immédiat. Son seul tort ? Avoir fait son travail de représentant du personnel.
Après une parodie de procédure interne, Monsieur Batistelli vient de délivrer sa sentence, digne des pire procès de notre histoire.
Je veux avant tout exprimer mon plus grand soutien à Laurent Prunier et à tous les salariés de l’ Office européen des brevets.
Je veux aussi dire à M. Batistelli que nous n’en resterons pas là. Il n’est pas concevable de gouverner une organisation internationale dans l’impunité la plus totale, en bafouant constamment les principes les plus élémentaires du droit du travail international.
Comme je l’ai récemment écrit, Batistelli doit partir. Je continuerai, avec mes collègues, d’exercer toutes les pressions nécessaires pour que les choses finissent par bouger et que les salariés puissent de nouveau travailler dans la sérénité.
“EPO Staff Representative sacked today,” said another message to us, noting that “I received sad news regarding Laurent Prunier, SUEPO secretary this afternoon. He got sacked by Battistelli. Update from SUEPO’s Facebook account…”
BREAKING NEWS :
Laurent Prunier, Secretary of SUEPO The Hague and elected member of the Central Staff Committee is fired with immediate effect.
The result of the social conference of Mr Battistelli should thus be upgraded to : 2016 : three union officials and staff representatives fired + one severely downgraded. More are in the pipeline……….
Anonymous comments found on social media:
BB has sacked a staff representative from The Hague for harassing others representatives. Mercifully, BB decided against reducing pension rights as well.
And another one:
Thanks for the info. Indeed, it is confirmed that LP got fired this afternoon! I have truly no words for this , so very sad and tragical.
And a comment posted on SUEPO’s FB was omitted. There’s plenty of information out there, but it’s hard to find it. The media sure isn’t interested and isn’t covering this.
“A further union représentative was fired this morning,” a comment said at IP Kat, “purely by coincidence would Minnoye say.” This alludes to Minnoye’s ludicrous statement to Dutch media.
“Now we know how much respect the President has for the council. Next he’ll probably fire them,” continues the same comment
“Not a chance,” responded another person. “They’ll be fine as long as they keep kissing his a** !”
One more comment links to “The Register: Fresh Euro Patent Office drama: King Battistelli fires union boss – EPO president ignores his own admin council” (so far the only media coverage of this embarrassing move by Battistelli!)
There are comments on this article. One says:
Concrete Decision
Pity this union can’t take a leaf out of one of the old style American unions.
By now Batistelli would have a supporting role in a motorway bridge.
I am amazed that the Administrative Council haven’t fired the sod and had him escorted from the premises.
“It should read: He would have been a cornerstone of the organization,” one person responded.
Again the point about total lack of effective oversight:
Exactly what does he know about the members of the Admin Council?
He’s acting with impunity. Sounds like he has immunity.
A not-so-relevant response to the above we’re omitting, but as usual, people use this to bash the European Union/Commission as a whole, even though the EPO has nothing to do with it.
Consider this:
unofficial but still
Long live the European project!
Also this:
Basta!, buster and board alike
It sounds like ‘disrepute’ is accumulating on the EPO to the degree that the Administrative Council should fire Battistelli for that cause, shortly before they all resign for the same cause. They have all lost face.
The following alludes to skeletons in the closet. Techrights will dive as deep as necessary into this closet to unearth whatever is in there and then present it to the public. It is, at the moment, the principal aim of Techrights. We help Battistelli with the transparency he likes boasting about (in words, not actions). Here is the comment:
You have to wonder …
… what skeletons he knows about, given that he’s lost all ability to influence the staff he is supposed to be leading, especially given that this has been rumbling on for years …
There is no relevant response to the above and there are probably more comments on the way. I have already reached out to journalists in an effort to get them to cover these atrocious moves from Battistelli and I encourage others, readers included, to do the same. It’s about more than one person; it’s about the EPO as a whole and if Battistelli continues going down this path, there won’t be much of an EPO left (maybe that’s more or less his objective amid EUIPO speculations). █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Humour, Patents at 6:07 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: A show I just caught on TV…
YouTube version
Transcript:
Fake TV interview with the fake President of the EPO, Benoît Hernandez
I’m the President
They call me Blatter, they think that’s clever and they think that I care
Well done, idiots, but let me tell you something
I do whatever the f*** I want
One way or another I’ll get my chinchillas at the Council to do what I tell them
I got myself total immunity
It’s great, isn’t it?
Seriously
I can even punish innocent people
F*** em!
And I do it all the time, even yesterday with that French dude, you should have seen that look on his face when he packed his things
I wrote an internal announcement and said “sniper” again
Some people actually believe all this bullshit and join FFPE afterwards
Some bloody idiots
They actually believe I ride a bicycle
Like I’m some friggin’ peasant
They don’t know I’m trying to get an EPO limo
You can’t make this s*** up
I can say anything I want
I lie several times a day and the media repeats the lies
Bloody bloody stupid media, they don’t even fact-check before publishing their s***
I got them by the balls
Some of them became media partners of the EPO
See, that’s the media, that’s how it operates
Throw some money at FTI Consulting and it’s done
My nose doesn’t even grow any longer
Imagine if they checked the facts
I’d look like a crook
Even Jesper would poke fun at me
He knows me, even my salary and my contractual increases
It’s massive!
Elodie signed it all off!
Even VP4′s
We told the chinchillas he’s awesome
And law-abiding despite all that c*** in Croatia
You should have seen what he did in Croatia to his staff, one person even committed suicide
And that’s actually funny?
Yes, I killed 5 in my Office
It doesn’t get any better than this
I’ve ruined entire families
You start with a disciplinary action
And they never know what’s gonna hit them?
I tell them perception of justice and all that nonsense about appeals and ILO
Little do they know I’ll be back with Sarkozy in my mid-seventies by the time ILO touches the darn thing
I actually find it very amusing
Did I tell you about my Willy?
He told Dutch television their High Court is rubbish
You should have seen Raimund, he wanted to hug him
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Content is available under CC-BY-SA