06.02.16
Closer Look at Players in Battistelli’s Information War: Part II (BlueCoat)
Summary: Rather than invest in a better examination and appeals process, Battistelli wastes a lot of money on censorship and surveillance (to be used against staff like examiners) with Blue Coat Systems, which is notorious for supporting abusive regimes
IN part one we wrote about a rather dodgy company which we shall revisit in part four. Today, for reasons that shall become apparent herein (today’s news), we’ve decided to leap to part two and write about BlueCoat at the EPO. BlueCoat helps Battistelli and his goons with oppression, blocking access to particular views (censorship) and using surveillance to induce fear that leads to self-censorship. BlueCoat is popular among oppressive regimes around the world. It might actually be illegal in particular civilised nations, but Eponia is a special case and Battistelli gets away with anything he decides to do.
We previously wrote about BlueCoat at the EPO in the following posts:
- Warning: EPO Surveillance May Have Just Gotten Even More Intrusive
- Rumour: Administrative Council Advises Benoît Battistelli Not to Fire Staff Representatives
- How the European Patent Office (Management) is Spying on Its Very Own Staff
At the bottom we present a document that can help shed light on the nature of the secret contract (amount of money spent is unknown). The interesting thing is that the EPO gives money to a US company (not the first time and this one, “Blue Coat Systems Inc., formerly CacheFlow, is a Sunnyvale, California-based provider,” according to Wikipedia). Unlike the secret contract, the document below does not tell us how much money goes and where exactly. So much for ‘transparency’… as well shall show another day, it’s only the pretense of transparency.
Notice how they put brand names in the requirements, which is a notorious practice that came under fire at the Commission (like specifying “Oracle” or “Microsoft” as requirements in ‘open’ tenders).
One must wonder, where did they get this recommendation? Maybe some of Battistelli’s recent trips to abusive, authoritarian nations (notice date of this document and dates therein) which famously make use of such human rights-incompatible ‘solutions’ that track and disparage dissidents and journalists? “Delivery,” according to the document, is to “Branch office in Rijswijk.” It’s possible that similar equipment exists in Munich and other EPO sites.
All this is worth mentioning not only because it helps demonstrate or verify the EPO’s abuses against staff but also because it shows how Battistelli keeps wasting money while pretending there’s no money for real activities, which involve examination, appeals, renewals (administration) etc.
Consider this new report from today which says:
EPO accused of decreasing power of boards of appeal
Proposed reforms to the boards of appeal at the European Patent Office (EPO) have been slammed in a leaked letter sent by some of the boards’ members.
In the letter, sent late last month and seen by WIPR, EPO president Benoît Battistelli’s proposed reforms were criticised as “decreasing the level of autonomy and independence” of the boards.
As it stands the boards of appeal are classed as a directorate-general of the EPO, meaning they are a specific branch of the office.
The proposals aim to make the boards a separate organisational entity as far as possible without reforming the European Patent Convention (EPC), the framework that created the European Patent Organization, under which the EPO operates.
The above does not say much about what it’s all about: money (or so it's claimed).
Maybe if Battistelli wasn’t so busy wasting millions on stupid (probably political) media charades that involve buying the media, there would be more money left for actual activities that the EPO was actually supposed to be dedicated to. We shall say more about this in part three. █
Supplies – 362318-2015
15/10/2015 S200 European Patent Office – Supplies – Contract notice – Open procedure
Germany-Munich: Provision of Blue Coat PacketShaper hardware, Blue Coat PolicyCenter software, and installation, configuration and migration of deliverables including support and maintenance
2015/S 200-362318
OPEN INVITATION TO TENDER
1. Awarding authority:
The European Patent Organisation (EPO), acting through the European Patent Office: Headquarters, Bob-van-Benthem-Platz 1, 80469 Munich, Germany, Postal address: EPO, 80298 Munich, Germany.
The European Patent Organisation is an intergovernmental organisation set up pursuant to the European Patent Convention which entered into force in 1977. At present it has 38 Member States (Albania, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United Kingdom). The executive body of the EPO is the European Patent Office which is charged with the search and examination of European patent applications and granting European patents. It employs approximately 6 700 staff at EPO headquarters in Munich, a branch at The Hague/Rijswijk (NL) and sub-offices in Berlin and Vienna (the number of Member States and staff members indicated may change).
2. Award procedure:
Open invitation to tender with discretionary award of contract.
3. Description of the contract:
(a) Purpose of the contract:
This contract is for the provision of Blue Coat PacketShaper hardware, Blue Coat PolicyCenter software, and installation, configuration and migration of deliverables including support and maintenance.
(b) Division into lots:
Not applicable.
(c) Any deposits and guarantees required:
Not applicable.
(d) Main terms concerning payment:
Purchase: within 30 days of acceptance of the equipment.
Maintenance: payments will be made quarterly in arrears.
(e) Qualifications required by law:
Not applicable.
4. Place and period of performance:
(a) Place at which the contract is to be performed:
Delivery to
Branch office in Rijswijk.
(b) Duration of contract or time limit for delivery or completion of services/work:
The duration of the contract is for 3 years with a right for the EPO to extend this duration twice by 1 year each.
5. Variants:
Proposals for variants, the effect of which would be to reduce significantly the rights and safeguards of the EPO, are not allowed.
6. Requests for the Procurement Documents and receipt of bids:
(a) Name and address of department from which the Procurement Documents and clarification of the Procurement Documents may be requested:
European Patent Office
Central Procurement 4.8 (1955),
Patentlaan 2,
2288 EE Rijswijk,
The Netherlands
E-mail: dhtenderclarifications@epo.org
The Procurement Documents may be requested by letter or e-mail.
(b) Final date for receipt by the EPO of requests for the Procurement Documents:
- 27.10.2015 (12:00), CET
(c) Final date for receipt by the EPO of requests for clarification:
- 6.11.2015 (12:00), CET
- Questions must be submitted by letter or E-Mail.
(d) Final date for receipt of bids/number of copies to be sent:
- 4.12.2015 (12:00), CET
- Bids must be submitted in 2 copies (including the original to be marked as such). The bid shall also be submitted on a USB stick/CD (except for the Offer Forms only to be provided as part of the original copy).
(e) Address to which the requests for clarification and bids must be sent:
As in point 6(a).
Please submit bids by post only and not by fax or E-Mail. Bids submitted by fax or E-Mail will be excluded.
(f) Language or languages in which requests for clarification and bids must be drawn up: English.
The Procurement Documents will be available in English.
7. Legal form of the grouping in the event of a joint bid:
If several bidders submit a joint bid, they must be jointly and severally liable for the performance of the obligations under the
contract. A declaration to this effect, duly signed by all members of the grouping and appointing a representative that is
authorised to act on behalf of all members, must be submitted with the bid.
8. Criteria for assessing bidders’ know-how, capacity and reliability to fulfil the contract:
Bids from bidders who do not fulfil the selection criteria stated in the Procurement Documents and/or whose circumstances are
such as to seriously call into question their financial and professional reliability (see Article 2 of the General Conditions of
Tender, available at www.epo.org) will not be considered for contract award.
Bidders’ know-how, capacity and reliability to fulfil the contract will be assessed on the basis of the information and evidence
submitted in reply to the questionnaire in Annex 1 to the General Conditions of Tender and any additional questionnaire(s)
included in the Procurement Documents.
9. Period during which the bidder is bound by his bid:
6 months following the final date for receipt of bids indicated in point 6(d).
10. Criteria for the award of contract:
The contract shall be awarded to the bidder whose bid is preferred regarding the bidder’s ability to meet the requirements of the EPO which will be measured by:
- In first instance, the technical quality of the support and of the maintenance, and the delivery time (70 %)
- The price and the operation cost (30 %)
11. Other information:
Contract award is expected to take place in the beginning of the 1st quarter of 2016.
Content is available under CC-BY-SA