07.03.16

Grim Situation at the European Patent Office Following Battistelli’s Latest Lawlessness Tendencies, as Explained by Concerned Insiders

Posted in Europe, Patents at 6:54 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Lawless state of affairs does a disservice to the services offered by the EPO

Firing Benoît Battistelli

Summary: Some of the latest input regarding Battistelli’s (mis)behaviour and the Administrative Council’s passive acceptance of such behaviour

THE USPTO may be notably poor when it comes to patent quality, but at no time in the recent past were there any scandals there that come anywhere close to what happens at Battistelli’s EPO. Battistelli has done so much damage to the EPO that it may take the Office decades to recover from it. The latest Battistelli scandal (among many) is extending to the whole Organisation, as the Organisation’s Administrative Council (AC) foolishly and recklessly plays along with Battistelli. As one person put it over the weekend or just before the weekend:

It appears, that the AC desperately felt the need to do something about the independence of DG3.

There are procedures at the german Bundesverfassungsgericht this year (the link is somewhere above). If the judges there see a lack of independence of DG3, it may cause quite some trouble, like an amendment to the EPC (http://www.stjerna.de/index_htm_files/Unitarypatent_Constitution.pdf, check out point 2).

Maybe this is why the AC felt the need to it quick?

Here is another comment about the massive fee hikes and what they will mean for SMEs, i.e. the large majority of European businesses:

It’s very difficult these days to follow the reforms at the EPO. So many different developments and proposed changes. Which of them are before the AC for decisions is difficult to understand. I hope at least the AC follows the situation.

RE: Considering that the present cost coverage for an appeal is 6.3%, the AC aims at increasing the cost coverage within the next five years to 20 to 25%.

On the one hand, an appeal fee of about 5000-7000 euros probably strengthens the case before national courts on the absence of independent judicial/quasi-judicial review of EPO grant/revocation decisions.

On the other hand, such a new appeal fee effectively diverts from the EPO patenting route small and middle size businesses/innovation, since they need fully disclose and make public their inventions while a review of EPO decision would have a 5000-7000-euro barrier. And this is just to start an appeal, without attorney costs, etc. And this all just for one patent.

Besides, it seems extremely disproportional to me to charge 5000-7000 euros a patentee who validates 3-4 countries and a patentee who validates 20+ countries. At the same time, also SMEs should be able to patent 38 countries.

Last but not least, an increase of BoA appeal fee seems to be indirect increase of patenting costs, given that now an appeal fee is already being paid, i.e. included in an entire series of EPO fees.

This entire policy appears to have been aimed at crushing the appeals process, hence/thereby speeding up examination and not doing the job properly. As one person put it later in the day, “it will be really difficult to get the applicants back to the EPO [...] once the current President has left.” Here is the entire comment:

I cannot help but wonder.

I hear that the Council extended the appointments of some members of the Enlarged Board having participated in the latest disciplinary decision. Nice sign. However, the Council should have suspended or dismissed the President, for interference with proper application of justice. That would have solved the independence issue, too.

It would also have bought enough time to finally organize the conference of ministers, overdue since 2012. Reshaping DG3 would definitely have merited such a conference, as would the UPC.

The impression I get is that all the Council is interested in is cash, i.e. as many patents and renewal fees as possible. As long as the President provides this cash, the Council will not stop him. Downside: once the applicants have voted with their feet and the cash flow drops, it will be really difficult to get the applicants back to the EPO. But that is unlikely to happen in the next one or two years, i.e. once the current President has left.

“Mr. Battistelli,” said some insiders, “appears unable to deliver what the AC has requested from him in its March resolution.” He not only continues his war on DG3 but also on staff representatives. In other words, he attacks both the Office and the Organisation. What a total mess.

Now that Bavarian authorities get increasingly upset or at least worried about the EPO, Team Battistelli pulls a fast one. According to insiders, “cooperation with the local authorities” was recently established as a largely political move:

On 19 April 2016 Mr. Battistelli met the Bavarian Minister of Justice, Mr. Winfried Bausback. According to the report on the intranet signed by Mr. Lutz (VP5) “the meeting participants expressed their willingness to enforce the links and exchanges between the Office and the Land of Bavaria.” In this context we refer to Article 20(1) EPO PPI that reads: “The Organisation shall co-operate at all times with the competent authorities of the Contracting States in order to facilitate the proper administration of justice, to ensure the observance of police regulations and regulations concerning public health, labour inspection or other similar national legislation, and to prevent any abuse of the privileges, immunities and facilities provided for in this Protocol.” In our opinion Data Protection forms part of the “similar national legislation”.

“Thus far we have seen very little of any such cooperation,” note the sources, so it seems like a hand-waving/white-washing exercise, much like the MoU with FFPE-EPO.

More of the same concerns about patent quality or examination/search exhaustion/depth were brought up in The Register. More people now advise other people not to apply for EPO patents. This is the kind of Battistelli-induced damage we have been warning about for years. “Filing a patent application in the USA is so much easier,” one person said, “and has a far greater chance of being granted. There’s a reason the likes of IBM file all their applications there after all. Besides, who really wants an EU patent anyway? Seriously!”

Here is a response to this:

Having a greater chance of your patent being accepted sounds like a great thing, except that it isn’t.

At all.

You could replace every patent office in the world with a stamping machine – come along, put your patent docs in the machine, get them stamped – Bingo – you have your patent.

Then all that remains is fighting out the validity of that patent in the various courts around the world, with rooms full of lawyers from all of the other companies that self-stamped their patents. The result is zero certainty in the validity of your patent and a fortune spent on lawyers with zero certainty of the outcome.

Patent applications need to be checked very carefully in order to ensure that the applicant can have a very high degree of certainty that their patent is actually valid – with that certainty companies can make decisions regarding investment and further research.

See also https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2178-boy-takes-swing-at-us-patents/ and somewhat rounded corners.

Well, the EPO could be going down a similar route and some say it already does. See “Increasing the PACE” (MIP article) as a euphemism for prioritising large foreign businesses and granting patents to them in bulk and at a higher pace. Later this week we shall shed more light on how it happens in practice and what it means to examination quality.

“One point has to be made clear,” said this commenter. “All EPO activities are paid by the renewal fees.” Well, Battistelli dooms it and he might finish his term before money runs out and budget dries up. To quote:

One point has to be made clear. All EPO activities are paid by the renewal fees.
None of them (including search, examination and opposition and not even mentioning the PR events of Battistelli or his bodyguards) cover its costs with the procedural fees.
The cost coverage factor of opposition, for instance, is similar (slightly lower) than that of an appeal.
Thus, BB’s [Battistelli] argument about the need for an increase in appeal fees in order to cover the costs is, as usual, completely disingenuous.
If that is not the reason which is the real reason?

“I believe the situation is now so bad and dangerous at the EPO,” wrote the following person:

I believe the situation is now so bad and dangerous at the EPO that it is time that public, patent attorneys, economists and company bosses assemble and act together. Make a petition, use your professional or private network if you know politicians, journalists, economists, write to ministers or representatives. We need to inform them that the whole European Patent System is at risk. Companies, economy, research will be endangered if the EPO continues on this track.
About the other reform voted at last AC, namely “risk of conflict of interest”, it is appalling that it appplies to DG3 members. A very clear conflict of interest exists at the moment at the EPO : the President and VP who force excessively high targets on examiners : EPC vs production and objectives. It is the representatives sitting at the AC : EPC vs money for grants, money for dentists, money for cooperation projects.

Based on comments and articles like the above, it increasingly seems like there’s a gentle avoidance (if not boycott) of the Office by stakeholders. The EPO had to hire (at the expense of millions of Euros) crisis management professionals after Battistelli had hired his mates and thugs. Did he not foresee the backlash? EPO examiners are not as naive as he needed them to be.

We honestly strive to save the EPO rather than destroy it because the current trajectory is a massive threat to current staff and former staff (pensions). It would damage Europe’s leadership and welfare. Former EPO workers, not just stakeholders like attorneys, are rightly concerned about the EPO. The EU’s future may depend on it to some degree. “This procedure which lead to the acceptance of the amended documents is the reason why the UK voted “exit”,” one person wrote about Battistelli’s behaviour. “First day clear NO! Some amendments overnight, and all public input, opinions,… are forgotten and the proposal is accepted anyway. Sounds like Bruxelles….”

The following comment was also posted in relation to this bunch of “amendments” and it said:

Reading the decision of the council linked above:

The last word on budget and information stays with Battistelli.

Proposal for appointments and re-appointments are delegated to the president of the boards. However, they are made dependent on the whim of the president of the board, himself dependent from Battistelli for his appointment or reappointment (the Boac has only a rubber-stamping function because the crucial power to propose the chairman of the Enlarged board and give an opinion on his reappointment is not delegated).

The drafting of the Rules of procedure has been moved from the presidium to the boac where Battistelli is again sitting and the users and the members of the boards . are excluded.

Costs of the appeal (ultimately paid by the users in form of sloppy dg1-style treatment of the appeals and/or higher fees) are going to increase because of the move into a new building.

In summary: the council abandoned the idea of an independent judiciary. They gave control over it to Battistelli(at least previously they could decide who was going to serve as VP3), whose contempt for the rule of law is known and told the users to mind their business.

If it is true that the initial reactions to the office proposal were (rightly) negative one wonders what happened behind the closed doors of the council that led 35 delegates to be satisfied with just a couple of purely cosmetic amendments.

This “contempt for the rule of law,” as the above puts it, is exactly why the EPO under Battistelli’s leadership can continue to degrade/erode trust. This might even mean that foreign investors walk away and foreign companies may become less interested in European patents. Look what a mess or liability Battistelli has become not just for the Office/Organisation but also for Europe as a whole. As a side note, Battistelli's political ally Nicolas Sarkozy has just announced preparations for a 2017 presidential bid. In politics there aren’t quite the same age limitations as in this patent sector. Might Battistelli return to ruinous politics having ruined the excellent EPO in just a few years?

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

This post is also available in Gemini over at:

gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2016/07/03/battistelli-lawlessness-liability/

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, June 12, 2021

    IRC logs for Saturday, June 12, 2021



  2. Virtual Injustice -- Part 5: Benoît's “Friends” in Budapest

    "Battistelli went to considerable lengths to secure the support of the Hungarian delegation."



  3. Links 13/6/2021: KDE Frameworks 5.83.0 and helloSystem 0.5

    Links for the day



  4. The Story of Techrights, in Banners...

    A look back at site banners from 2006-2021; they help illuminate or show our changing focus over the years



  5. With KDE Plasma 5.22 Having Just Been Released It's Time to Give KDE a Try (or Move to GNU/Linux, Leveraging the Best Features of Any Operating System Out There)

    A quick recommendation of KDE based on a reasonably recent (but not latest) build; there's this myth about KDE being difficult and flaky, but for a number of decades it has been the most advanced desktop (on any operating system) and its developers managed to hide the complexity while offering users all the power they may want/need



  6. Open Letter to the FSF About Taking Control of the FSF's (and GNU's) IRC Channels

    The FSF should have seized the opportunity, in light of self-harming IRC infighting (instability and unpredictability), to create its own IRC network and then help this new (or "GNU") network flourish



  7. EU Already Captured by -- and Lying for -- Corrupt EPO Officials, Team UPC, and Lobbyists of Multinational Corporations

    12 pages of lies; is the European Parliament reduced to a mere marionette of corrupt officials who run the EPO into the ground?



  8. [Meme] Virtual Code of Conduct (ViCoC)

    Cheapening of basic concepts and principles like "right to be heard" or "access to justice" is an international trend; we need to push back in the direction of justice, not fake 'innovation' or 'tech' (where it clearly does not belong)



  9. IRC Proceedings: Friday, June 11, 2021

    IRC logs for Friday, June 11, 2021



  10. Virtual Injustice -- Part 4: Mihály Ficsor, the EPO's Hungarian “Fixer”

    One key operative of António Campinos, who is fiercely in favour of software patents, has quite a colourful past and background



  11. Conversation With Richard Stallman in Brazil, May 31st 2021

    At the end of last month Richard Stallman had a 2-hour (and beyond, considering some of the afterthoughts) conversation, which is now available online



  12. Links 11/6/2021: Nginx Rising and SteamPal Rumours

    Links for the day



  13. New Introduction at Gemini

    As part of ongoing improvements to our capsule we have a new introductory text, reproduced below



  14. Links 11/6/2021: A Torvalds COVID Rant and RISC-V Risk of Takeover

    Links for the day



  15. Petition Against Richard Stallman Continues Losing Signatures, Open Letter of Support Reaches 6,750 Signatures

    The latest (if not last) person to garden the anti-RMS petition is an IBM employee. As has been the case for months. Another removal. IBM has a grudge against GNU's founder and by extension the FSF (they want the FSF to be a slave of IBM, just like the Linux Foundation is; we last covered this a day ago). “An open letter in support of Richard Matthew Stallman being reinstated by the Free Software Foundation” has meanwhile reached 6,750 signatures and that number grows by about 50 every 3-4 weeks, so it’s reasonable to expect 7,000 by year’s end. The anti-RMS petition may fall below 3,000.



  16. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, June 10, 2021

    IRC logs for Thursday, June 10, 2021



  17. Virtual Injustice -- Part 3: All the President's Men…

    Benoît Battistelli‘s army of minions, combined with former colleagues of António Campinos, team up to participate in the legal fudge of the EPO



  18. EPO ‘ViCo’ Prior Art (or ViCo Going Back to the 1980s)

    A previous post (video from yesterday) gave examples of prior art from the early/ier 1990s, debunking the EPO’s foolish and irrational embrace of this notion that so-called ‘ViCo’ is so absolutely incredible (we’ve kept talking, e.g. in many prior videos, about how the only real ‘innovation’ was connection speeds); MinceR recalls that “when UMTS (“3G”) was new, video calls on mobile was the feature that was supposed to sell the technology” and in the mid-80s you could already see who you spoke to (almost) in real time



  19. The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) Needs to Get Its Act Together on the EPO's GDPR Violations

    EU authorities aren't keeping abreast of EPO abuses; as a result, people's basic rights and fundamental sense of dignity erode, with impunity resulting in passage of massive piles of data to foreign corporations and governments that engage in industrial and political espionage



  20. Links 10/6/2021: Raspberry Digital Signage 15.0, NVIDIA Driver 470

    Links for the day



  21. EPO 'ViCo' Prior Art (~30 Years Ago): Barely Innovative at All

    Debunking the EPO‘s Big Lie that ViCo is some sort of incredible and innovative thing that must therefore be embraced fully; the missing ingredient was fast network connections, so there’s no excuse for EPO claiming that we must embrace such stuff irrespective of the law, constitutions etc.



  22. Improvements in the Techrights Gemini Capsule

    Further improvements are being made to our Gemini capsule, which contains all the latest stories sans the graphics; it now has a total of 35,820 pages



  23. Linux Foundation is a Foundation of Mass Surveillance

    Whatever the so-called ‘Linux’ Foundation touches turns to dust; they’re already killed the site known as Linux.com and now they scatter the “Linux” brand to the wind (in pursuit of misbranding cash)



  24. [Meme] Lord Justice Sir

    Inspired by an old Internet joke, we present the state of EPO 'justice'



  25. The EPO's Lack of Objective Legal System is No Laughing Matter

    The array of abuses committed by António Campinos and his EPO minions (people who meddle in legal affairs) is mentioned in this new video; we focus on what was shown this morning, i.e. in Part 2 of an ongoing series (to last two more weeks)



  26. Virtual Injustice -- Part 2: The ViCo Oral Proceedings of 28 May 2021

    More than half a day of theatrics and stonewalling by the EBA may have done a damage so enormous to the EBA's credibility that irrespective of the final outcome the case is already seen as compromised



  27. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, June 09, 2021

    IRC logs for Wednesday, June 09, 2021



  28. Links 10/6/2021: KDE Gear 21.08 Schedule, Librem 5 USA Supply Chain Security

    Links for the day



  29. Linux: Bugs Welcome

    With UEFI ‘secure boot’ (aka ‘wontboot’ [1, 2]) and bad BIOS, are we just accepting malicious ‘features’ and inherently bad design?



  30. Links 9/6/2021: Krita 4.4.5 and Mabox Linux 21.06 Geralt

    Links for the day


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

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

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

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

Recent Posts