10.05.16
Gemini version available ♊︎Echo Chamber’s Lobbying: Team UPC Citing Team UPC as ‘Proof’ Regarding the UPC
Another TTIP/TPP-like spiel… because they want all the money and power and would lie for it
Reference: Peter Popoff
Mr. Popoff lied to people (said he spoke for God) and seriously harmed them in order to get their money. Likewise, the EPO and so-called ‘experts’ (a conspiracy of self-serving law firms) are lying to people (while claiming to speak for SMEs) in order to systematically rob Europe with broad lawsuits and shakedowns.
Summary: Another fine example where the echo chamber of Team UPC is trying to sell us the illusion that European businesses want the UPC
THIS Web site has spoken out against the UPC for nearly a decade, since before it was even known as “UPC”. One might think that it’s all over for UPC amid Brexit, but don’t put the guards down and rest on the laurels because history shows that foul play and nefarious tricks can accomplish all sorts of things, by pulling the right strings behind closed doors. We see this in TISA, CETA, TTIP, TPP, ACTA or whatever the powerful corporations and their lobbyists/lawyers want to have.
Also, the UPC ‘mission creep’ can still be found on the surface…
Bristows, a UPC pusher and British parasite, wants us to believe that the words of Tilmann (mentioned here before in [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]) count for something objective. Team UPC basically cites another Team UPC member and people notice this. One of them said that the paper was “authored under the chairmanship of Prof. Tilmann” (which isn’t OK).
IP Kat promotes the UPC quite a lot these days, at least when it’s Bristows staff authoring the posts. Here is the comment in full (under the misleading article with a misleading headline, courtesy of Bristows staff):
Since the author is keeping quite on this: “The German Bar Association’s recent position paper” was authored under the chairmanship of Prof. Tilmann who is presiding over the relevant sub-committee. For obvious reasons, this is not irrelevant and should be mentioned, at least if an objective information of the readers was intended.
So Tilmann of Team UPC interjected himself into IP Kat through Bristows (Team UPC). Nice propaganda, but people do notice:
To be fully objective, it should be stated as well that Prof. Tilmann is as well uttering a pro-domo plea as he has been heavily involved in the launching of the UPC. That the German Bar Association position paper reflects the position of its chairman is not a surprise.
In German he can be qualified as “Wendehals”, i.e. flexible neck.
In a first paper analysing Opinion 1/09 of the EuCJ, he was most adamant that the UPC was only open to EU member states. After Brexit, this opinion was not so important and a few amendments to the UPC under Art 87 would allow not only the post Brexit participation of the UK, but also further non EU member states.
It is amazing to see how an opinion can change when one’s own interests are at stake…..
We hope that IP Kat realises what it’s stooping down to. I confronted one of their writers this morning. █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA
ricegf said,
October 6, 2016 at 5:54 am
What’s a UPC?
Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:
October 6th, 2016 at 5:59 am
Unitary or unified patent court.