12.13.16
Gemini version available ♊︎Another New Book, This Time From Dr Luke McDonagh, Chronicles the Demise of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Agreement
The media too realises that there’s a (pitch)fork in it…
Summary: Brexit and UPC are inherently incompatible and people in the legal profession know that nothing is going to change that, definitely not some words on a Web page (from Lucy Neville-Rolfe)
THE President of the EPO believes that for the sake of the UPC he can do pretty much whatever he wants (carte blanche) any time it pleases him. In a later article we are going to show what he did last week in Croatia. At the end of last month, after Battistelli had lobbied Lucy, a bizarre (impossible) nod was given to the UPC, leaving patent professionals confused and befuddled. It only increases uncertainty both for them and for their clients. A new WIPR survey, just published with the results, says that its “Readers don’t like UK decision on UPC Agreement”. Bear in mind this is a London-based publication whose readers are mostly law firms in that area. To quote:
WIPR readers have not welcomed the UK’s recent decision to ratify the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Agreement.
On November 28, WIPR reported that UK Minister of State for Intellectual Property Baroness Neville-Rolfe announced that the UK will implement the unitary patent and UPC.
She said: “As the prime minister has said, for as long as we are members of the EU, the UK will continue to play a full and active role.”
Neville-Rolfe added that the new system will “provide an option for businesses that need to protect their inventions across Europe”.
However, she warned that the decision to proceed with ratification “should not be seen as pre-empting the UK’s objectives or position in the forthcoming negotiations with the EU”.
Answering our latest survey, on whether readers welcomed the decision, 63% did not, while 37% felt positive about the news.
When asked whether the UPC would be ratified, on various occasions including a UPC-centric event in the UK, most participants if not all of them said “no”. We wrote about this at the time. One must remember that this is in fact the echo chamber admitting it. The UPC won’t happen here. It’s common sense. Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP was acting as though it’s actually likely to happen and said this on December 7th in a site for law firms. To quote:
Brexit will not affect granted, pending, or to-be-filed patent applications in the United Kingdom, whether they are filed directly in the United Kingdom or filed through the EPO and validated in the United Kingdom. Because the EPO is an international organization established by a multilateral treaty—the European Patent Convention—the EPO will still be able (notwithstanding the United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union) to obtain a patent in the United Kingdom through current procedures at the UK Intellectual Property Office by way of the EPO, directly or through the Patent Cooperation Treaty. In effect, the United Kingdom may have a status similar to that of Switzerland, Norway, and Turkey (which are not members of the European Union but are members of the European Patent Convention; validation of granted EPO patents in the United Kingdom would remain available to patent applicants).
Well, actually entertaining the possibility is most likely a waste of time. Nothing it going to change, especially now that the EPO is in a crisis and not many people will pursue this system, opting instead for national patent offices (NPOs). The UPC will fail because it’s still/already dying, no matter all that lying from Battistelli and other chronic liars like Margot Fröhlinger. As IP Kat put it yesterday (not Bristows taking over the platform): “The Unified Patent Court (UPC) has been grabbing the headlines in recent weeks and it is easy to forget that the last six or so years have brought many major reforms to IP litigation in England and Wales.”
Well, those latter issues, including those brought up in the article (corruption), are much more important. As for the UPC, see this 7-parts series below along with followups:
- The UPC Scam Part I: EPO-Bribed Media Outlets Lie to Brits (and to Europeans) About the UPC
- The UPC Scam Part II: The Patent Echo Chamber at Work, Prematurely Congratulating Itself in Its ‘News’ Sites
- The UPC Scam Part III: The “Patent Mafia”
- The UPC Scam Part IV: Bumps Along the Road for UPC, With or Without the UK and Brexit
- The UPC Scam Part V: Unitary Patent Regime a Fantasy of Patent Trolls
- The UPC Scam Part VI: The Real Story Which People Missed Due to Puff Pieces Seeded by Battistelli-Bribed Media is That UPC Technically Cannot Come to the UK
- The UPC Scam Part VII: A Fine Mess in the Making, as Nothing Can be Made of It Amid/After Brexit
- Memo “Deliberately Leaked to Cover up the UPC” With Its Many Associated Issues Amid Brexit
- Ignore the Bristows UPC Echo Chamber, the UPC is Not Happening
The UPC isn’t coming to the UK and probably not to Europe (or EPO member states), either. The campaign of deception from Unitary Patent cronies, notably Team UPC, took a massive blow when the UK voted to leave the EU, separating London from that envisioned system they have been drooling over for about a decade.
Dr. Luke McDonagh, one of the critics of the latest move from Lucy (quoted a lot in the 7-parts series above), has said: “Law of #patents headline news in Law Society Gazette due to #Brexit…” (we have added the picture to the top)
McDonagh is a realist, unlike Team UPC, and separately he wrote that he has this new book on the subject. “Download free the first chapter of my new book on European #patent law & the #UPC #Brexit consequences,” he wrote. There is also a book on the subject from Dr. Ingve Björn Stjerna. █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA