04.02.17
The Litigation Lobby is Causing Chaos in Patent Offices, Still in a Coordinated Effort to Convert Patents Into Nothing But Legal Chaos That Harms Science
Earlier tonight: Growing Suspicions of Planned Obsolescence at the European Patent Office (replacing examination with prosecution Armageddon)
In their newsletter they are even quite blatant about it
Summary: Aggressive efforts to cause war and instigate unnecessary conflict at the expense of sharing and collaboration in the world of science, for nothing but the enrichment of (taxing by) the serial litigators such as trolls
IT IS not news to us that the Chamber of Commerce (essentially an influence/pressure group) is with the litigation lobby, as a lot of litigation or threats thereof might come from large companies against their minuscule competitors. CoC — as it’s often referred to (almost derogatorily) — stands for large multinational corporations, so the “commerce” part isn’t exactly frank.
“So the litigation industry wants legal wars.”Now that IAM and Watchtroll are lobbying Trump and trying to overthrow USPTO Director Lee so as to install this crook we should pay careful attention to IAM’s latest issue that promotes discriminatory thickets. “In recent years,” it says, “patent pools have once again become a hot topic, as well as a source of considerable controversy.”
It’s not hard to see why. These pools are designed to exclude small players and support/enforce an oligopoly. Watchtroll, in the meantime, citing the U.S. Chamber of Commerce which attacks India for disallowing patents on software (IAM was a megaphone for the Chamber of Commerce just weeks ago, also in relation to this point), complains about improvements in patent quality in the US (and decreased litigation). Joining him are the usual people, for instance John Harris (of a patent law firm) who said “USA continues to take steps backwards due to variety of self-inflicted wounds in patent system. (Duh.)”
“Cui bono? Certainly not scientists.”So the litigation industry wants legal wars. No surprise there. “That’s actually forward,” Benjamin Henrion corrected him, “depending on which side you are.”
Here in Europe we have similar problem because Battistelli demolishes patent quality whilst EPO management and Team UPC are lobbying aggressively for UPC. Cui bono? Certainly not scientists. They would be the ones to lose money to a bunch of non-producing (or unproductive) parasites.
“There are powerful forces pressuring and sometimes even bribing politicians to turn their back on reason.”“The only interest group in Britain which has any interest in the UK acceding to the UP [Unitary Patent] are law firms,” this new comment says. “British law firms which are just the post office of American and some Asian applicants will be marginalised if they will no be eligible to present before the UPC. Due to the high cost of litigation in the UK and by consequence the low number of court cases they have basically no real court experience and they wont get it before the UPC. To a very small extent Irish firms will take over, and German lawyers take the win. The best thing the British lawyers can hope for is no UPC at all or requalify as plumbers with all the Polish plumbers leaving the Island, this seems a more rewarding career prospect.”
It is important to recognise that progress and innovation (in science and technology in particular) are not on the agenda of every occupation. There are powerful forces pressuring and sometimes even bribing politicians to turn their back on reason. That’s a slap across the face to patent examiners who practice and study science. █
Content is available under CC-BY-SA