03.01.18
Gemini version available ♊︎The Latest Bristows Spin Distracts From the Fact that Britain Has No Intention of Ratifying UPC and Brexit Agreement Altogether Omits It
Summary: In an effort to distract (quite frankly as usual) from another UPC setback in the UK, Bristows LLP speaks about an irrelevant (to the UPC) Luxembourg and attempts to make a draft of the Brexit Agreement seem as though it backs the UPC (it doesn’t)
THIS AFTERNOON we published a long post about the latest UPC deception and we predicted that Bristows would soon spread/seed similar deception in Kluwer Patent Blog. Seems as though our prediction was correct. The EPO hasn’t said anything about the UPC lately (not directly anyway). But Bristows is a loose cannon. The lies just ooze out…
Nobody but those people of Bristows would be crazy enough to insinuate that the future of UPC depends on tiny Luxembourg (its role in the UPC is cursory at best and it barely has any European Patents), but here they are getting so desperate for any positive news. Brian Cordery certainly knows that without France, Germany and the UK ratifying there will never be any UPC at all. Only France ratified.
“Brian Cordery certainly knows that without France, Germany and the UK ratifying there will never be any UPC at all. Only France ratified.”But Cordery’s nonsense/distraction wasn’t the worst. The worst was this ramble about “IP rights” from Kluwer Patent blogger (Bristows publishing anonymously because it knows it’s deceiving/lying).
Like we said aerlier today, the Brexit Agreement does not say a single word about the UPC (this is not a priority at all), but of course Bristows is trying to spin all that and saying the opposite of what is true. They try to make it sound like UPC ratification is imminent or inevitable. Bristows, these greedy liars, are dominant in Kluwer today (on same day, earlier today, Bristows’ Dominic Adair did their usual SPC lobbying/marketing, which his colleague typically does at IP Kat).
“We certainly hope that FCC in Germany is watching this. Any perception (illusion) of justice at the EPO is coincidental.”And speaking of which, Kluwer is not only dominating this UPC-centric blog these days (almost like it does IP Kat); it also does the same at IP Kat, where jobs ads from Bristows reappeared some hours ago. To quote: “The European Patent Office is looking to appoint new legally qualified members of the Boards of Appeal in Munich, see EPO looking for new legally qualified members of the Boards of Appeal for more details.” (composed by Bristows staff, which wants to promote the illusion of effective justice at the EPO)
It would be odd if the Office rather than the Council (or Organisstion) was to appoint members for the Boards of Appeal, but actually that’s not an error because in many ways the Office already controls everything, including the Council. Battistelli gets to choose (or have a say on) President of Boards of Appeal as well as deputies and BOAC.
We certainly hope that FCC in Germany is watching this. Any perception (illusion) of justice at the EPO is coincidental. █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA