08.29.19
Gemini version available ♊︎USPTO and EPO: Call Software Patents ‘Hey Hi’ (‘AI’) and Use Microsoft Software (or Else!)
A dip in patent quality and integrity
Summary: The mischief of the world’s biggest patent offices (or biggest bar China’s) is costly and very much corrosive to the image of patent systems; if they don’t obey the law, how is the public expected to respect them?
THE LATEST 35 U.S.C. § 101 cases (in our daily links) show that software patents continue to be rejected by courts, never mind what the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) says. As we shall show in other future posts (we’ve just received lots of new documents), the European Patent Office (EPO) is the same; European courts reject such patents and the UPC will never materialise, i.e. those courts will continue to decide on patent scope. While software patents are being granted in Europe there’s no legal certainty; they’re pointless if not worthless. António Campinos and his friend Battistelli were granting loads of fake patents or Invalid Patents (IPs).
“It’s a growing problem because it has become a common dodge (from the law) both the USPTO and EPO now leverage.”We recently wrote a bunch of articles about the “Hey Hi” (AI) hype — more articles than we care to recall or even count. It’s a growing problem because it has become a common dodge (from the law) both the USPTO and EPO now leverage. This dodge lets them fake ‘productivity’ — in effect granting patents which they very well know courts would throw out (if given the chance/challenge).
Law firms don’t really mind all these fake patents; they still get to collect payments from applications, renewals, searches and lawsuits. They’re in it for the money, not for science or innovation (with few rare exceptions, who might end up seeking a career change sooner or later). Consider this latest promotion of software patents in Europe from a firm that brags about a “European Software Patents Knowledge Base” (while in this case acknowledging that the said patents aren’t even valid!); also spot Gene Quinn (Watchtroll) still attacking judges (“Note to the Federal Circuit: Spewing Illogical Nonsense Does Not Make It True” is his latest insult/headline). He’s just angry that the Federal Circuit rejects software patents and affirms inter partes reviews (IPRs). What a villainous site; it’s hardly surprising that EPO management associates with it! The EPO too attacks judges. Today’s EPO is a rogue institution placed above the law so that it can break the law every single day. It’s granting patents on maths, on nature and on life. The USPTO too grants patent monopolies on life itself. Totally insane? Sure. But here, it has just done so again.
“Nowadays the EPO doesn’t even use the same old buzzwords for software patents. It came up with new ones, including “AI”.”The “EPO [is] promoting swpats [software patents] again,” Benjamin Henrion warned earlier this week. “Using patents to protect digital business models,” he quoted from a new event page of theirs.
Nowadays the EPO doesn’t even use the same old buzzwords for software patents. It came up with new ones, including “AI”. The USPTO copies some of these buzzwords.
“USPTO patenting statistics,” Henrion wrote, citing the latest nonsense from the USPTO. They call it “AI” and it’s about software; no matter if actual courts throw our or push all these fake patents away…
Disguising fake patents on software (or algorithms) using buzzwords like “hey hi” might help trick examiners, but not courts.
“USPTO seeks public comment on patent policy and artificial intelligence,” said Susan Decker from Bloomberg, where she often spouts out the lies of the patent microcosm.
Bear in mind all these proponents of “AI” patents never even wrote any computer code. “AI” is, to them, some sort of “geek magic”.
“Bear in mind all these proponents of “AI” patents never even wrote any computer code.”Here’s Dennis Crouch’s take on “Artificial Intelligence (AI) Patents,” where he states that: “The USPTO is seeking information on artificial intelligence (AI) inventions.”
Here’s the “CII” nonsense (the term which the EPO used to name-drop a lot): “written description support for computer-implemented inventions [CII] generally require sufficient disclosure of an algorithm to perform a claimed function, such that a person of ordinary skill in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention.”
Crouch wrote another post about price hikes and Microsoft promotion; it’s a subject we wrote about last year. To quote: “New Fee: Non-DOCX Application Filing Surcharge Fee of $400″ (OOXML promotion, discrimination against open standards like ODF). This might merit a separate post/rant because it’s a major scandal and right now it’s just in “proposal” status. There’s an actual, confirmed scandal below [1]. Covered 2 days ago.
If patent offices want patents to be taken seriously, then they should themselves set an example. Obey the law, for starters. █
Related/contextual items from the news:
-
The Patent And Trademark Office Is Apparently Branching Out Into The Immigration Enforcement Business
Here’s another one of those weird signs of the time. Under any normal presidential administration, this move by the US Patent and Trademark Office might look a bit strange. But only a bit. There are some legitimate reasons for doing this, but filtered through the administration’s xenophobia, it seems to be just another way to hassle non-citizens. (h/t Jef Pearlman)
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA