09.19.19

Gemini version available ♊︎

When the EPO Sees Itself as Above European Law, Grants Patents in Defiance of the EPC (Its Founding Document) and Violates Staff’s Labour Rights/Protections (International Law)

Posted in Europe, Law, Patents at 10:42 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Skeleton

Summary: The absurd state of affairs at the EPO has reached the point where laws at every level are being violated and even judges are being threatened or vainly ignored; the EU is belatedly trying to tackle these issues, which have actually cost its credibility a great deal and threaten the perception of Rule of Law at multiple levels

THE WAY things are going, the European Patent Office (EPO) does everything it takes for its critics to be proven correct. The current president was appointed by nepotism (Battistelli), he refuses to undo illegal rules, and moreover he’s meeting disgraced officials to undermine the EPC (like 35 U.S.C. § 101 in the US for some parts of it) whilst actively promoting software patents in Europe. They’re not even shy to show their disdain/hatred of the law and rather fundamental rules. What motivates them to do all that self-harming stuff? Do they not genuinely care about the future of Europe, including the Office? They’re supposed to at least listen to the staff and the general public, not impose their will on both. This shouldn’t be a hard concept to grasp. Power comes from consent typically; otherwise brutality becomes necessary and things get rather ugly very fast.

“Power comes from consent typically; otherwise brutality becomes necessary and things get rather ugly very fast.”We’ve been tracking EPO abuses for quite some time; hardly anything is improving, only suppressed. Discussion in the media is nowadays nearly dead. Not because anything was tackled/resolved; unless the EPO thinks that the sole issue it had was ‘hostile’ media.

Months ago we wrote about “Collaborative Quality Improvements” (CQI) — a programme whose net goal would be further reductions in patent quality. How low can it go? Earlier this week the EPO wrote: “Today we are hosting a conference on #3Dprinting. EPO examiners across all sectors are preparing to face challenges this emerging tech brings.”

Surely the EPO understands that the patents it grants are a barrier and affront to 3-D printing i.e. they slow down innovation and have already held back this domain for decades (famously so; UAVs also).

Distracting from the real news, which is the EPO's "fascist bills", the EPO still writes about the latest ‘state visit’ in Munich — one in which the Romania-born Andrei Iancu was present to promote patent maximalism on behalf of American corporations. Iancu and the EPO are management-leaning bureaucrats — two names one associates with attacks on justice and judges for the sake of corporate profits. The USPTO wrote: “Our productive conversations will lead to even more collaboration between our two offices. We value our close friendship with the EPO and look forward to further strengthening our relationship in ways that will benefit our stakeholders in the U.S. and Europe.” ~ Director Iancu.”

The EPO retweeted this.

We’ve meanwhile found this new press release about a patent front group for software patents (IPO), which has “Keynote speakers include Antonio Campinos, President, European Patent Office; The Honorable Andrei Iancu…”

That the EPO continues to openly associate with lobbyists of aggressors from the US (that’s what IPO is) doesn’t shock is. It’s not surprising us anymore. Nor does the fact that last week they mentioned the UPC, probably for the first time in a very long while (many months). They’re not totally giving up just yet. A couple of days ago Mondaq published this self-promotional piece for Markus Gampp LL.M. (DLA Piper), who said: “Nonetheless, Brexit does not necessarily mean the end for the UPC and the entire reform project.”

It does. In its current form it’s dead. Finished. Needs restarting the process (if ever). And here are all the relevant paragraphs:

However, the UK leaving the EU will likely have substantial impact on the biggest reform in the history of European patent law: the long-awaited introduction of the European patent with unitary effect and the Unified Patent Court (UPC). This system would enable a patentee to enforce their patent across Europe with just one action before the UPC. All decisions taken by the UPC, including injunctions, damages and decisions on the validity of a patent would have pan-European effect.

The UK was to play a vital role in this ambitious project, inter alia by hosting a branch of the court’s central division in London. As the underlying agreements currently stand, as a non-EU member the UK can not participate in the UPC. The new system can only enter into force upon ratification by 13 member states, including the UK and Germany. The German ratification is currently on hold pending resolution of a constitutional challenge against the national legislation implementing the UPC. While some have advocated this possibility, it appears highly doubtful whether the UK could participate in the UPC system as a non-EU member when it comes into force.

Nonetheless, Brexit does not necessarily mean the end for the UPC and the entire reform project. There are ways (eg through bilateral agreements) by which the UK may conceivably still participate. However, this could potentially take years to implement, causing a significant delay.

No legal system can be entrusted/empowered under the EPO. Evidence is everywhere.

Brian Cordery (Bristows) has meanwhile invoked another event of patent maximalists, AIPPI. He’s now pushing patents on life in Kluwer Patent Blog. The usual greedy, dishonest Team UPC taking points; “Echoing a point made by Sir Robin Jacob in his address at the Opening Ceremony,” he wrote, “the message was clear from the outset: when it comes to the form of claims in antibody patents, the US is the odd one out.”

It’s a race to the bottom for them.

Europe has come to the point of embracing patent quality even lower than that of the United States. How? By deliberately violating the EPC. The judges, who no longer have any autonomy, typically let it be. They can get ousted otherwise.

Some people who pay to promote their promotional sales pitch tell us that the “Technical Boards of Appeal as well as the Legal Board are independent” (no, Weickmann & Weickmann’s Christian Heubeck should know this is no longer the case). Here’s the whole paragraph in question, published just days ago:

The Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office, i.e. the judicial panel of the second instance of the EPO, examine appeals from the decisions of the Receiving Section, the Examining and Opposition Divisions of the European Patent Office. The Technical Boards of Appeal as well as the Legal Board are independent and are bound only by the European Patent Convention (EPC). The procedure before the Boards of Appeal is outlined in the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal.

This is totally false; it’s nonsense because everyone including examiners and the Boards themselves know that independent judges are no more; it’s not the fault of the judges either. It’s the fault of the Office and the Council, which work collaboratively to crush the EPC. This is why the EPO is so absurd; it does follow even its own rules. This isn’t a particularly new problem.

Consider our various new articles about Stallman being pushed out [1, 2] for having said tactless things that were then distorted and spun by hostile media. As Benjamin Henrion has just put it (upon the news about Stallman): “Stallman an opened our eyes that the European Patent Office (EPO) was a “corrupt and malicious organization which should not exist”. Intergovernmental organizations like FIFA are designed to be captured and corrupted” [] Stallman: “But if the European Patent Office stands in your way, get rid of it too” [] Maybe one day we get someone who realize the EPO construction was not respecting the ‘rule of law’ principle…”

He then highlighted this new page about the EPO rejecting orders from our representatives in the EU: [via]

Barrier-free access to plant material is essential for the innovative capacity of the European plant-breeding sector and farmers, as well as for the genetic variety of our crops and the health of EU citizens.

In 2015, the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (EPO) ruled that products obtained from essentially biological processes, such as plants, seeds, native traits and genes, are patentable. On the basis of this decision, a broccoli and a tomato variety were effectively patented (Cases G2/12 (tomatoes) and G2/13 (broccoli)).

In response, the European Parliament adopted a resolution[1] on 17 December 2015 calling for clarification of patent law for plants. In its Notice of 8 November 2016, the Commission stated that it was never the intention to grant patents on natural traits that are introduced into plants by means of essentially biological processes such as crossing and selection. All Member States supported this reading and the Board of Directors of the EPO eventually amended its policy so as not to grant patents on products from essentially biological processes.

Unfortunately, the Technical Board of Appeal of the EPO rejected this decision on 18 December 2018, arguing that the European Patent Convention takes precedence over the EPO’s implementing rules and that patents on plants may therefore be granted.

At this stage, the President of the EPO has requested a final judgement from the Enlarged Board of Appeal to conclude the issue. Third parties are entitled to submit written statements on the matter to the Enlarged Board before 1 October 2019.

Does the Commission intend to submit a written statement to the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the EPO in order to protect the innovative capacity of the European plant-breeding sector and the general public interest?

What action does the Commission envisage taking to ensure that products resulting from natural processes are not patentable?

Here’s more on that in other new pages. At least some politicians are paying attention to the way a corrupt EPO management ignores European Parliament and grants these illegal patents anyway, helped by judges who are threatened by Office management (in direct defiance of the EPC).

“EPs will quiz the EU Commission on Monday on how to ensure that products obtained from essentially biological processes, such as crossing, cannot be patented,” says this new page: [via]

The European Patent Office’s (EPO) Enlarged Board of Appeal decided in March 2015 in the tomato (G0002/12) and broccoli (G0002/13) cases that products obtained from essentially biological processes, such as crossing, can obtain patent protection. The European Parliament responded in December 2015 with a non-binding resolution demanding that EU rules be clarified and reiterating its objection, from May 2012, to patentability of products derived from conventional breeding.

After the European Commission intervened in November 2016, the EPO amended its policy so as not to grant patents on products obtained from essentially biological breeding processes. However, the EPO’s Technical Board of Appeal rejected this decision in December 2018, arguing that the European Patent Convention takes precedence over EPO’s implementing rules.

We certainly hope that all (or at least most) EPO examiners agree with us that patent maximalism at the EPO helps neither examiners nor the Office. It merely discredits the whole institution and harms science for the sake of profits (companies like Bayer/Monsanto). People who protest in front of the EPO and demonstrate against the EU (in forms like a rebellious Brexit referendum) are motivated/emboldened by utterly disgraceful behaviour such as this. We deserve better than this. We don’t need patent lunacy (patents on life and nature) and patent trolls. We don’t need the UPC either. We need to think what would best serve Europe’s place in science and technology (worldwide). Not law firms’ interests.

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

Decor ᶃ Gemini Space

Below is a Web proxy. We recommend getting a Gemini client/browser.

Black/white/grey bullet button This post is also available in Gemini over at this address (requires a Gemini client/browser to open).

Decor ✐ Cross-references

Black/white/grey bullet button Pages that cross-reference this one, if any exist, are listed below or will be listed below over time.

Decor ▢ Respond and Discuss

Black/white/grey bullet button If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

DecorWhat Else is New


  1. Links 29/11/2021: NuTyX 21.10.5 and CrossOver 21.1.0

    Links for the day



  2. This Apt Has Super Dumbass Powers. Linus Sebastian and Pop_OS!

    Guest post by Ryan, reprinted with permission



  3. [Meme] Trying to Appease Provocateurs and Borderline Trolls

    GNU/Linux isn’t just a clone of Microsoft Windows and it oughtn’t be a clone of Microsoft Windows, either; some people set themselves up for failure, maybe by intention



  4. Centralised Git Hosting Has a Business Model Which is Hostile Towards Developers' Interests (in Microsoft's Case, It's an Attack on Reciprocal Licensing and Persistent Manipulation)

    Spying, censoring, and abusing projects/developers/users are among the perks Microsoft found in GitHub; the E.E.E.-styled takeover is being misused for perception manipulation and even racism, so projects really need to take control of their hosting (outsourcing is risky and very expensive in the long run)



  5. Links 29/11/2021: FWUPD's 'Best Known Configuration' and Glimpse at OpenZFS 3.0

    Links for the day



  6. President Biden Wants to Put Microsofter in Charge of the Patent Office, Soon to Penalise Patent Applicants Who Don't Use Microsoft's Proprietary Formats

    The tradition of GAFAM or GIAFAM inside the USPTO carries on (e.g. Kappos and Lee; Kappos lobbies for Microsoft and IBM, whereas Lee now works for Amazon/Bezos after a career at Google); it's hard to believe anymore that the USPTO exists to serve innovators rather than aggressive monopolists, shielding their territory by patent threats (lawsuits or worse aggression) and cross-licensing that's akin to a cartel



  7. Microsoft GitHub Exposé — Part VIII — Mr. Graveley's Long Career Serving Microsoft's Agenda (Before Hiring by Microsoft to Work on GitHub's GPL Violations Machine)

    Balabhadra (Alex) Graveley was promoting .NET (or Mono) since his young days; his current job at Microsoft is consistent with past harms to GNU/Linux, basically pushing undesirable (except to Microsoft) things to GNU/Linux users; Tomboy used to be the main reason for distro ISOs to include Mono



  8. Dr. Andy Farnell on Teaching Cybersecurity in an Age of 'Fake Security'

    By Dr. Andy Farnell



  9. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, November 28, 2021

    IRC logs for Sunday, November 28, 2021



  10. Links 29/11/2021: Linux 5.16 RC3 and Lots of Patent Catch-up

    Links for the day



  11. By 2022 0% of 'News' Coverage About Patents Will Be Actual Journalism (Patent Litigation Sector Has Hijacked the World Wide Web to Disseminate Self-Promotional Misinformation)

    Finding news about the EPO is almost impossible because today’s so-called ‘news’ sites are in the pockets of Benoît Battistelli, António Campinos, and their cohorts who turned the EPO into a hub of litigation, not science; this is part of an international (worldwide) problem because financial resources for journalism have run out, and so the vacuum is filled/replaced almost entirely by Public Relations (PR) and marketing



  12. Trying to Appease Those Who Never Liked Free Software or Those Who Blindly Loved All Patent Monopolies to Begin With

    It’s crystal clear that trying to appease everyone, all the time, is impossible; in the case of the EPO, for example, we hope that exposing Team Battistelli/Campinos helps raise awareness of the harms of patent maximalism, and when speaking about Free software — whilst occasionally bashing the alternatives (proprietary) — we hope to convince more people to join the “Good Fight”



  13. Links 28/11/2021: Laravel 8.73 Released, GitHub Offline for Hours

    Links for the day



  14. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, November 27, 2021

    IRC logs for Saturday, November 27, 2021



  15. Links 27/11/2021: Nvidia’s DLSS Hype and Why GNU/Linux Matters

    Links for the day



  16. [Meme] Linus Gabriel Sebastian Takes GNU/Linux for a (Tail)'Spin'

    If you’re trying to prove that GNU/Linux is NOT Windows, then “haha! Well done…”



  17. GNU/Linux is for Freedom and It'll Gain Many Users When (or Where) People Understand What Software (or Computing) Freedom Means

    Software that respects people's freedom (and by extension privacy as well) is an alluring proposition; those who choose to try GNU/Linux for the wrong reasons are likely the wrong target audience for advocates



  18. Amid Reports of Microsoft's Competition Crimes in Europe...

    European companies are complaining, but they seem to overlook the principal aspect of an imperialistic system with bottomless pockets (almost 30 trillion dollars in debt already; US national debt soared again last month); Microsoft is shielded by a political system with military (“defence”) as bailout budget to help cushion international expansion for data grab and technical leverage, as we've seen in the case of EPO (this is all political, not technical, and should thus be treated as a political/corruption issue)



  19. Is Linus Trolling the GNU/Linux Community?

    This new video responds to what many sites have been provoked into amplifying



  20. Links 27/11/2021: Tux Paint 0.9.27 and SeaMonkey 1.1.19 in EasyOS

    Links for the day



  21. [Meme] Keeping Our Distance From Microsoft

    The OSI is the dagger, the Linux Foundation is the knife, and many others are the sword by which Microsoft tries to get into the very heart of GNU/Linux and extinguish the Free software movement



  22. Microsoft Edge Encourages Indebted Americans to Guilt-spend Just in Time for Christmas

    Guest post by Ryan, reprinted with permission



  23. IRC Proceedings: Friday, November 26, 2021

    IRC logs for Friday, November 26, 2021



  24. 38+ Years of GNU and 19+ Years of FSF Associate Membership

    “On November 25, 2002,” Wikipedia notes, “the FSF launched the FSF Associate Membership program for individuals.” As the above video points out, it all started almost 40 years ago.



  25. Gemini as a Platform for Gamers

    Contrary to what people often assume (or are led to assume), even without client-side scripting Gemini can accomplish a great deal; early adopters, many of whom are technical, test the limits of the very minimalistic (by design and intention) specification



  26. Improved Workflows: Achievement Unlocked

    Today we've completed a bunch of small projects that can make us more efficient (e.g. more Daily Links per day, more articles); the above video was recorded many hours ago to accompany the outline below



  27. Links 26/11/2021: New Complaint About Microsoft Competition Crimes in Europe, EuroLinux 8.5, GhostBSD 21.11.24, and Kiwi TCMS 10.5 Released

    Links for the day



  28. Links 26/11/2021: F35 Elections, Whonix 16.0.3.7, OSMC's November Refresh With Kodi 19.3

    Links for the day



  29. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, November 25, 2021

    IRC logs for Thursday, November 25, 2021



  30. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, November 24, 2021

    IRC logs for Wednesday, November 24, 2021


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts