11.22.19

Gemini version available ♊︎

Global Patent Warming

Posted in Europe, Patents at 2:06 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

I cannot grant those patents. So I will change the rules.

Summary: The old term “Global Patent Warming” comes to mind when one assesses the neoliberal approach of today’s EPO, where the sole goal is making piles of money by granting loads and loads of illegal European Patents

UNDER the reckless management of Campinos and Battistelli the European Patent Office (EPO) makes it a lot easier for examiners to allow European software patents (sometimes compelling them to grant in defiance of the EPC because of the misguided guidelines), at least within the Office, not outside (national courts). Lawyers would admit and they occasionally say that it’s even harder to get software patents from the USPTO (after AIA and 35 U.S.C. § 101) than from the EPO.

“Off-the-shelf Free/libre software libraries allow programmers to paint just about everything as “hey hi” within less than one hour.”It’s very troubling to us, especially geeks. The EPO makes it easier to get illegal patents on statistics and mathematics by misusing buzzwords like "hey hi" (AI) — a term that nowadays refers to all sorts of things ranging from automation to computing. Off-the-shelf Free/libre software libraries allow programmers to paint just about everything as “hey hi” within less than one hour. It’s very ‘plug-n-play’; and still… it all boils down to algorithms.

Grzegorz Wesela-Bauman (JWP Patent & Trademark Attorneys) has published in Mondaq this piece entitled “New EPO Guidelines – Easier Procedures For Patenting AI-Based Inventions” and we’ll quote just the relevant pieces of text while highlighting key parts:

The EPO has made considerable changes to both the procedural issues, which are important for patent attorneys, and in recognizing the patentability of inventions, which is of importance for inventors.

Among the procedural changes, it is worth pointing out the simplified representation for applicants before the EPO before granting the patent, or the simplified method of obtaining discounts for application payments and substantiative examinations when there is more than one applicant.

Substantive changes include granting AI-based inventions the status of technical solutions. A significant change has also been made in the area of novelty search, which may affect the procedures required for inventions in chemistry and pharmaceutical sciences. Additionally, facilitation is on the way for demonstrating the level of inventiveness, in particular for biotechnological and pharmaceutical inventions.

The number of changes is enormous and exceeds the scope of this post. Below is a short presentation of selected changes.

[...]

At present, the European Patent Office is working on clarifying the issue of patentability of inventions which were previously considered non-technical. This is relevant because recognizing the technical character is the first and foremost condition for an invention to be considered as such. The examination of the novelty and inventive step cannot begin until the first condition has been met.

Inventions that were previously denied technological character were the so-called computer implemented inventions (CIIs). Last year the EPO decided that those inventions are in fact technical. Artificial intelligence-based inventions (AI) and machine learning-based inventions (ML) have recently followed suit.

In the previous versions of its guidelines, the EPO demonstrated that it should be assumed that AI/ML inventions are non-technical. In the new version of its guidelines, the EPO has changed that approach and stated that the EPO’s experts must assume that AI/ML-based inventions may have technical character.

Although this change may seem only superficial, it offers a significant improvement for the applicants. To be more precise, after the guidelines come into force, what the EPO experts will have to demonstrate is a lack of technical character of an AI/ML-based invention, whereas earlier it was the applicant who had to prove that the invention had technical character.

It is worth noting that there is a chance that the procedure for AI/ML inventions will become even friendlier for applicants this year. The European Patent Office is currently deliberating whether inventions based on computer simulations can be patented. Should this happen, it will become easier for applicants to not only demonstrate the technical character but also to demonstrate that this type of invention involves an inventive step.

So just like that they ignore caselaw, violate the EPC, throw away instructions from Parliament and trample over software developers (who were never consulted about this).

Lobbying by the litigation industry, helped by their media (with buzzwords and hype waves), may have yielded results.

“Lobbying by the litigation industry, helped by their media (with buzzwords and hype waves), may have yielded results.”The EPO is basically stepping away further and further — even more so under Campinos — from the rules that govern it. Then it goes to other countries for photo ops that yield this kind of piece from J A Kemp LLP (patent litigation firm). To quote: “It has been announced that the European Patent Office (EPO) has signed an agreement with the government of Georgia to enable European patents to be validated in Georgia. The validation agreement will enter into force once it has been adopted into Georgian law.”

So EPO guidelines become another country’s too? Even outside Europe? Even if the EPO violates the law? We don’t suppose Georgia’s ‘IP’ people understand that nowadays many European Patents are fake/invalid patents. We’ve also just noticed this new puff piece from World Intellectual Property Review, reminding us once again that it’s little but a megaphone of litigation zealots and — by extension — EPO management. To quote: “The European Patent Office (EPO) has released new search tools in a bid to improve the world’s largest free collection of patent documents. In an announcement yesterday, November 19, the EPO said the new Espacenet is a “substantially revised and improved version” of its existing patent information search tool. It said new functions will make it easier for users to conduct searches and access more than 110 million patent documents from across the world for free.”

“Good luck to the lone inventor, searching monopolies or millions of submarine patent ambushing him/her, awaiting litigation opportunities to bankrupt his/her business.”For free!

Good luck to the lone inventor, searching monopolies or millions of submarine patent ambushing him/her, awaiting litigation opportunities to bankrupt his/her business. Good for innovation?

Why aren’t there BILLIONS of documents? Not yet? Maybe trillions? That would be lots and lots of “innovation”… correct?

We’ve meanwhile also learned from this self-promotional article in Lexology that “a recent European Patent Office (EPO) case has shown that further measures may well be needed” to “keep information truly confidential…”

But wait, isn’t patenting all about publication?

Terence Broderick from UDL Intellectual Property [sic] writes about T2239/15, which concerns MPEG. These MPEG patents are very likely bogus software patents (geometry, mathematics etc.) that are grouped in massive numbers to make it far too expensive to invalidate them all. The EPO should not grant any of these, but in practice it even offers special awards to the person who's responsible for hundreds of these. From the article:

In recent case T2239/15 the EPO considered whether documents which were said to be ‘private’ were also ‘confidential’, in the absence of any agreement to say so.

Two prior art documents were cited in examination proceedings which the applicants claimed were confidential working documents, circulated as part of the MPEG (Motion Picture Expert Group) working group. The applicants submitted that a confidentiality agreement was in place within the working group.

A variety of submissions were filed to support this stance which centred on the secrecy associated with national standards bodies, obligations set out in guidelines for delegates and files which set out that documents resulting from meetings of the working group (known as input documents) were considered ‘private’.

However, the flexible nature of the working group couldn’t support an obligation of confidentiality on the members. Indeed, the documents themselves even indicated that members of the group were encouraged to seek external expertise. It was said that the number of members was indefinite and that no absolute obligation of confidentiality existed.

Therefore, the problem wasn’t sharing documents, but that it couldn’t be guaranteed that all members of that group were covered by an explicit obligation of confidentiality — even if documents shared between the members are accepted as being ‘private’.

The EPO does not care about confidentiality; the EPO violates confidentiality and then covers it up. It’s a crime, sure, but if the EPO hides evidence of it, will it count? And even if it got caught, nobody would be punished because of immunity.

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. [Teaser] Rape is Not a Joke

    Having just uploaded a police report, we’re starting to move the ongoing series to the next phase, which will still be — for the most part — weekly installments on Mondays (for months to come)



  2. [Teaser] Meet Microsoft’s Chief Architect of GitHub Copilot, Balabhadra (Alex) Graveley

    Alex Graveley, a serial abuser, has been protected by Microsoft; what does that say about Microsoft and about Nat Friedman, GitHub’s CEO whom Alex considers his "best friend"? Stay tuned as we have plenty more to show



  3. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, December 07, 2021

    IRC logs for Tuesday, December 07, 2021



  4. Links 8/12/2021: FreeBSD 12.3, EasyOS 3.1.13, and WordPress 5.9 Beta 2

    Links for the day



  5. [Meme] EU Assurances

    The EPO‘s staff cannot be blamed for losing patience as elected public representatives completely fail to do their job (with few exceptions)



  6. Clare Daly (GUE/NGL) Does What Every Public Official in Europe Should Have Done About EPO Shenanigans

    There’s another (new) push to hold the EPO accountable, seeing that the overseers clearly do not do their job and instead cover up the abuses



  7. Links 7/12/2021: Firefox 96 Beta and Fedora 37 Abandons ARMv7

    Links for the day



  8. Links 7/12/2021: Plasma Mobile Gear 21.12 and Tails 4.25

    Links for the day



  9. All IRC Logs Now Available as GemText Over Gemini Protocol

    Today we've completed the transition from plain text over gemini:// to GemText over gemini:// for IRC logs



  10. IRC Proceedings: Monday, December 06, 2021

    IRC logs for Monday, December 06, 2021



  11. [Meme] Rowing to the Bottom of the Ocean

    The EPO‘s Steve Rowan (VP1) is failing EPO staff and sort of “firing” workers during times of crisis (not at all a crisis to the EPO’s coffers)



  12. EPO Gradually Reduced to 'Fee Collection Agency' Which Eliminates Its Very Own Staff

    Mr. Redundancies and Mr. Cloud are outsourcing EPO jobs to Microsoft and Serco as if the EPO is an American corporation, providing no comfort to long-serving EPO staff



  13. Linux Foundation 2021 Annual Report Made on an Apple Mac Using Proprietary Software

    Yes, you’re reading this correctly. They still reject both “Linux” and “Open Source” (no dogfooding). This annual report is badly compressed; each page of the PDF is, on average, almost a megabyte in size (58.8 MB for a report of this scale is unreasonable and discriminates against people in countries with slow Internet connections); notice how they’re milking the brand in the first page (straight after the cover page, the 1991 ‘creation myth’, ignoring GNU); remember that this foundation is named after a trademark which is not even its own!



  14. Links 7/12/2021: OpenIndiana Hipster 2021.10 and AppStream 0.15

    Links for the day



  15. Microsoft “Defender” Pretender Attacks Random Software That Uses NSIS for installation; “Super Duper Secure Mode” for Edge is a Laugh

    Guest post by Ryan, reprinted with permission



  16. Links 6/12/2021: LibreOffice Maintenance Releases, Firefox 95 Finalised

    Links for the day



  17. “Wintel” “Secure” uEFI Firmware Used to Store Persistent Malware, and Security Theater Boot is Worthless

    Guest post by Ryan, reprinted with permission



  18. No Linux Foundation IRS Disclosures Since 2018

    The publicly-available records or IRS information about the Linux Foundation is suspiciously behind; compared to other organisations with a "tax-exempt" status the Linux Foundation is one year behind already



  19. Jim Zemlin Has Deleted All of His Tweets

    The Linux Foundation‘s Jim Zemlin seems to have become rather publicity-shy (screenshots above are self-explanatory; latest snapshot), but years ago he could not contain his excitement about Microsoft, which he said was "loved" by what it was attacking. Days ago it became apparent that Microsoft’s patent troll is still attacking Linux with patents and Zemlin’s decision to appoint Microsoft as the At-Large Director (in effect bossing Linus Torvalds) at the ‘Linux’ Foundation’s Board of Directors is already backfiring. She not only gets her whole salary from Microsoft but also allegedly protects sexual predators who assault women… by hiring them despite repeated warnings; if the leadership of the ‘Linux’ Foundation protects sexual predators who strangle women (even paying them a salary and giving them management positions), how can the ‘Linux’ Foundation ever claim to represent inclusion and diversity?



  20. Microsoft GitHub Exposé — Part IX — Microsoft's Chief Architect of GitHub Copilot Sought to be Arrested One Day After Techrights Article About Him

    Balabhadra (Alex) Graveley has warrant for his arrest, albeit only after a lot of harm and damage had already been done (to multiple people) and Microsoft started paying him



  21. The Committee on Patent Law (PLC) Informed About Overlooked Issues “Which Might Have a Bearing on the Validity of EPO Patents.”

    In a publication circulated or prepared last week the Central Staff Committee (CSC) of the EPO explains a situation never explored in so-called 'media' (the very little that's left of it)



  22. Links 6/12/2021: HowTos and Patents

    Links for the day



  23. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, December 05, 2021

    IRC logs for Sunday, December 05, 2021



  24. Gemini Space/Protocol: Taking IRC Logs to the Next Level

    Tonight we begin the migration to GemText for our daily IRC logs, having already made them available over gemini://



  25. Links 6/12/2021: Gnuastro 0.16 and Linux 5.16 RC4

    Links for the day



  26. Links 5/12/2021: Touchpad Gestures in XWayland

    Links for the day



  27. Society Needs to Take Back Computing, Data, and Networks

    Why GemText needs to become 'the new HTML' (but remain very simple) in order for cyberspace to be taken away from state-connected and military-funded corporations that spy on people and abuse society at large



  28. [Meme] Meanwhile in Austria...

    With lobbyists-led leadership one might be led to believe that a treaty strictly requiring ratification by the UK is somehow feasible (even if technically and legally it's moot already)



  29. The EPO's Web Site is a Parade of Endless Lies and Celebration of Gross Violations of the Law

    The EPO's noise site (formerly it had a "news" section, but it has not been honest for about a decade) is a torrent of lies, cover-up, and promotion of crimes; maybe the lies are obvious for everybody to see (at least EPO insiders), but nevertheless a rebuttal seems necessary



  30. The Letter EPO Management Does Not Want Applicants to See (or Respond to)

    A letter from the Munich Staff Committee at the EPO highlights the worrying extent of neglect of patent quality under Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos; the management of the EPO did not even bother replying to that letter (instead it was busy outsourcing the EPO to Microsoft)


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