04.19.20
Gemini version available ♊︎JUVE Has a Prank ‘Survey’ That’s Just UPC Lobbying (As Usual)
Summary: The idea that UPC will inevitably materialise (and the sole question is, in what form) is still being perpetuated by publishers whose sole goal is UPC lobbying (serving litigators) rather than truth and societal/scientific advancement
NO Web site is perfect and no survey is 100% objective and pure. There tend to be ideologies and motivations; we have those too, but we try to stay close — as close as possible — to underlying, verifiable facts.
The scandals at the European Patent Office (EPO) culminated around 2015, i.e. half a decade ago when Battistelli assaulted a number of staff representatives, not just a judge. Back then JUVE did very good work reporting on those matters (that changed around the time António Campinos was ‘groomed’ to replace Battistelli) and we were privileged enough to receive — and occasionally also publish — EPO leaks from trusting readers. Truth be told, we no longer receive as many leaks as we used to. Nor do we write as much about 35 U.S.C. § 101, seeing that the American courts — irrespective of the USPTO — toss out the vast majority of software patents. We included new examples in yesterday’s Daily Links.
“The pseudonym “Merpel” is nowadays an obedient mouth of the patent maximalists, not of EPO critics.”We previously took note of the profound changes at IP Kat — a subject we’ll touch again or revisit in a later post. The pseudonym “Merpel” is nowadays an obedient mouth of the patent maximalists, not of EPO critics. The staff changed beyond recognition and still includes leading Bristows liars, who to this very date deny the reality of UPC's death. We wrote about that latest bit from Bristows last week and Sarah Morgan at World Intellectual Property Review (WIPR), a Team UPC megaphone, seems to learning to accept that the UPC is dead. The headline is “UPC membership ‘incompatible’ with future EU relations: UK IP minister” and the article may be stuck behind a paywall already (depending on age).
Morgan is no ordinary journalist but somewhat of a megaphone for the litigation ‘industry’. Days ago in a sister site of WIPR (one that’s lobbying for patents on life and nature) she called notorious patent trolls “patent monetisation company Rembrandt Diagnostics.”
Whatever; “patent monetisation…”
“The UPC has been practically dead since 2016 (Brexit) or 2007 (German Constitutional Court receiving a potent complaint).”Al Capone was “threat monetisation…”
This is typical World Intellectual Property Review (WIPR) in 2020. But half a decade ago the staff was different and it occasionally covered EPO scandals. Not anymore. The bosses there did not like that. They put a stop to that.
Now this takes us to JUVE, a site that used to do excellent journalism rather than ‘excellent’ lobbying, i.e. lying. The UPC has been practically dead since 2016 (Brexit) or 2007 (German Constitutional Court receiving a potent complaint).
Facts do not matter to bribed, corrupt, lying media however (it is their business model to deny or refute facts). Cranks on YouTube have more credibility than these people, who spent several weeks lying about what had happened about a month ago (see index of our rebuttals).
I was disappointed but hardly surprised anymore to find this article from JUVE last week in their English lobbying site.
“UPC is dead, but we’re supposed to think that the sole choices or possibilities are, which form it’ll take.”Basically, anyone with a sense for truth or common sense knows that the UPC is dead, but necrophiles of Team UPC will jog on and pay publishers to keep pretending otherwise (a lobbying strategy which will merely alienate their clients and harm public trust).
A loud UPC proponent (even calling his Twitter account “UPC”) wrote: “From JUVE by-email: „The momentum is gone for good. That is the current mood in the European patent community on the Unified Patent Court…””
This summary sounds sincere, but what follows is not. Amy Sandys continues to pay lip megaphone service to Team UPC. This is what JUVE became. This site seems to have been set up purely for lobbying with Team UPC in mind and there’s hardly exception to it. Is it a lobbyist front or a news site? The headline speaks of “IP community” and that alone is three words that are lies in a row. JUVE puts those right there in the headline for its biased ‘survey’ (push polling and loaded questions). UPC is dead, but we’re supposed to think that the sole choices or possibilities are, which form it’ll take.
To be fair, the article does contain a few quotes from UPC critics. Benjamin Henrion (FFII) pointed out a few of these, e.g. [1, 2, 3, 4]: “There can be no room for further objections, otherwise the dream of a European patent court is over. [...] As a lawyer, I have always been against the UPC which is an SME-killer. It’s too expensive, too quick, forum shopping, foreign language. [...] It is time for a fundamental re-think based on simplicity and access by SMEs. The law should not be designed to reflect what large international corporates want. [...] A European initiative for a patent court system is needed, but none of the options mentioned in your survey is convincing. It should rather be an EU system, without the UK and without non-EU EPC countries, similar to the working EU system for trademarks…”
They seem not to speak to anyone outside the so-called “IP community” though; as if nothing in the world exists but lawyers. This creates a mindset bubble, like a religion…
“JUVE played a huge role in the lying in recent years.”Did they bother speaking to SMEs? Nope.
“As if patents were designed for SMEs in the first place,” Henrion wrote.
“The EPO mentions “SMEs” every day to distract from how much it is harming them,” I told him, later noting, as per this page, that “the JUVE Web site is malware disguised as information. Not only lots of sponsored “articles” (ads) but also surveillance capitalism (you cannot opt out)…”
The introductory paragraphs state the following:
In recent years, those responsible for the Unified Patent Court project have often spoken of the importance of momentum for the launch of the European patent court. This meant above all the support of politicians in the 25 participating EU states, but also of representatives from in-house patent departments, the legal profession and patent judges.
The mood and support in the patent community has fluctuated considerably in recent years depending on the amount of progress the project made or the number of setbacks it suffered. The Brexit referendum in June 2016 put the first big question mark over the Unified Patent Court and the participation of the UK. Almost as soon as the result came in, many in the patent community began to doubt the UPC would launch. However, the project made headway and gradually gained more support in the years following. But then, the German Constitutional Court rejected the German UPC legislation on 20 March this year.
They speak of “momentum”, which they manufactured — at times illegally — by advertising fake job ads and lying to politicians, to media and so on. JUVE played a huge role in the lying in recent years. It published obvious lies, sometimes even as headlines. It seems to have opted for propaganda (a big and potentially very profitable sector) rather than journalism. What a waste of potential and momentum thrown away. I used to actually respect JUVE. █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA