TWO years ago (start of July 2018) António Campinos replaced Benoît Battistelli as 'king' of EPOnia. In practical terms nothing has changed; earlier this morning we noted that Campinos is lobbying for software patents in Europe (not even the US tolerates such patents because of 35 U.S.C. €§ 101; courts reject them en masse) and the approval rate of Campinos among EPO staff is near zero.
"Facts ceased to matter. Law ceased to matter. Constitutions are treated like tissue paper one finds inside toilet bowls."The EPO's attitude towards law and order is equally appalling. The legal processes, constitutions and most basic legality ceased to matter. The Rule of Law was in effect suspended for the sake of "productivity" (which means granting as many patents as possible and as quickly as possible). We see this in the mistreatment of staff, the fraudulent 'studies', and the endless lies; we see this in UPC too. Facts ceased to matter. Law ceased to matter. Constitutions are treated like tissue paper one finds inside toilet bowls. There's also the lack of impartiality/independence of judges -- an issue we addressed again this morning. If that's not bad enough, here's the EPO's management openly bragging about illegal outsourcing (to Microsoft) of EPO legal processes. (warning: epo.org link)
"Even the EPO's technical chiefs lack a technical background; they just happen to know Campinos from the old employer (whose IT department was outsourced to India months before he left)."This is illegal, but who cares, right? They put that in the "news" section on Friday as if to celebrate the illegality. It's all just referred to as "VICO" (with a screenshot showing Microsoft). What the heck is going on? Only days ago there was a ruling of relevance. Yesterday one report said that "EU Court Again Rules That NSA Spying Makes U.S. Companies Inadequate for Privacy" (suffice to say, this applies to courts or tribunals). "This decision shows," says the outline, "yet again, that the U.S. needs much broader, privacy-protective reform, and that Congress’ inaction makes us all less safe, wherever we are."
But never mind these 'inconvenient' (to EPO management) facts. Even the EPO's technical chiefs lack a technical background; they just happen to know Campinos from the old employer (whose IT department was outsourced to India months before he left).
Where's the media coverage about this scandal? Nowhere!
Nowhere at all.
"Where's the media coverage about this scandal?"Kluwer Patent Blog mentioned it in passing several months ago, but it's merely a blog that almost nobody can see except lawyers who follow the site closely.
Over at Managing IP (EPO mouthpiece) there are now sponsored 'articles' and even so-called 'reporting' by the "Georgia IP [sic] Alliance" (and the private company of the author), followed by this hogwash from Patrick Wingrove. It's about "VICO". "Patent owners and implementers say the lockdown has made negotiations more efficient," he wrote, "but they'd like to use a hybrid remote and in-person model after COVID" (so even after the emergency they wish to maintain an illegal practice).
Should we expect this publication to take note of the illegality? Of course not, just follow the money...
"As long as EPO managers blackmail and bribe the media we can only expect those things to further exacerbate and create a fictional world with inverted facts."The same author has also just produced an hilarious headline that says "EU hints UPC alive" (it's not). Managing IP's Patrick Wingrove was previously spinning for Team UPC based on a telephone chat with Justice Huber months before Huber threw out the UPCA; months later Huber said there's more to the issue than just the two-thirds majority, but Team UPC doesn't like to talk about that...
Citing the outrageous nonsense from Thierry Breton [1, 2, 3, 4], a Battistelli ally, Wingrove wrote the following: (to which we respond to in-line, in yellow)
EU Commission [well, Thierry Breton] says Germany can ratify UPCA despite Brexit
The European Commission would welcome Germany’s swift ratification of the Unified Patent Court Agreement despite Brexit, commissioner for the internal market Thierry Breton wrote on Wednesday, July 15.
In a letter to MEP Patrick Breyer, who is from the German Pirate Party and asked in May whether Germany could ratify the UPCA now that the UK has left the EU, Breton said that Brexit does not affect the UPC’s ratification process. [It's a lie]
The commissioner reasoned that the UK ratified the UPCA when it was still an EU member state [but the UPC as a whole wasn't ratified yet], and that its departure from the bloc simply meant that it would not be able to participate in the UPC after the end of the Brexit transition period. [The UK ratified a UPCA that still says there's a court in London]
“The unitary patent will be an effective tool for [large foreign] businesses [and especially monopolists] to protect their
inventions[monopolies]on[by suing] the European market at a competitive price [to them], and the Unified Patent Court will offer the possibility for these businesses toenforce their patents[sue many European SMEs] at a European Union level, thereby enhancing legal certainty and reducing costs,” Breton wrote. [Certainty for monopolies, business uncertainty for everybody else]
“It will further boost innovation in Europe [litigation is innovation, right?], which will be key for the economic recovery following the COVID pandemic.” [Which politician does not exploit COVID-19 these days when spreading lies?]
The UK confirmed in February that it would not seek to participate in the UPC, noting that membership was inconsistent with its aims to become an independent and self-governing nation.
In June, the German Federal Ministry of Justice called for comments on a draft of its UPCA Approval Act, three months after the Federal Constitutional Court ruled that Germany’s pre-ratification of the agreement was void because it did not have a two-thirds majority in the Bundestag. [There's a lot more to it]