Bonum Certa Men Certa

Virtual Injustice -- Part 11: Perceptive Comments and Caustic Criticism

Previously in the series:

  1. Virtual Injustice -- Part 1: António's Increasingly Wonky Legal Fudge Factory
  2. Virtual Injustice -- Part 2: The ViCo Oral Proceedings of 28 May 2021
  3. Virtual Injustice -- Part 3: All the President's Men…
  4. Virtual Injustice -- Part 4: Mihály Ficsor, the EPO's Hungarian “Fixer”
  5. Virtual Injustice -- Part 5: Benoît's “Friends” in Budapest
  6. Virtual Injustice -- Part 6: Best Buddies With António
  7. Virtual Injustice -- Part 7: Musical Chairs and Revolving Doors
  8. Virtual Injustice -- Part 8: A Well-Connected 'IP' Maximalist
  9. Virtual Injustice -- Part 9: Heli, the EPO's Nordic Ice-Queen
  10. Virtual Injustice -- Part 10: Vapid and Superficial Coverage in the 'IP' Blogosphere


Thrown objects
Many of the comments on the actions of the EBA have been quite critical.



Summary: The EPO's management managed to silence a lot of the critical media (handouts and threats from Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos), but silencing comments is a lot harder; though we don't know which ones were moderated out of existence...

In the last part we looked at the coverage of G 1/21 in the 'IP' blogosphere and noted the failure of most reports to get to grips with the important issues at stake in the present case.



As often happens, the real "meat" is to be found in the comments which appear underneath the blog posts themselves.

"As often happens, the real "meat" is to be found in the comments which appear underneath the blog posts themselves."Some of the comments posted beneath the IPKat report are very perceptive and informative and deserve closer attention.

The first person to comment referred to the dismissal of the appellant's "compelling" submissions which alleged "continued lack of impartiality of the amended panel".

The poster concluded that "today marks a sad loss of the days when impartiality could be expected" from the EPO's Enlarged Board of Appeal.

The next person to comment added that "it also marks the end of the days where rules had to be obeyed (at least for the EBoA)" and continued as follows:

The EBoA discussed and refused request 1 (postponement of the Oral Proceedings) in non-public consultations only with the Appellant when there was no justification to exclude the public on this point, and granted request 2 (Oral Proceedings to discuss Art. 24 EPC) without obeying Rule 115 EPC.

And what about the approach that serving documents to parties and clause 2 of Art. 9 RPEBOA are not so important? Only in the last moment the EBoA "gracefully" granted (less than) one month for the Appellant to submit his observations. Surely, Art. 10 RPEBOA provides that third parties' observations (and amicus curiae submissions) "may be dealt with as the Board thinks fit".

This Board obviously thinks it fit to put them on an USB stick and then directly throw them in the bin. Which patent attorney right in his mind would put in his or her computer an USB stick that had been sent to him by mail? I hope none.


The comments in a response from another poster under the pseudonym "The fall of the EBA" were even more caustic and began by referring to the infamous removal from office proceedings G€ 2301/15 (warning: epo.org link) conducted back in September 2015:

Talking about an USB stick: when the EBA was called in to confirm the sacking of one of its members, the then president gave the EBA a stick with all alleged proof of the misbehaving of the accused member and told the EBA it should take knowledge of its content. At the time the EBA refused to look at it.

Now it is the BA which gives an USB stick to a party and tells it to take knowledge of its content. It is amazing to see how the EBA has evolved! Do not tell me that the EBA is really independent.


The poster continued with the following criticism of oral proceedings by ViCo and suggested that the proceedings in G 1/21 were being conducted in a manner designed to facilitate Campinos' plans for the "New Normal" at the EPO:

OP by video before the EBA do not give the guarantee that the representatives of the president cannot participate in the debate within the EBA. It might be far-fetched, but in view of the manner G 1/21 has been dealt with by the EBA up to now, I would not be surprised.

It is clear that the speed with which the chair of the BA called OP was to please the president. Without OP by ViCo no “New Normal”!


In conclusion, there were some harsh words about the Enlarged Board and the President of the Boards of Appeal, Carl Josefsson:

That on top [of the fact that] the EBA is not even aware of its own RP is as such a scandal.

That the chair of the BA had to be told by his peers that he should not act in G 1/21 also a scandal. I do not think that his credibility has increased.


Some posters were particularly critical of the precipitous haste with which the procedure was conducted in the run-up to the hearing of 28 May:

Especially given the fundamental nature of the decision here, there should absolutely be sufficient time for all parties to prepare the case. This was true even before the two most crucial members of the EBoA have been exchanged mere days before the Oral Proceedings, and it is certainly true now. Compare this to a "normal" EBoA case in which the EPO has no "causa sua" interest and check how much time there usually is to prepare legal opinions and so on.


Much of the discussion focused on the lack of independence of the Boards of Appeal and the evident failure of Battistelli's "reform" in 2016 to solve this problem.

A poster under the pseudonym "Bring About" made the following observations:

The letter of the opponent detailing its objections on suspected partiality is very interesting, cf.

https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP04758381&lng=en&tab=doclist (Letter of 24.05.2021)

For me the opponent convincingly shows that a decision untainted by suspicions of partiality is impossible for this case.

The reasons are multiple, but I would say that the fundamental one is the lack of independence of the (E)BoA.


The poster's comments on Battistelli's 2016 "reform" were as follows:

The situation has been clearly rendered worse by the actions of the current President of the Boards, a position created with the latest reform.

Thus it seems that this reform under the pretense of increasing the (perception of) independence of the Boards has in fact aggravated the issue.


Another poster - "Proof of the pudding" – referred to Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and stated that there were "objectively justifiable doubts" regarding compliance with the criteria for judicial independence laid down in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights.

The poster concluded by asking the question: How has this been allowed to happen?

In a later comment, the same poster referred to the Burgh House Principles On The Independence Of The International Judiciary and the requirement that a judge refrain from adjudicating on cases where he could be reasonably suspected of having an interest in the outcome. The poster concluded that "the President of the BoA must have overlooked this principle when (originally) deciding to serve in case G 1/21".

Criticism of Carl Josefsson and the role which he had played in the procedure also came from "The fall of the EBA":

The whole way G 1/21 has been managed by the chair of the EBA shows amply that the BA are anything but independent.


In a subsequent post "The fall of the EBA" took the view that the procedural "mess" in G 1/21 was a consequence of Battistelli's Boards of Appeal "reform":

The whole mess the BA/EBA finds itself in, is the direct result of the reform of the BA wanted by a former head of the EPO.

It is a scandal that members of the BA can only be reappointed if they have shown a given "performance". The criteria are still non-public. This is also scandalous!

Without leaning too far out of the window, performance means probably a certain flexibility of the spine associated with a production increasing every year like in DG1.

The EPO has indeed been degraded to a producer of "targets".

When one sees the number of patents revoked or severely limited in opposition because the grant procedure is flawed, it becomes alarming. Just look at the published decisions and draw your conclusions. As only 5% of patents are opposed, when you extrapolate to all the grants it is daunting!


The damning verdict from this poster was as follows:

The EBA is tumbling from one scandal to the next.

One wonder who will be the beneficiary of the deed!

I would say for some at the EPO the rules of law deserve a “dynamic interpretation”, and if they are not to their liking, they are simply ignored.

The tragic fact is that people in charge of paying due respect to the EPC are actually acting against it.


Overall, there appeared to be a general consensus amongst the posters that the manner in which the case had been handled reflected poorly on the Enlarged Board of Appeal and gave serious cause for concern about the state of judicial independence at the EPO.

"Overall, there appeared to be a general consensus amongst the posters that the manner in which the case had been handled reflected poorly on the Enlarged Board of Appeal and gave serious cause for concern about the state of judicial independence at the EPO."As we have seen, a number of the comments were highly critical of the President of the Boards of Appeal, Carl Josefsson, who was deposed as chairman of the panel on 17 May.

However, as previously explained, despite the fact that Josefsson has been sidelined, he still remains in a position to exert an indirect influence on the proceedings.

In the next part we plan to take a closer look at this particular "elephant in the room".

ViCo offline
President of FFII, who 'attended' the hearing, was more than impressed by the unprecedented transparency



Recent Techrights' Posts

Open letter to the ACM regarding Codes of Conduct impersonating the Code of Ethics
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
With 9 Mentions of Azure In Its Latest Blog Post, Canonical is Again Promoting Microsoft and Intel Vendor Lock-in, Surveillance, Back Doors, Considerable Power Waste, and Defects That Cannot be Fixed
Microsoft did not even have to buy Canonical (for Canonical to act like it happened)
Links 28/03/2024: GAFAM Replacing Full-Time Workers With Interns Now
Links for the day
Consent & Debian's illegitimate constitution
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
The Time Our Server Host Died in a Car Accident
If Debian has internal problems, then they need to be illuminated and then tackled, at the very least in order to ensure we do not end up with "Deadian"
China's New 'IT' Rules Are a Massive Headache for Microsoft
On the issue of China we're neutral except when it comes to human rights issues
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, March 27, 2024
IRC logs for Wednesday, March 27, 2024
WeMakeFedora.org: harassment decision, victory for volunteers and Fedora Foundations
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Links 27/03/2024: Terrorism Grows in Africa, Unemployment in Finland Rose Sharply in a Year, Chinese Aggression Escalates
Links for the day
Links 27/03/2024: Ericsson and Tencent Layoffs
Links for the day
Amid Online Reports of XBox Sales Collapsing, Mass Layoffs in More Teams, and Windows Making Things Worse (Admission of Losses, Rumours About XBox Canceled as a Hardware Unit)...
Windows has loads of issues, also as a gaming platform
Links 27/03/2024: BBC Resorts to CG Cruft, Akamai Blocking Blunders in Piracy Shield
Links for the day
Android Approaches 90% of the Operating Systems Market in Chad (Windows Down From 99.5% 15 Years Ago to Just 2.5% Right Now)
Windows is down to about 2% on the Web-connected client side as measured by statCounter
Sainsbury's: Let Them Eat Yoghurts (and Microsoft Downtimes When They Need Proper Food)
a social control media 'scandal' this week
IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, March 26, 2024
IRC logs for Tuesday, March 26, 2024
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
Windows/Client at Microsoft Falling Sharply (Well Over 10% Decline Every Quarter), So For His Next Trick the Ponzi in Chief Merges Units, Spices Everything Up With "AI"
Hiding the steep decline of Windows/Client at Microsoft?
Free technology in housing and construction
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
We Need Open Standards With Free Software Implementations, Not "Interoperability" Alone
Sadly we're confronting misguided managers and a bunch of clowns trying to herd us all - sometimes without consent - into "clown computing"
Microsoft's Collapse in the Web Server Space Continued This Month
Microsoft is the "2%", just like Windows in some countries
Links 26/03/2024: Inflation Problems, Strikes in Finland
Links for the day
Gemini Links 26/03/2024: Losing Children, Carbon Tax Discussed
Links for the day
Mark Shuttleworth resigns from Debian: volunteer suicide and Albania questions unanswered, mass resignations continue
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Links 26/03/2024: 6,000 Layoffs at Dell, Microsoft “XBox is in Real Trouble as a Hardware Manufacturer”
Links for the day
Gemini Links 26/03/2024: Microsofters Still Trying to 'Extend' Gemini Protocol
Links for the day
Look What IBM's Red Hat is Turning CentOS Into
For 17 years our site ran on CentOS. Thankfully we're done with that...
The Julian Paul Assange Verdict: The High Court Has Granted Assange Leave to Appeal Extradition to the United States, Decision Adjourned to May 20th Pending Assurances
The decision is out
The Microsoft and Apple Antitrust Issues Have Some But Not Many Commonalities
gist of the comparison to Microsoft
ZDNet, Sponsored by Microsoft for Paid-for Propaganda (in 'Article' Clothing), Has Added Pop-Up or Overlay to All Pages, Saying "813 Partners Will Store and Access Information on Your Device"
Avoiding ZDNet may become imperative given what it has turned into
Julian Assange Verdict 3 Hours Away
Their decision is due to be published at 1030 GMT
People Who Cover Suicide Aren't Suicidal
Assange didn't just "deteriorate". This deterioration was involuntary and very much imposed upon him.
Overworking Kills
The body usually (but not always) knows best
Former Red Hat Chief (CEO), Who Decided to Leave the Company Earlier This Month, Talks About "Cloud Company Red Hat" to CNBC
shows a lack of foresight and dependence on buzzwords
IRC Proceedings: Monday, March 25, 2024
IRC logs for Monday, March 25, 2024
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
Discord Does Not Make Money, It's Spying on People and Selling Data/Control (38% is Allegedly Controlled by the Communist Party of China)
a considerable share exists
In At Least Two Nations Windows is Now Measured at 2% "Market Share" (Microsoft Really Does Not Want People to Notice That)
Ignore the mindless "AI"-washing
Internet Relay Chat (IRC) Still Has Hundreds of Thousands of Simultaneously-Online Unique Users
The scale of IRC