Techrights logo

IRC: #techbytes @ FreeNode: Sunday, March 08, 2020

Join us now at the IRC channel.

schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/Sheikh_al_Touar/status/1236433924777181184Mar 08 02:21
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@Sheikh_al_Touar: Financial and Legal Corruption Scandal in France (INPI) Implicating the Person Benoît Battistelli Put in Charge of… https://t.co/v70Aa2Y5CdMar 08 02:21
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@Sheikh_al_Touar: Financial and Legal Corruption Scandal in France (INPI) Implicating the Person Benoît Battistelli Put in Charge of… https://t.co/v70Aa2Y5CdMar 08 02:21
schestowitz"Financial and Legal Corruption Scandal in France (INPI) Implicating the Person Benoît Battistelli Put in Charge of the EPO’s Finances #Finance #fraud #Corruption #patents #France #Europe #EuropeanUnion #INPI #scandal #court"Mar 08 02:21
schestowitzOSI Controlled (Partly) by Microsoft and Promotes Microsoft Proprietary Software After Taking Microsoft BribesMar 08 05:35
schestowitz"Any feedback other than typos? I can still add some. I cannot post article before I finish work at 9am."Mar 08 05:35
schestowitzhttps://pleroma.site/notice/9skvmfCgX6HFeYaMQSMar 08 05:42
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes- ( status 404 @ https://pleroma.site/notice/9skvmfCgX6HFeYaMQS )Mar 08 05:43
schestowitz"Mar 08 05:43
schestowitzThanks for responding.Mar 08 05:43
schestowitzNo worries, we are exploring another method to achieve a similar result.Mar 08 05:43
schestowitzDSFG SupportersMar 08 05:43
schestowitz"Mar 08 05:43
schestowitzhttps://pleroma.site/notice/9slAhbygb6fBVs5QrgMar 08 05:43
schestowitz"Finally, you're starting to wake up. Now, who paid for it to be man-made? Hint: Frank Plummer's recent assassination."Mar 08 05:43
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-pleroma.site | PleromaMar 08 05:43
schestowitzhttps://pleroma.site/notice/9slIui6ruRz7vefengMar 08 05:43
schestowitz" i thought Google doesn’t do any interviews since they already know all the things about you 🤣"Mar 08 05:43
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-pleroma.site | PleromaMar 08 05:43
schestowitzIt uses that for vetting candidatesMar 08 05:43
schestowitzhttps://pleroma.site/notice/9slOvhyeUGTdX4gdgeMar 08 05:44
schestowitz"Mar 08 05:44
schestowitz#UniversalBasicIncome is necessary... and as soon as possible.Mar 08 05:44
schestowitzCombined with #landTax, #UBI will help to produce a more #equitable and #sustainable society.Mar 08 05:44
schestowitz"Mar 08 05:44
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-pleroma.site | PleromaMar 08 05:44
schestowitz> off the record:Mar 08 05:54
schestowitz> I would expand even more on the OSI's apparent rejection of the OSD andMar 08 05:54
schestowitz> what that means for the organization.  It's a terrible change inMar 08 05:54
schestowitz> direction.  Can you get hold of any charter or constitution to check ifMar 08 05:54
schestowitz> the have an obligation to support OSD?Mar 08 05:54
schestowitzI won't mention this in the article.Mar 08 05:54
schestowitzI think that latter, which you propose, would make a good topic for a separate (future) article. Also some legal background might help as I don't know what nonprofits are legally required to honour.Mar 08 05:54
*tedbox is now known as roy_on_tedboxMar 08 06:04
schestowitz> https://opensource.org/minutes/Mar 08 06:44
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-opensource.org | List of OSI Board Meeting Minutes & Portfolio Reports (2005-2018) | Open Source InitiativeMar 08 06:44
schestowitzI'll dig inMar 08 06:44
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/StarchyArchie/status/1236450389723099144Mar 08 07:31
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@StarchyArchie: @schestowitz @PBS @cspan 📺😥Mar 08 07:31
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/Skylar1964/status/1236328811429593089Mar 08 07:35
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@Skylar1964: @schestowitz @wikileaks @BernieSanders math ain’t hard https://t.co/5RNbjyf6mhMar 08 07:35
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@Skylar1964: @schestowitz @wikileaks @BernieSanders math ain’t hard https://t.co/5RNbjyf6mhMar 08 07:35
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/AdrienneGT/status/1236364118787067904Mar 08 07:35
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@AdrienneGT: I'm a woman. Thanks to #RMS, #GNUcgraph is a #GNU package with users worldwide from universities to electronics sec… https://t.co/dYZ9be0FS8Mar 08 07:35
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@AdrienneGT: I'm a woman. Thanks to #RMS, #GNUcgraph is a #GNU package with users worldwide from universities to electronics sec… https://t.co/dYZ9be0FS8Mar 08 07:35
schestowitz"Mar 08 07:35
schestowitzAdrienne G. Thompson Retweeted Dr. Roy Schestowitz (罗伊)Mar 08 07:36
schestowitzI'm a woman. Thanks to #RMS, #GNUcgraph is a #GNU package with users worldwide from universities to electronics sector industries! RMS has always welcomed my participation and input.Mar 08 07:36
schestowitz#RichardStallman has not departed - he remains Chief Executive of GNU!#FreeSoftware #OpenSourcceMar 08 07:36
schestowitz"Mar 08 07:36
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/gasgebouw/status/1236318573850574848Mar 08 07:36
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@gasgebouw: @schestowitz #StateCorporateCrime @governmentsMar 08 07:36
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/RedOwlDr/status/1236307348525740032Mar 08 07:36
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@RedOwlDr: @schestowitz https://t.co/mB1Mvc3Bz2Mar 08 07:36
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes--> steemit.com | Coronavirus: The "Cures" Will Be Worse Than the Disease — SteemitMar 08 07:36
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/j082298/status/1236305184093077504Mar 08 07:37
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@j082298: The women's movement was never about women. It was a Rockefeller creation. https://t.co/7t1lqUljwJMar 08 07:37
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@schestowitz: "Another option for Women’s Day celebration is to head to the exotic Amaya Resort" Women's rights hijacked and expl… https://t.co/w6uXU9YWg6Mar 08 07:37
schestowitz> One more for today's batch.Mar 08 09:07
schestowitzThanks, I only needed to cull the newlines, so always better to put in a file and then send (without MS-type notepad-style CRs) ;-)Mar 08 09:08
*roy_on_tedbox has quit (Remote host closed the connection)Mar 08 10:54
schestowitz>> I would expand even more on the OSI's apparent rejection of the OSD andMar 08 13:45
schestowitz>> what that means for the organization.  It's a terrible change inMar 08 13:45
schestowitz>> direction.  Can you get hold of any charter or constitution to check ifMar 08 13:45
schestowitz>> the have an obligation to support OSD?Mar 08 13:45
schestowitz>Mar 08 13:45
schestowitz> I won't mention this in the article.Mar 08 13:45
schestowitz>Mar 08 13:45
schestowitz> I think that latter, which you propose, would make a good topic for aMar 08 13:45
schestowitz> separate (future) article. Also some legal background might help as IMar 08 13:46
schestowitz> don't know what nonprofits are legally required to honour.Mar 08 13:46
schestowitz"Mar 08 13:51
schestowitzI went over most of the links on their site and could not find any public reference to their governance documents.  It'll probably need the efforts of someone who the OSI would be willing to answer to get hold of their charter or constitution.  They seem to have <a href="https://opensource.org/minutes/" title="List of OSI Board Meeting Minutes & Portfolio Reports (2005-2018)">their minutes online</a> but available only via direct links:Mar 08 13:51
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-opensource.org | List of OSI Board Meeting Minutes & Portfolio Reports (2005-2018) | Open Source InitiativeMar 08 13:51
schestowitzyou cannot browse or search your way forth to one.Mar 08 13:51
schestowitzIt is stated on their 2017 tax form, "educate the public about open source software and maintain the open source standards definition" in the IRS' database, see the second link above.  It does not say anything about protecting it etc.Mar 08 13:51
schestowitz"Mar 08 13:51
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/j082298/status/1236685266221490181Mar 08 16:24
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@j082298: Google=Fascism https://t.co/KxdF4RzAt1Mar 08 16:24
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@schestowitz: #google as "sugar daddy" or tyrant/censor? https://t.co/JUidmieEfJMar 08 16:24
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/Mioewing/status/1236662761679192065Mar 08 16:25
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@Mioewing: @schestowitz Apparently Turkey is aiming for the downfall of Europe.Mar 08 16:25
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/zoobab/status/1236583329023000577Mar 08 16:25
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@zoobab: @schestowitz For all fields, not just swpats.Mar 08 16:25
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/leftylabourtech/status/1236558984347299840Mar 08 16:26
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@leftylabourtech: @schestowitz Free/libre software is not enough. One also has to confront capitalism. Corporations will only cont… https://t.co/hGidK81Q8SMar 08 16:26
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@leftylabourtech: @schestowitz Free/libre software is not enough. One also has to confront capitalism. Corporations will only cont… https://t.co/hGidK81Q8SMar 08 16:26
schestowitz"Free/libre software is not enough.   One also has to confront capitalism.  Corporations will only contribute to free software projects they believe will benefit corporations.  They don't care about free software projects that don't."Mar 08 16:26
schestowitzhttp://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2020/03/breaking-eqe-and-pre-eqe-postponed.html?showComment=1583609986937#c542330458819041519Mar 08 16:53
schestowitz"Mar 08 16:53
schestowitzI am truly sorry for you.Mar 08 16:53
schestowitzThe EPO position is disastrous and I can't understand how so many in social networks seem to view it as a necessary evil.Mar 08 16:53
schestowitzOnce the decision is settled, I hope an Appeal will be filed.Mar 08 16:53
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | BREAKING: EQE and pre-EQE postponed until further notice - The IPKatMar 08 16:53
schestowitzA complete cancelation of all exams is certainly not what European governments have in mind at this stage.Mar 08 16:53
schestowitzProbably the reason is that the people who took this decision do not take subways.Mar 08 16:53
schestowitz"Mar 08 16:53
schestowitzhttp://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2020/03/breaking-eqe-and-pre-eqe-postponed.html?showComment=1583599663342#c4140086191119564225Mar 08 16:53
schestowitz"Mar 08 16:53
schestowitzIt strikes me as daft that for the pre exam at least, arrangements can't be made for candidates to sit the paper on their own premises under the supervision of a Professional Representative willing and able to certify that exam condition had been adhered to.Mar 08 16:53
schestowitzReplyMar 08 16:53
schestowitzRepliesMar 08 16:53
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | BREAKING: EQE and pre-EQE postponed until further notice - The IPKatMar 08 16:54
schestowitzGraver TankSaturday, 7 March 2020 at 16:47:00 GMTMar 08 16:54
schestowitzThere is only 1 paper - it would have to be taken everywhere at the same time. Maybe this is the incentive to change things in the future.Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzReplyMar 08 16:54
schestowitzAnonymousSaturday, 7 March 2020 at 11:09:00 GMTMar 08 16:54
schestowitzI think it is going to be highly unlikely that the EPO will be able to postpone the exam. It's a logistical nightmare.Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzHowever, wouldn't an alternative solution be to hold a partial EQE, i.e., only hold some of the exams. For example, I know that preparing for part D takes a substantially higher amount of effort than the other papers. Thus, would it not make sense to at least hold paper D in 2020?Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzI can see several advantages over straight-out canceling the EQE in 2020, even for the EPO. Some example advantages include:Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzorganizing a single exam should be straightforward, even if it were held in all examination centers across Europe (e.g., finding a venue for a single day is far easier than finding a venue that would be free 4 days in a row);Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzthe back-log of candidates that would result in a very large attendance of candidates in 2021 or 2022 (depending on whether the pre-EQE is waived for 2020 candidates) could be mitigated;Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzif the coronavirus is still an issue in the summer, this would substantially decrease any risk of spreading the infection (less candidates and the exam would only be held on 1 day instead of 4 separate days);Mar 08 16:54
schestowitz2020 candidates who were preparing for all 4 exams will not be as disadvantaged because their preparation for part D would not go to waste and they would only have to prepare for parts A-C;Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzthe paper could be held later in the year because it would take substantially less time to mark 1 paper instead of 4 thereby avoiding the scenario where candidates would take the exam in autumn in 2020 and not know their results until after the EQE in 2021.Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzWould appreciated some thoughts on this matter.Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzReplyMar 08 16:54
schestowitzRepliesMar 08 16:54
schestowitzAnonymousSaturday, 7 March 2020 at 19:16:00 GMTMar 08 16:54
schestowitzI would support allowing candidates to take Paper D asap because the amount of work involved is substantial.Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzAs there will be less candidates, they could all be spread out throughout the exam hall (at least 2m) so they should be fine and within limits. If necessary, candidates could do them in multiple rooms in the exam venue.Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzAnonymousSaturday, 7 March 2020 at 19:24:00 GMTMar 08 16:54
schestowitzI do support a partial EQE approach. I think its sensible to do this especially for D. I see no reason why it can't be done on a smaller scale and perhaps ease the burden on the EPO and national organisations to find venues that are large enough to fit hundreds of candidates.Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzCan we lobby the EPO to see if this can be done. It would definitely help them logistically and I also think this is fair for the affected candidates this year who need to take Paper D. Paper D is probably the most amount of work.Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzAnonymousSaturday, 7 March 2020 at 19:25:00 GMTMar 08 16:54
schestowitzBy the way, the EPO mentions that it monitors several blogs. Does anyone know this IPKAT blog is being monitored by them?Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzAnonymousSaturday, 7 March 2020 at 20:12:00 GMTMar 08 16:54
schestowitzThis sounds like a great option, however if a candidate sat Paper D at a later date this year and did not pass that paper, would they have to wait until 2022 to resit it? Would EPO be flexible with registration?Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzReplyMar 08 16:54
schestowitzAnonymousSunday, 8 March 2020 at 14:20:00 GMTMar 08 16:54
schestowitzI would say that the best channel for lobbying, giving ideas, pledging people/resources is via the epi. They work jointly with the EPO to run the exam, but they are going to be more open the patent attorney point of view. They have representatives from each EPC state. Probably their Professional Education Committee (PEC) is the right address. Does anyone know their e-mail address?Mar 08 16:54
schestowitz"Mar 08 16:54
schestowitzhttp://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2020/03/breaking-eqe-and-pre-eqe-postponed.html?showComment=1583609140891#c5231909645977889373Mar 08 16:57
schestowitzBy the way, the EPO mentions that it monitors several blogs. Does anyone know this IPKAT blog is being monitored by them?"Mar 08 16:57
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | BREAKING: EQE and pre-EQE postponed until further notice - The IPKatMar 08 16:57
schestowitzhttp://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2020/03/breaking-eqe-and-pre-eqe-postponed.html?showComment=1583653698303#c6775671962191568285Mar 08 16:59
schestowitz"Mar 08 16:59
schestowitzAlso - how can training courses be ran (normally) early May/June, July/August for UK exams and Oct/Nov for EQE exams with all this uncertainty. It has a MASSIVE impact and many knock on effects.Mar 08 16:59
schestowitzWe must also bear in mind that candidates are taking a financial hit i.e. loss of earnings and have also wasted a lot of time preparation time. Many consequences and It is a serious matter.Mar 08 16:59
schestowitz"Mar 08 16:59
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | BREAKING: EQE and pre-EQE postponed until further notice - The IPKatMar 08 16:59
schestowitzhttp://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2020/03/breaking-eqe-and-pre-eqe-postponed.html?showComment=1583653538102#c7656435503142668541Mar 08 16:59
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | BREAKING: EQE and pre-EQE postponed until further notice - The IPKatMar 08 16:59
schestowitz"Mar 08 16:59
schestowitzA significant number of candidate actually take EQEs first before UK exams. Some take 1 UK exam, pre-EQE followed by main EQEs and then do another exam.Mar 08 16:59
schestowitzNot being able to do main EQEs means candidates will not have to consider sitting FD2, FD3.Mar 08 16:59
schestowitzSo it has many significant impacts on individuals.Mar 08 16:59
schestowitz"Mar 08 16:59
schestowitzhttp://patentblog.kluweriplaw.com/2020/02/29/is-the-unitary-patent-system-worthwhile-without-the-uk/Mar 08 17:05
schestowitz"Mar 08 17:05
schestowitz“all of the European industry […] were in favour of the Unitary Patent system”Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzSoftware industry opposed the UPC:Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzhttp://www.nounitarysoftwarepatents.uk/uk-software-companies-oppose-unitary-patent-ratificationMar 08 17:05
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-patentblog.kluweriplaw.com | Is the Unitary Patent system worthwhile without the UK? - Kluwer Patent BlogMar 08 17:05
schestowitzMaxDreiMar 08 17:05
schestowitzFEBRUARY 29, 2020 AT 12:12 PMMar 08 17:05
schestowitzNo chance, Kevin. Sorry.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzAs a UK patent attorney in Germany, my sense is that the UPC was only seen as useful for as long as all three of the EU’s “Big Three” were committed to it. The ideal number for a committee is three. With only two members, how can a committee cope with any difference of opinion amongst its members?Mar 08 17:05
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.nounitarysoftwarepatents.uk | UK software companies oppose Unitary Patent ratification - Nounitarysoftwarepatents.ukMar 08 17:05
schestowitzThe BREXIT crowd doesn’t see it, or accept it, but the UK, within the EU, had an incredibly powerful role, mediating between Germany and France, never more prominent and crucial than in the field of law-making. All now thrown away, like so many other good things, and so much soft power, by the selfish, greedy and anti-social people driving BREXIT.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzEU supporterMar 08 17:05
schestowitzFEBRUARY 29, 2020 AT 12:26 PMMar 08 17:05
schestowitzAs far as I understand the legal situation, is there at all a possibility for the German government to stop the UPC?The parliament has agreed with the UPC and in case the constitutional court agrees with the UPC and the way of the parliament approval, the UPC agreement only requires the signature of the Federal President which is a mere formality?Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzAttentive ObserverMar 08 17:05
schestowitzFEBRUARY 29, 2020 AT 4:26 PMMar 08 17:05
schestowitzIt does not come as the surprise that Mr Mooney is disappointed. For him and all the British members who sat in the co-opted Committee drafting as a closed party the Rules of Procedure, the result on investment is nil, and this is always hard to accept. The non-British members of this committee can still hope that their result on investment not to be nil, but without UK, it will certainly be lower than expected should the UPC come toMar 08 17:05
schestowitzlife, which anything but certain.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzEurope might have “needed a new patent system for 50 years”, but certainly not something like the UPC. That European Industry needs the UPC is only the opinion of people like Mr Mooney, but certainly not of those having had a look at what is really needed in Europe.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzThe birth defect of the UPCA is that it is not binding for all member states of the EU. Some countries might have signed, but will never ratify. Some have or will ratify, but they have been lured in with the promise of some function located there, e.g. arbitration chambers. No wonder why some countries will not ratify as it will be detrimental to their industry. Poland and the Czech Republic might not be the only ones.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzWhat might be needed in Europe is a treaty which does not grossly favours big countries, with big industries having very deep pockets, but which is also useful for smaller ones. Only then a true IP cooperation within the EU could be achieved. But the number of true supranational cases is so little that the necessity of such a monster like the UPC is only for those thinking of filling their pockets with lawyer fees and squeezing out SMEsMar 08 17:05
schestowitzIt is good that the complaint before the FCC has put the progress of the UPC to a halt. It has given the opportunity to look at it very carefully, and to realise how badly it has been conceived beside for those who intended to profit from it.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzHow can a judge at the UPC be independent if he can be removed from office by a mere decision of the Presidium of the UPC, but at the same time no means of redress are opened to him? The same applies to the re-appointment of judges. What will be the criterion applied? Those are a real constitutional problems and it is to be hoped that the FCC will look into it them.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzRather than dwelling on the UPCA, it would be much better if the FCC would look at the complaints about the independence of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO. There are no less than four complaints about this topic before the FCC.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzIt might be the best moment to care for the true independence of the Boards, and not just merely look at improving the perception of their independence…Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzThis would certainly be more of a benefit for European industry and European SMEs than a monster like the UPC. It is also high time to bring life into Art 4a EPC2000. Now or never. And should any president of the EPO not like such a conference, he should simply go back where he came from.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzIt should not be forgotten that after all EPC members states, that is also member states of the EU, have the same IP law, as it is based on the UPC. One good way to bring in harmonisation with respect to the validity is to bring IP judges from all over Europe together regularly. Such meetings are already taking place and they should be pursued and reinforced.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzOn the other hand, subsidiarity is also something which should be kept in mind within the EU, and if a few decisions of national courts are at odds with decisions of the Boards of Appeal, does this really harm and bring about legal uncertainty? Not in my humble opinion. But adding an extra layer of case law in the hope that it will be valid for all, even the EPO, is truly increasing legal uncertainty.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzOne way of deciding in a uniform way over all member states of the EPC is to keep open the possibility of filing an opposition for the whole life of the patent, and not merely for nine months after grant. But for this we need truly independent Boards of Appeal and certainly not examining and opposition divisions just focused on figures and a quick turnover of files.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzInfringement could remain national, and there is no need to have one system to fit all. There are very few truly supranational litigation cases, and the companies involved in them have deep enough pockets to afford the extra costs.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzTelling that the UPC is cheaper than existing ways is only correct should one need a patent in all contracting states of the EU. When looking at the average number of validations, the UPC is anything but necessary. There are other cheaper ways to create a new patent system for Europe than the UPC should such a system be really needed, what appears highly doubtful!Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzTechrights and zoobab: FINGERS OFF!!! No need to explain!Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzMagnus StiebeMar 08 17:05
schestowitzFEBRUARY 29, 2020 AT 11:50 PMMar 08 17:05
schestowitzI think that now time has finally come to implement a unitary EU patent with ENGLISH as the ONLY language. With the UK gone, what almost all of us who are remaining have in common is ENGLISH as our SECOND LANGUAGE. SO LET’S BE PRACTICAL!Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzfrancis hagelMar 08 17:05
schestowitzMARCH 2, 2020 AT 6:53 AMMar 08 17:05
schestowitzAttentive Observer, your suggestion of extending the opposition period to the entire life of the patent is interesting. This has now been introduced in the US. But this would result in a bifurcation between validity and infringement as in the German system. Another problem is that unlike the US or the German system, there is no oversight authority above the Boards of Appeal, which hampers the resolution of conflicting views between twoMar 08 17:05
schestowitzBoards (see recently the sharp disagreement between Vasco T 2102/12 and Ricoh T 172/03 about the scope of article 54(2) EPC). From this angle, it could be argued that the Boards of Appeal are too independent.Mar 08 17:05
schestowitzAttentive ObserverMar 08 17:05
schestowitzMARCH 2, 2020 AT 12:30 PMMar 08 17:06
schestowitzDear Mr Hagel,Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzThanks for your comment. I support your point of view, but I would even go one step further.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzIf an opposition could be filed over the whole life time of a patent, there would indeed be a bifurcation between validity and infringement. Nevertheless we would at least avoid diverging case law on validity.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzThere are however two important conditions to be fulfilled, and they are not fulfilled at the moment.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzThe first one is the real independence of the Boards of Appeal. The members of the boards should not be submitted to the disciplinary power of the president of the EPO and should have a completely autonomous budget to be presented to the Administrative Council independently of the president of the EPO. The president of the boards of appeal does only have the powers delegated to him by the president. I do not call this being independent.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzThere are however other problems.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzThe re-appointment of board members is presently subject to a performance appraisal, whereby the appraisal conditions are not even public. The independence of the boards might be questioned for this reason alone.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzWhat has happened with the former president when he disregarded the separation of powers by refusing a board member to enter the premises of the EPO and by the present one trying to twist the arm of the Enlarged Board of Appeal in matters of interpretation of Art 53,b) are further reasons to say that the independence of the boards can be questioned.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzThe second reason is the absence of a revision instance after the boards of appeal. I think this is what you mean when saying that the boards are too independent. I fully agree.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzPresently only revision for procedural reasons is possible before the EBA. When looking at the decisions taken under Art 112a, the chances of success are very remote.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzThis can also be a problem when one looks at the great discretion left to the boards in view of their new rules of procedure in force since 01.01.2020.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzThe boards are empowered to decide whether a division of first instance has exercised its discretion in an appropriate way. Which instance will decide whether the discretion of the boards has been correctly applied? The prejudicial revision under Art 112a is a very blunt weapon when looking at the decisions issued in the matter. You have been heard about the non-admissibility and this is enough. No, it is not.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzWhat is also missing at the EPO is an instance which could revise the decisions of the boards for reasons of substance. In other words what is missing at the EPO (and at the UPC) is a revision instance as it is known if not in all, at least in a vast majority of national legal systems.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzOnly referring questions to the Enlarged Board when there is an alleged divergence of case law is not enough. The parties should be allowed to access a revision instance. The right to request interpretation of the EPC should not be limited to the boards or the president of the EPO.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzIf an application is refused or a patent is revoked, the property or asset representing an IP title is destroyed. This should only be done with the correct safeguards. And those are not presently available, be it at the EPO or at the UPC. Those are also questions before the German Federal Constitutional Court, and there are not less than four such questions.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzRather than trying to implement a treaty trying to be subject to EU law without really being part of the EU, as it is not valid for all EU member states, we should rather concentrate on improving the functioning of the EPO and its boards of appeal. This would bring immediate advantages not only as far as the EU is concerned but for all member states of the EPC.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzThere have been proposals to improve the situation of the boards in the years 2004-2005, but they have been dismissed by the member states. There is now an opportunity to be grasped, and it could be a very good point of discussion for a conference according to Art 4a EPC 2000. This would really help legal integration in IP matters, and for the few true supranational litigations we do not need something as complicated as the UPC.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzTechrights and zoobab: FINGERS OFF!!! Even by means of a link!Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzCees MulderMar 08 17:06
schestowitzMARCH 2, 2020 AT 3:30 PMMar 08 17:06
schestowitz« London » is explicitly mentioned in Art.7(2) of the UPC agreement as one of the « sections » of the Unified Patent Court. If the UK does not wish be part of the UPC, the negotiations have to be reopened after which finding a new agreement would be difficult.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzIf the UK – after an effective BREXIT – were allowed to stay in the UPC, this would have created a kind of « paradox ». From the beginning Switzerland indicated its desire to join the unitary patent system, but CH was denied access by the CJEU because not being a EU member State. Nevertheless, with the participation of CH (and other non-EU States) the unitary patent system would have been stronger.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzIf the UK desires to be truly legally independent op the EU, can they live with decisions of the boards of appeal and decisions/opinions of the Enlarged Board of Appeal. Should we fear that the UK will also abandon the EPC?Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzUPC VisionärMar 08 17:06
schestowitzMARCH 2, 2020 AT 6:08 PMMar 08 17:06
schestowitzAccording to Art. 87(2), the Administrative Council may amend the UPC Agreement to bring it in line with Union law. I wonder whether the following line of argument would be feasible once the Agreement is in force:Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzAs the EU treaty does no longer apply to the UK, the court may no longer be seated in London as this would violate Union law. Therefore, a change of venue brings the Agreement in line with Union law.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzAttentive ObserverMar 08 17:06
schestowitzMARCH 2, 2020 AT 6:19 PMMar 08 17:06
schestowitzDear CeesMar 08 17:06
schestowitzReopening the negotiation about the location of the London section of the Central (?) Division means opening Pandora’s Box.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzIt was one of those marathon Brussels negotiations which led, as the French would say, the pear not to be cut in two, but in three! Do not tell me that this was a good solution.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzIf negotiations are reopened on this topic, it appears logic that the Central Division should be concentrated at a single location that is either Munich or Paris. As Munich has the EPO, logic would be that the Central Division as a whole goes to Paris. But logic and politics are not best friends. Some Italian friends have already stated that it should come to Milan if it has to leave London.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzI agree with you that trying to twist Opinion C 1/09 so that post Brexit UK could remain in the UPC, and even then implying that other non-EU member states could join the UPC was a crazy idea. I am thinking here of some papers authored by Mr Tillman and supported by all his friends wanting the UPC as quickly as possible.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzEPLA would have been a possibility, but first the EU commission decided no, for whatever reason, even if it is “not invented here”, and the CJEU gave its famous opinion which is as clear as clear can be.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzI however doubt that the UK will leave the EPO and the EPC. They can “live with decisions of the boards of appeal and decisions/opinions of the Enlarged Board of Appeal”, even if some decisions of the UK Supreme Court are difficult to follow. Trying to overcome the Improver disaster by another disastrous decision on a European patent is something only the Brits can achieve.Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzWe should not fear that the UK will also abandon the EPC. Brexit might have been an action to spite your face in order to spite your nose, but leaving the UPC would add a further injury. British lawyers have lost their right to represent before the UPC, do you want British patent attorneys also lose their jobs?Mar 08 17:06
schestowitzAttentive ObserverMar 08 17:06
schestowitzMARCH 2, 2020 AT 11:54 PMMar 08 17:06
schestowitzDear UPC Visionär,Mar 08 17:07
schestowitzNice try, but Art 87(2) is only applicable once the UPCA entered into force, but it cannot enter into force with London mentioned in it.Mar 08 17:07
schestowitzSo we are turning in circles, and we will end being dizzy!Mar 08 17:07
schestowitz"Mar 08 17:07
schestowitzhttp://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2020/03/breaking-eqe-and-pre-eqe-postponed.html?showComment=1583677248527#c7824864191828887214Mar 08 17:25
schestowitz"I would say that the best channel for lobbying, giving ideas, pledging people/resources is via the epi. They work jointly with the EPO to run the exam, but they are going to be more open the patent attorney point of view. They have representatives from each EPC state. Probably their Professional Education Committee (PEC) is the right address. Does anyone know their e-mail address?"Mar 08 17:25
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | BREAKING: EQE and pre-EQE postponed until further notice - The IPKatMar 08 17:25
*tedbox (~roy@host81-152-238-70.range81-152.btcentralplus.com) has joined #techbytesMar 08 17:30
*tedbox has quit (Changing host)Mar 08 17:30
*tedbox (~roy@unaffiliated/schestowitz) has joined #techbytesMar 08 17:30
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/clara_mancia/status/1236693554229108737Mar 08 17:32
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@clara_mancia: Read on...what kind of man Bill Gates is... https://t.co/ksKapKgbXeMar 08 17:32
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes--> techrights.org | Bill Gates “Uploaded a Virus he Had Written and Caused the Entire Network to Crash.” | TechrightsMar 08 17:32
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/unknown_uid/status/1236690731760320512Mar 08 17:32
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@unknown_uid: 😤😤😤 https://t.co/i0W1QCQQ7pMar 08 17:32
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes--> techrights.org | The Linux Foundation is Sometimes Against Linux and Its Official Blog Posts Come From Microsoft Veterans This Month (Nowadays It’s Not Even Shocking) | TechrightsMar 08 17:32
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/morzba/status/1236728629377134592Mar 08 19:01
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@morzba: @enufabhi007 @schestowitz @ManCity Bruh seriously after one bad game? Sterling is a fine player, i mean i even want… https://t.co/WnP9bzxGycMar 08 19:01
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@morzba: @enufabhi007 @schestowitz @ManCity Bruh seriously after one bad game? Sterling is a fine player, i mean i even want… https://t.co/WnP9bzxGycMar 08 19:01
schestowitz"Bruh seriously after one bad game? Sterling is a fine player, i mean i even want him than Sancho at United to pair him with Rashford "Mar 08 19:01
schestowitzone bad game would be enough to lose CLMar 08 19:01
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/joexllen/status/1236720352782356481Mar 08 19:01
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@joexllen: @enufabhi007 @schestowitz @ManCity Are you brain dead?Mar 08 19:01
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/enufabhi007/status/1236720022963122176Mar 08 19:02
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@enufabhi007: @schestowitz @ManCity Sell sterling firstMar 08 19:02
schestowitzhttps://twitter.com/perkedupRio/status/1236720001526177802Mar 08 19:02
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-@perkedupRio: @schestowitz @ManCity Team sucks bruvMar 08 19:02
*oiaohm has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)Mar 08 21:43
*oiaohm (~oiaohm@unaffiliated/oiaohm) has joined #techbytesMar 08 21:44

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.6 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!