Former EPO Manager Warns That the Illegal 'Court' for "Unitary Patents" Enables “Law Shopping”
HAVING just mentioned what a former EPO executive/manager (Daniel X. Thomas) said about the UPC, let's quote some more from his post: "If the UPC is to determine the amount of damages in this case in accordance with the law of the UPCA, this would lead to different sub questions of the same legal dispute being adjudicated by different courts, i.e. determination of the patent infringement and the legal consequences in principle by the national court on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the amount of damages by the UPC. Patent proprietors could also engage in abusive “law shopping” for the different sub-questions of one and the same legal dispute."
As a reminder, Daniel X. Thomas opposed the very existence of the UPC, which any honest person could recognise was both illegal and unconstitutional. So now, in the EU, the legal system itself is basically illegal (at least for patents).
Daniel X. Thomas has also blasted the EPO's in-house kangaroo courts, whereupon we quoted him and that upset him. Why? Because he wants to say the truth about the corruption in the European patent system; then he gets upset when other critics (like Benjamin Henrion, FFII) cite him [1, 2]. He cannot have it both ways. Be honest and accept that other people use this honesty not from within the patent microcosm, which is where Daniel X. Thomas made millions of euros, whereas the rest of us had to face extortion artists (this is where he derived his salaries from). It it's corrupt, then it's corrupt. Shut it down, detain and prosecute the enablers and perpetrators as a matter of urgency.
"Law shopping" is also what Microsofters do to critics in order to censor them. Microsofters tried it on us as recently as last night. █