Summary: EPO and EUIPO in collaboration for the promotion of the notion that they are both necessary (and reinforced speculations about growing overlap between them)

RUMOURS have been swirling for quite some time -- both within and outside the EPO -- that growing overlap between the EUIPO and the EPO is likely if not inevitable. This does not necessarily imply unification; at the very least it means collaboration. There are already some HR overlaps, as we pointed out earlier this year [1, 2].

EPO collaborations are not out of the ordinary. When the EPO does not privately boast collaborations with Stasi-connected spying agencies (Desa/Control Risks) and PR firms it publicly brags about collaboration with other patent offices. Watch this new article from the Korea Herald:

Korea, EU see surge in intellectual property rights exchange

[...]

In 2015, the EPO proceeded 6,400 applications from Korea, making the country the fifth-largest source of European patent applications, according to Pihlajamaa.

In EPO’s company rankings, Samsung and LG have been among the four largest company applicants for six years.

These are incorrect English terms, starting in the headline and continuing inside the article. Not "exchange" is at stake here but expansion. And it mostly benefits large/multinational corporations, like those which the EPO gives preferential treatment to. Imagine if the public at large knew this. The EPO has been trying to change the story since; it was an act of revisionism and damage control. Now they say that this preferential treatment is available to everyone, everywhere, which practically defeats the purpose of it. In a sense, this programme was undermined once exposed publicly.

Going back to the EUIPO, the EPO said: "What is the contribution of IPR-intensive sectors to the European economy? Stay tuned & you'll find out on Tuesday."

"The EPO has been trying to change the story since; it was an act of revisionism and damage control."The tweet says Tuesday after it said Monday (tweet deleted for the mistake in it). So that's tomorrow, not today. Expect lots of hogwash and protectionism advocacy. Why is this significant? See this other tweet which demonstrates overlaps between the EPO and EUIPO: "#EUIPO and @EPOorg will shortly launch a new study on the contribution of #IPR-intensive industries to the #EU economy. Stay tuned!"

The EPO retweeted this, adding to growing evidence of the overlap.

The EPO also wrote: "What are the economic benefits for Europe of patents, trademarks, designs and other forms of IP? Find out on Tuesday #IPvalue #IPRindustries"

As the EPO under Battistelli threw away the notion patent quality (for “production”, i.e. quantity), all of this is doomed. It's just beneficial to trolls (wait and watch!) and to large corporations that patent in bulk. Given the reputation of EPO 'studies' as of late, we don't expect the above to be anything but propaganda -- something to be used to 'plant' puff pieces in the media later this week.

"It's possible that something pretty big is happening (other than the relentless UPC efforts) and only few people at the top are "in the know"...""Just #3daysleft until we publish a further EU-wide study of the impact of IP rights on the European economy," EPO PR people wrote, adding hashtags like #IPvalue #IPRindustries (which themselves smack of propaganda, not true studies).

Imagine what would happen if the EPO was shut down and folded into the EUIPO (the USPTO already deals with patents and trademarks in tandem). Would patent applications be dealt with by a process of registration only (like in France)? The US, based on this new post from Patently-O, moves in a similar direction ("Maria Pallante Out as Chief of Copyright Office: New Calls for Unified US Intellectual Property Office").

Never say never. It's possible that something pretty big is happening (other than the relentless UPC efforts) and only few people at the top are "in the know"... ⬆