IN our previous post, a post about the EPO, we noted that the UPC cannot happen (it's stuck). Everybody knows it, but the lobbyists (notably Team Battistelli and Team UPC) try hard to deny it. The UPC threatens to bring to Europe the patent trolls that currently or previously revolved/orbited around the USPTO.
Don't assume that BB does not have (or will not generate) a "Plan B" that will be equally unpalatable as a 3-year extension.
Remember, this is a man who has virtually wrecked the EPO on the grounds of financial self-interest (of the EPO management, the AC delegates and the Member States), in the process trampling over the (basic human) rights of the staff, crippling the Boards of Appeal and blatantly ignoring both the interests of the users and the rule of law. For someone who has achieved all that, what is to stop him twisting the agenda yet again to suit his personal needs? Certainly not the AC.
"They are manipulating international media and apparently even blogs now."We are still truly disgusted to see what IP Kat has become. I used to view them as allies, but now they are like foes. They do exactly the opposite of fixing the EPO and instead bolster the dictatorship. Here it is writing once again about that stupid think tank, complete with stuffed/stacked panels from Microsoft, Bristows and other lovers of UPC (litigation plus patent maximalism) Kool-Aid. Battistelli's chief UPC liar, Margot, was already aided by the Bristows mouthpieces, who in effect took over IP Kat. It's almost unthinkable and unbelievable that IP Kat was a prominent critic of Battistelli one year ago. "The mere presence of members of the Boards of Appeal [in the panels] would have spoiled the performance of the other member of staff of EPO," said one comment. "She came to herald the UPC, one wonders why."
She did the same thing in Korea some weeks ago. They are manipulating international media and apparently even blogs now. Yesterday, the Bristows-run blog (IP Kat) continued to cheer for patent trolls that operate in London (profitable for Bristows). Something like the UPC would make things even worse!
As someone pointed out in the comments this morning:
What always worries me in this respect is A54(3) EPC. I could scan through the patent publications in the afternoon of the publication day, find something interesting, add a few trivial features (the processor may be silicon based, a copper containing current distributor may be used, etc.) and file it as my patent application before 24:00. As the original application is only prior art according to A54(3) and I have some trivial features for novelty, I should be fine and get it granted.
"...Annsley Merelle Ward continued acting almost like a Battistelli 'mole' inside the blog."Remember that Unwired Planet is just a patent troll utilised by Ericsson.
Bristows staff soon thereafter proceeded to another EPO puff piece (like amplifying Margot). In it, Annsley Merelle Ward continued acting almost like a Battistelli 'mole' inside the blog. Those who make a living out of litigation (like trolls with threatening letters) understandably tolerate Battistelli because of his UPC ambitions. Watch this new tweet that says "Anjali Chopra of GreyB believes that getting rid of #Patenttrolls would hurt #innovation"
Let's just pretend -- as some legal firms do -- that patent trolls are good for innovation. Let's just invert truths, pretending that UPC would be good for SMEs etc. Just earlier this month the Washington Times published "Banish the [patent] trolls" -- an article which explains, in the words of United For Patent Reform, that "[p]atent reform requires shifting burden of proof “to the trolls and away from inventors & innovators”..."
From the article:
There’s an entire class of litigants in patent law that lawyers call “venue-shoppers.” U.S. district courts in East Texas and Delaware have become the go-to venues, courts likely to produce huge judgments in plaintiffs’ favor. Courts in these jurisdictions have shown themselves to be sympathetic to the trolls, or as they call themselves, “patent-assertion entities.”
Patent trolls, typically shell companies, buy the rights to dormant patents and use them to extort holders of similar patents by filing false patent-infringement claims. Defendants will often settle out of court just to make the case go away. It’s cheaper than hiring expensive lawyers to fight claims without merit.
The predatory patent-infringement threats and lawsuits drained an estimated $29 billion from the U.S. economy in 2011 alone, according to a Boston University study released in June 2012. That figure represents only direct legal costs, so the true economic toll is much higher since the true toll includes “various indirect costs such as diversion of resources, delays in new products, and loss of market share.”
"Taking much of the above into account, what we have now is a British blog called IP Kat which is primarily run by proponents of patent trolls, software patents, the UPC and even Battistelli's agenda."It leaves not so many of us to fight for EPO justice, to combat the UPC, to stop trolls, and take away those software patents they rely on so much.
IAM 'magazine', a think tank of Battistelli, pushes on with propaganda and fake news about the UPC, citing this piece that says:
The Isle of Man is signing up to a Europe-wide system for registering patents.
It is planned for the agreement to continue beyond Brexit.