HELPED by the regime of the EPO, and with Bristows having taken charge of much of IP Kat, blogs such as these (formerly critics of the EPO's regime) are becoming indistinguishable -- at least at times -- from IAM, the EPO-leaning think tank.
"So now comes IAM, funded by patent trolls, citing a patent troll in support of patent trolls, even in the UK (where IAM is based)."There is a growing risk that patent trolls will soon flock to the UK. IAM's long series of pro-trolls (in the UK) articles regarding this case have been making it abundantly clear that IAM is totally in favour, citing Justice Birss and InterDigital (an anti-Android troll which was last mentioned in December after we had written about it for years). Yesterday IAM wrote that "a lawsuit always remains a distinct possibility in today’s environment, but on the analyst call Merritt also highlighted how the recent decision from London’s High Court in Unwired Planet v Huawei should be a boon to licensors."
They mean a boon to trolls.
So now comes IAM, funded by patent trolls, citing a patent troll in support of patent trolls, even in the UK (where IAM is based). It's like opening one's country/town gates to the enemy.
"Patent trolls are a business opportunity for IAM and Bristows."Bristows too has run a long series of pro-trolls articles, piggybacking this case. The Bristows-run IP Kat, one might say, has become a proponent of patent trolls. Isn't it wonderful? A British blog cheering for foreign patent trolls to come to Britain and sue companies...
As usual, as can be seen yesterday (latest in the pro-trolls series). Bristows staff is reprinting other Bristows staff, even with sheer lies in tact. Bristows lies right there in the headline (consistent with its coverage of UPC matters). For the uninitiated, Unwired Planet is a patent troll that has trolled in the UK and eventually won. We wrote about it when this whole thing started in 2015. It's a dangerous precedent.
"But," says Bristows, "attendees are never in short supply, and for the latest Rapid response event following the handing down of the latest judgment in the Unwired Planet cases (see IPKat summary here) patent litigator and new AIPPI member, Rachael Cartwright (Bristows), took to expertly reporting for the IPKat."
"British companies oppose UPC, knowing it would lead to more patent trolls in the UK."'Reporting' maybe. In scare quotes. These people have a habit of lying. It's marketing, not "expertly reporting". From Cartwright, the only part which somehow alludes to or speaks about trolls is this: "Additionally, he did not appear to appreciate the fact that the historic royalty rates in this market are heavily reduced due to the negotiations occurring primarily between manufacturers and that the recent rise of the NPEs has affected this balance."
That does not agree with what the headline says. Well, they need to fix the headline, but as it uses a question mark at the end they can defend it being as is (it's well known that headlines with question marks at the end are usually wrong and deserve "No!" as the answer).
Patent trolls are a business opportunity for IAM and Bristows. Never mind if they derive this money from actual producers, i.e. by destroying British companies.
"It once again proves we were right about the UPC, unlike Bristows and IAM with its fake news."British companies oppose UPC, knowing it would lead to more patent trolls in the UK.
Speaking of Bristows lies, remember how it misled clients on UKIPO and UPC? Well, British media says today that there is no UPC ratification any time soon. To quote WIPR:
The UK’s ratification of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Agreement will have to wait until after the election of the next government.
[...]
In February, nearly three-quarters of WIPR readers were sceptical over the December start date, citing Brexit as a major spanner in the works.