The 'Milan' talking point is back again

Summary: From fashion accessories like gowns and robes to the old delusion of hastily working around Brexit

THE European Patent Office (EPO) isn't mentioning the UPC. António Campinos isn't mentioning it either. But Bristows? These fetishists with their UPC 'necrophilia' just can't help it. In "Milan as a location for the UPC central division?" Alan Johnson from Bristows continues to yank out lies and false news, trying hard to maintain the perception that UPC isn't dead, it's just 'moving'. Last week they focused on and wrote about clothing, now it's about a fashion capital. How long before something similar gets published in Kluwer Patent Blog?

"Last week they focused on and wrote about clothing, now it's about a fashion capital."An article by Ian Rainey and Craig W. Mueller (Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP) has also just been published to say:

Arguably, filing in the EPO is the most common regional patent system, so it merits some discussion. As shown below, EPO member states generally coincide with the European Union. But it is extremely important to note that the EPO has little to do with the EU. Indeed, non-EU counties such as Norway and, in the future, the UK are members of the EPO. In the latter's case, Brexit should have little effect on the UK's standing in the EPO.

But that does not mention the UPC, which is an EU system that is therefore affected by Brexit. Also, to claim that "the EPO has little to do with the EU" is to totally ignore the UPC push, which thankfully failed. Not even fabricated rumours, fabricated job openings and so on could save it.

The EPO's total lack of vision, e.g. granting of terrible patents that courts reject (more on that in our next post), is a real problem -- so much so that the EPO asks for help to pretend there's public input/participation. "Spread the word," they wrote yesterday. "The EPO is inviting all stakeholders to provide their views on its Strategic Plan 2023..."

"What about quality of patents? Or the rule of law? Nope, not on the agenda."Will any attention be paid to them though?

"Stakeholder input will play a key role in helping us to formulate our strategic priorities for the next few years," they claim (warning: epo.org link). "The Strategic Plan will steer all our activities over the period 2019 to 2023 in different areas, be translated into concrete actions and projects and be subject to regular monitoring of progress and achievements."

What progress and what achievements? What about quality of patents? Or the rule of law? Nope, not on the agenda. ⬆