Like father, like son (and grandpa): Immunity of the Intellectual Property Office of the European Union Causes Outrage in Spanish Media

Source: Yesterday's tweet

Summary: The EPO shows how immunity leads to crimes being committed with total impunity; at this point the EPO's immunity must be removed and judges should be permitted to do their job, which is enforcing the law

THE European Patent Office (EPO) breaks the law every single day.

It may sound crazy until one grasps the concept -- however illogical -- of immunity. Battistelli was never held accountable for his crimes, including the Benalla affairs. António Campinos knows that he too is immune. He can do anything he likes!

Come again?

"Who holds the EPO accountable? Nobody! Not even judges. Not even the highest court in the same city as the ICC!"Yes, it's true!

This is why we end up with staff being bullied, people dying without an investigation (on EPO premises), and ridiculous patents such as software patents get granted in Europe in violation of direct instructions from elected politicians who are there to represent us. Who holds the EPO accountable? Nobody! Not even judges. Not even the highest court in the same city as the ICC! Even after determining that the EPO did, in fact, break the law!

Just reposted by Haseltine Lake Kempner LLP was this piece about patents on brews or their ingredients (close to patents on recipes!) and IAM, the megaphone of the EPO, mentioned the illegality of it. "Naturally obtained plants and seeds should not patentable say MEPs," but the EPO illegally grants patents on these anyway (because it's run by unaccountable thugs). Here's the whole relevant section:

Naturally obtained plants and seeds should not patentable say MEPs – Members of the European Parliament passed a non-legislative resolution that fruit, vegetables or animals obtained from conventional breeding processes, such as crossing, must not become patentable because open access to plant material is essential to the innovation and competitiveness of the agricultural and horticultural sectors. The decision was made against the background of a recent controversy concerning EPO president Antonio Campinos’ request for the office’s Enlarged Board of Appeal to reconsider its ruling that such inventions can be protected.

But the Enlarged Board of Appeal is largely controlled by him and his Office. That's like a principal at a school reprimanding a boy through a parent.

"Remember that nobody at the EPO's top-level management -- not even a single person -- has been held accountable."In any event, one day (sooner or later) the whole thing will come tumbling down, an avalanche of invalid patents that are rejected en masse like patents on life were (a few years ago). Sooner or later the Administrative Council won't be able to defend this. Sooner or later the public too will rebel, seeing that the EPO gives patents (i.e. monopoly) on treating cancer. This helps nobody, but the EPO has also given awards for such notorious patents. Yesterday we saw this new press release about an opposition being filed:

Cantargia AB today announces that an opposition has been filed against one of the European patents in Cantargia's patent family covering antibody therapy in solid tumors. The patent, with number EP3020730B1, confers protection for e.g. IL1RAP targeted antibodies in tumor forms not already covered in the European mother patent, which was granted in 2016. The current opponent, Mab Discovery GmbH, also filed an opposition against the mother patent in 2016. That opposition was unsuccessful and the mother patent, valid until 2032, remains in force after the opposition proceedings were concluded in 2018.

As we explained earlier this week, the task of assessing oppositions has been encumbered by a soaring number of filings, limiting the ability to handle these properly. It's the same problem with appeals (backlog exceeding 10,000 cases!), but law firms don't seem particularly bothered. An article by J A Kemp, just boosted by Mondaq, focuses on the EPO (re)arranging the seats on the Titanic's deck:

The EPO has recently revised the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal (RPBA)[1]. The revised RPBA will come into force on 1 January 2020. The revisions are fairly extensive, and are primarily concerned with harmonising the practices of the various different Boards of Appeal. The EPO is also hoping that the changes will increase the overall efficiency of the appeal procedure. Many of the changes may require users of the European patent system to modify their day-to-day practice, both during first instance proceedings and in subsequent appeals.

[...]

The efforts to codify many aspects of Board of Appeal practice currently governed by the case law are very welcome, and will hopefully result in the various different Boards of Appeal taking a more consistent and predictable approach. Further, the Boards of Appeal are sending a message that parties should present their entire case as early as possible during proceedings, and should not expect to have changes to their case admitted later in proceedings as a matter of course.

Notice how nothing at all has been done to restore judges' independence. Nothing. So in effect the EPO remains an unaccountable entity which grants -- through precedented pressure on examiners to break the law -- illegal patents. Preventing this from happening at an individual level would be career suicide. The only way to properly deal with this deadlock is to remove/strip the EPO's immunity, holding the management legally accountable. Remember that nobody at the EPO's top-level management -- not even a single person -- has been held accountable. One of them even opened a private business in Zagreb. ⬆