Bonum Certa Men Certa

Today's EPO is an Illegal Institution Promoting and Granting Illegal Patents

The EPC is violated every time, rendering it meaningless or irrelevant

You must grant software patents! Oh yeah? The EPC says not! Now grant! I killed the EPC!



Summary: With patent courts or tribunals or boards (panels) that enjoy as much 'independence' as patent examiners -- i.e. none at all -- the EPO continues to grant and then authorise patents in direct and clear violation of the EPC, never mind public interest, directions from public representatives, external (to the EPO) courts and so on

"I am just wondering, the UK is bent to leave the EU, why not the European Patent Office. We both know that it is no EU institution but... probably there are better reasons to leave the EPO than the EU..."



So said a reader of ours, who is actually a high-profile person who opposes software patents in Europe. It has become pretty clear that EPO tyranny didn't end with Battistelli's departure because António Campinos is even worse in certain aspects. This is why EPO staff protested last week.

"I am just wondering, the UK is bent to leave the EU, why not the European Patent Office. We both know that it is no EU institution but... probably there are better reasons to leave the EPO than the EU..."
      --Anonymous
Looking at the official words of the EPO itself, those have nothing whatsoever to do with staff's positions. It's clear that press releases and tweets are composed by people highly loyal to high-level managers (or else they would not endure in these positions).

"Looking at the official words of the EPO itself, those have nothing whatsoever to do with staff's positions. It's clear that press releases and tweets are composed by people highly loyal to high-level managers (or else they would not endue in these positions."Here are some examples from yesterday.

The EPO is clearly hiding the collapse in patent quality while focusing on other things instead ("level of satisfaction related to the European Patent Register & future needs"). This is what it did this week in EPOPIC, which we wrote about yesterday. The following day (not the opening day) they had fewer high-profile speakers, but the nonsense kept on coming. Take this bunch of "tweets" for example [1, 2, 3]: "A new IPC subclass “G16Y” for IoT-related technologies will enter into force in January 2020 #EPOPIC cc @JPO_JPN [..]. ZIT is the world’s first #classification for #IoT-related technologies #EPOPIC cc @JPO_JPN [...] Opening the next session at #EPOPIC on classification, Toshiki Yamaguchi at @JPO_JPN is going to give us the latest information on new J-PlatPat & #IoT-related classifications."

So in EPOPIC too they misuse these words; Many bogus, invalid, bunk software patents have been 'dressed up' as "IoT" -- a rather meaningless or at least vague marketing buzzword. Here's more: "Automatic Classification: There is likely a data deficiency challenge ahead – we need human investment! One of the take-aways from Alexander Klenner-Bajaja's insights into #AI & #patentclassification #EPOPIC"

"Hey hi" is pure magic. You just say out loud those two letters, A and I, and the audience will be wowed. Are software patent not valid? A I! Hakuna matata.

"It means no worries

"For the rest of your days

"It's our problem-free philosophy"

Just grant, grant, grant. Do it for Grant Philpott. The poor sod will only get promoted if he artificially inflates the number of grants by consciously violating the EPC, compelling examiners below him to break the law for him.

The EPO's propaganda partner IAM has meanwhile published "AI technology – the pitfalls of protecting inventions" and promoted that in Lexology.

Aled Richards-Jones (Carpmaels & Ransford LLP) is admitting these so-called "AI" patents are just software patents, almost right from the outset: "The current situation in the United States presents uncertainties when it comes to patenting AI-related technology, following the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corp v CLS Bank, while the law covering other aspects of AI is equally complex. In the United Kingdom, protecting AI-related technology involves a range of considerations, from EPO case law relating to computer-implemented inventions, to UK domestic laws involving other forms of protection such as copyright and trade secrets. With innovation currently outpacing the law, where does this leave innovators? This article uses a hypothetical example to shed some light on the landscape."

So what? They grant anyway. Let the courts deal with the resultant mess.

This is as much of a problem in the US as it is in Europe and HTIA has just mentioned it in relation to this article from Dave Jones. We'll put it again in Daily Links as it's not about Europe. "David W. Jones is a former IP Counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee and currently executive director of the High Tech Inventors Alliance," says the bio and his employer quotes him as saying: “The solution to poor quality isn’t to lower the bar. We need to address quality head on by making it less likely invalid patents are granted and by strengthening the ability to challenge them when they do."

The same is true in Europe. "How to fix the patent quality crisis" is his headline and he wishes to raise patent quality, not lower it. The EPO has been constantly lowering the patent bar in recent years and that became very visible -- to the point where EPO management panicked and sought to silence the messengers.

The problem isn't limited to software. Big Pharma blogger Rose Hughes (litigation industry for monopolies) has just published "BREAKING: Board of Appeal provides some initial thoughts on the Broad Institute’s CRISPR appeal (T0844/18)" (we covered this case many times before).

Well, the EPO is not allowed to grant patents on life. So on the surface this whole appeal may seem like a waste of time (or non-starter). It's not legal. That much should be obvious, but the EPO is so inherently corrupt and the law does not matter to it. Judges aren't rewarded for enforcing the law (EPC) but for doing the Office President's biddings. Watch that comment from an attorney:

Looking forward to the appearance of the summarized TBA Communication on the EPO public file. Meanwhile, thanks to the IPKat for sharing this news that is "breaking" in more senses than one.

Reading through the Board's summary of the pro's and con's of stepping back from the current established practice, two thoughts occur.

First, getting more into line with "the intention" of the Paris Convention strikes me as outweighing most, if not all, other considerations.

Second, can anybody here recall a case of many years ago, in which a UK patent attorney firm (U&L) was caught in the middle of an ownership dispute, between rival parties, that went to litigation during the Paris year. The facts of the case were quite mundane really. Such ownership disputes can arise quite easily. The two sides were giving that patent attorney firm (which had filed the priority application) opposite and irreconcilable PCT filing instructions. Thus it was, that U&L entered the litigation as an "interpleader". I should like to re-read any published case report in the context of the present dispute before the TBA. Can anybody supply the case report reference?


We already know, based on prior cases such as G 2/19 (Enlarged Board of Appeal), that these rulings aren't compliant with the EPC -- so much so that the EPO aggressively lobbied to not even deal with a query about it (deeming it inadmissible). The EPO is an outlaw institution where the concept of lawfulness ceased to exist some years ago. Something must be done.

Recent Techrights' Posts

Daniel Pocock elected on ANZAC Day and anniversary of Easter Rising (FSFE Fellowship)
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Ulrike Uhlig & Debian, the $200,000 woman who quit
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
Girlfriends, Sex, Prostitution & Debian at DebConf22, Prizren, Kosovo
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
Martina Ferrari & Debian, DebConf room list: who sleeps with who?
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
 
Joerg (Ganneff) Jaspert, Dalbergschule Fulda & Debian Death threats
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
Amber Heard, Junior Female Developers & Debian Embezzlement
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
[Video] Time to Acknowledge Debian Has a Real Problem and This Problem Needs to be Solved
it would make sense to try to resolve conflicts and issues, not exacerbate these
[Video] IBM's Poor Results Reinforce the Idea of Mass Layoffs on the Way (Just Like at Microsoft)
it seems likely Red Hat layoffs are in the making
IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, April 24, 2024
IRC logs for Wednesday, April 24, 2024
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
Links 24/04/2024: Layoffs and Shutdowns at Microsoft, Apple Sales in China Have Collapsed
Links for the day
Sexism processing travel reimbursement
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
Microsoft is Shutting Down Offices and Studios (Microsoft Layoffs Every Month This Year, Media Barely Mentions These)
Microsoft shutting down more offices (there have been layoffs every month this year)
Balkan women & Debian sexism, WeBoob leaks
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
Links 24/04/2024: Advances in TikTok Ban, Microsoft Lacks Security Incentives (It Profits From Breaches)
Links for the day
Gemini Links 24/04/2024: People Returning to Gemlogs, Stateless Workstations
Links for the day
Meike Reichle & Debian Dating
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
Europe Won't be Safe From Russia Until the Last Windows PC is Turned Off (or Switched to BSDs and GNU/Linux)
Lives are at stake
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, April 23, 2024
IRC logs for Tuesday, April 23, 2024
[Meme] EPO: Breaking the Law as a Business Model
Total disregard for the EPO to sell more monopolies in Europe (to companies that are seldom European and in need of monopoly)
The EPO's Central Staff Committee (CSC) on New Ways of Working (NWoW) and “Bringing Teams Together” (BTT)
The latest publication from the Central Staff Committee (CSC)
Volunteers wanted: Unknown Suspects team
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Debian trademark: where does the value come from?
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Detecting suspicious transactions in the Wikimedia grants process
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Links 23/04/2024: US Doubles Down on Patent Obviousness, North Korea Practices Nuclear Conflict
Links for the day
Stardust Nightclub Tragedy, Unlawful killing, Censorship & Debian Scapegoating
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Gunnar Wolf & Debian Modern Slavery punishments
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
On DebConf and Debian 'Bedroom Nepotism' (Connected to Canonical, Red Hat, and Google)
Why the public must know suppressed facts (which women themselves are voicing concerns about; some men muzzle them to save face)
Several Years After Vista 11 Came Out Few People in Africa Use It, Its Relative Share Declines (People Delete It and Move to BSD/GNU/Linux?)
These trends are worth discussing
Canonical, Ubuntu & Debian DebConf19 Diversity Girls email
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
Links 23/04/2024: Escalations Around Poland, Microsoft Shares Dumped
Links for the day
Gemini Links 23/04/2024: Offline PSP Media Player and OpenBSD on ThinkPad
Links for the day
Amaya Rodrigo Sastre, Holger Levsen & Debian DebConf6 fight
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
DebConf8: who slept with who? Rooming list leaked
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
Bruce Perens & Debian: swiping the Open Source trademark
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
Ean Schuessler & Debian SPI OSI trademark disputes
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
Windows in Sudan: From 99.15% to 2.12%
With conflict in Sudan, plus the occasional escalation/s, buying a laptop with Vista 11 isn't a high priority
Anatomy of a Cancel Mob Campaign
how they go about
[Meme] The 'Cancel Culture' and Its 'Hit List'
organisers are being contacted by the 'cancel mob'
Richard Stallman's Next Public Talk is on Friday, 17:30 in Córdoba (Spain), FSF Cannot Mention It
Any attempt to marginalise founders isn't unprecedented as a strategy
IRC Proceedings: Monday, April 22, 2024
IRC logs for Monday, April 22, 2024
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
Don't trust me. Trust the voters.
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Chris Lamb & Debian demanded Ubuntu censor my blog
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
Ean Schuessler, Branden Robinson & Debian SPI accounting crisis
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
William Lee Irwin III, Michael Schultheiss & Debian, Oracle, Russian kernel scandal
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work