THE European Patent Office (EPO) has long promoted this illusion that it can outclass the world regardless of how bad a policy it adopts. The non-scientific presidencies (even predating Campinos and Battistelli) have meant that decisions were made by the clueless, who instead of promoting science sought to appease the litigation giants, listening only to them and their self-serving wishes (more patents, more lawsuits).
"The examiners are humans, they're scientists and they tend to derive personal pride not from money but the contribution of their work to science, to progress, to innovation."It typically takes a high court (e.g. Supreme Court on 35 U.S.C. ۤ 101) to put an end to such office-wide coups. It's a sobering moment for many.
The examiners are humans, they're scientists and they tend to derive personal pride not from money but the contribution of their work to science, to progress, to innovation. Compare them to the top-level managers who are corrupt monsters, picked for nepotistic purposes, ruthlessness, and willingness to cover up crimes of predecessors. The former group was supposed to occupy top-tier positions as well (examiners turning into gentle and attentive management), but not so at the EPO...
Today's EPO is a classic case of "friend brings a friend..." (even at present time; it didn't end with Battistelli's departure)
"Today's EPO is a classic case of "friend brings a friend..." (even at present time; it didn't end with Battistelli's departure)"Earlier this week AdrianPatent wrote: "Cillian Ãâ Donnabháin of gave some valuable insights into the work of Examiners @EPOorg in Liverpool today @TheCIPA Merseyside meeting - turns out they *are* human after all..."
They're good people, but they're managed by corrupt people. This, in turn, can corrupt them against their will. Some leave, whereas others are desperate to stay (family relocated to another country already). The EPO retweeted the above and also this recruitment propaganda (as if the EPO is still recruiting examiners; it reduces their numbers).
I told them that "even EPO examiners tell people NOT to look for a job at EPO because it is corrupt and most staff have depression, partly because of corruption at the top..."
This is a typical 'EPO day' in Twitter. Lots of lies and nonsense all around.
The EPO has just resurrected a myth when it wrote: "140 years ago, Thomas Edison received a patent for the electric lamp. Here you can have a look at his patent document..."
"This is a typical 'EPO day' in Twitter. Lots of lies and nonsense all around."But Thomas Edison was somewhat of a patent troll who ripped off people who actually invented things and amassed patents on things he exploited without doing the work. This is actually well understood by today's scientists and historians. People like Tesla are far more worthy of credit and gratitude.
But never mind facts... the EPO has long favoured myths.
"If you're a #startup," the EPO tweeted, "IP rights can improve your competitiveness."
There's no such thing as "IP" (they meant patents I assume) and these are NOT rights. They're simply NOT. The EPO sounds like a law firm rather than a patent office. "Having grown up with digital technology at their fingertips," it wrote, "GenerationZ-ers think & act differently. Join us in Madrid to discuss their goals and how the IP world can adapt to their needs."
They've used stock photography of young professionals -- also the following day (same image) -- to make this page (warning: epo.org link) entitled "IP for the next generation" -- crafted like a marketing agency rather than a patent office.
"The EPO sounds like a law firm rather than a patent office."We probably shouldn't be so shocked by this (not anymore anyway), knowing that the EPO is run -- at the management level -- by people who haven't a clue what they're talking about and what kind of institution they run. Until his mid-fifties, for instance, Battistelli probably didn't even know what patents really were. He probably still doesn't know. His CV speaks for itself.
Sadly, nobody in the media talks about it anymore. It used to be occasionally mentioned here and there, but those who covered the subject and were capable of it have been threatened and/or bribed by the EPO. This includes IP Kat, which is never even mentioning EPO issues anymore, only advertising EPO agenda of the management and censoring comments critical of António Campinos and perhaps Battistelli too (it's hard to see everything that they delete). The other day Riana Harvey advertised the "European Patent Office's "East meets West" Forum 2020" (she also promotes lots of Watchtroll articles, i.e. the most overzealous blogs). It's another event of the patent maximalists with "hey hi" (AI) hype included. To quote: "The EPO's annual 'East meets West' forum returns! The forum, which will provide an update on the most important developments in patent information and IP knowledge in Asia and other jurisdictions will discuss other topics of interest, from how to cope with the growing amount of patent data from Asia, and how to maximise opportunities made available by AI and new search tools, amongst others."
"Sadly, nobody in the media talks about it anymore."Meanwhile, the bananas (so-called 'IP News Center') published a repost of the EPO's press release, bragging about bribery of academia. It's entitled "EPO publishes six search [sic] reports" (they must have meant research, not search) and it says: "The European Patent Office (EPO) published six Research Reports that were developed with funding from its Academic Research Programme. The Academic Research Programme was launched by the EPO in 2017 with the objective of encouraging research in the field of patents and to promote the dissemination of research findings. A total of 300,000 Euros were awarded for the research projects. The final results of the research were presented at a workshop that was recently hosted by the EPO in Munich. During the research period, researchers used patent data to delve deeper into topics such as financing for innovation, knowledge transfer, trade, tracking inventions in the marketplace, and the growth of technologies to tackle climate change."
"Why is the EPO controlling research now? Is it a patent office or what?"Why can't anyone see what's wrong with it and point it out in the media? This is NOT what a patent office is supposed to do. It is corrupting poor scholars in exchange for biased 'research' -- the same thing oil giants do. Earlier this week it bragged about this at least twice. The first tweet said: "Igor Bagayev of @ucddublin has investigated how international #technology diffusion encourages local exports. His project was funded by our Academic Research Programme. You can read his findings here: https://bit.ly/38P7DkN"
Why is the EPO controlling research now? Is it a patent office or what? Is it ERC (European Research Council) or EPO? Another newer tweet: "Gaétan de Rassenfosse at @EPFL has used data science tools to build a database that tracks #innovations into the marketplace. You can read the results here: https://bit.ly/38P7DkN His project was funded by our Academic Research Programme" (to associate patents with so-called 'innovation').
Not only EPO bribes scholars in exchange for propaganda. As someone correctly noted this week: "Always refreshing to have a lobby meeting and you learn that all civil society and academics in Europe are basically funded by Google in order to provide research that is in the interest of Google, and against the music industry..." [sic]
We've long complained about companies such as Google and Microsoft funding scholars in exchange for something, i.e. bribing them. It's a sick game that ultimately harms the reputation of academic institutions, collectively.
The EPO just doesn't seem to care about facts.
"The EPO just doesn't seem to care about facts."One new example of it is this tweet which says: "3Dprinting is set to revolutionise conventional approaches to design, materials, processes & products. The potential for #innovation will change and diversify accordingly."
"3Dprinting," I responded to them, "is one of the BEST known examples of patents retarding progress for a number of decades. Hard to understand who in EPO thought this area would be a good marketing, it is a rout..."
If that's not embarrassing enough (for the EPO), consider who the EPO associates with these days. The EPO's management has again found its match in Cambodia... with zero European Patents. What does that do for science or for public interest? Nothing.
The Phnom Penh Post has issued this puff piece, which helps the image of Cambodia a lot more than it helps the EPO. To quote:
Cambodia will renew its memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the European Patent Office (EPO) to boost investment from Europe, the Ministry of Industry and Handicrafts said.
The decision was made during a meeting between Minister of Industry and Handicrafts Cham Prasidh and EPO president Antonio Campinos on Monday.
[...]
Prasidh said Cambodia works with Singapore, Japan, China and the EU to register and validate patents.
Since 2015, the ministry has received 816 patent applications, of which 150 have been finalised.
The EU has filed 230 patent applications in Cambodia.