Summary: With a gross selection effect in media coverage about the UPC (lobbyists and litigation firms monopolising the news), one might be led to think that the UPC still stands a chance; at the end, however, the public will know who lied all along

THE people of Bristows (as we noted this morning) will need to explain why each and every year they said the UPC would come "later this year" or "next year"...

The "IP" ministers of the UK will need to explain why they ratified an agreement which was later de-ratified and thrown down some wastebasket of history...

"Kluwer Patent Blog and its patrons will need to explain why they keep posting 'fake news' about the UPC, even after the obvious collapse of the whole thing."The Bundestag will need to explain why -- along with the ministry of injustice and Bundesrat -- it went ahead with unconstitutional ploys, even in defiance of its own Federal Constitutional Court (FCC).

Kluwer Patent Blog and its patrons will need to explain why they keep posting 'fake news' about the UPC, even after the obvious collapse of the whole thing.

Promoting the UPC in 2020 is a major liability to one's longstanding and long-term reputation. It's hardly surprising that over time fewer and fewer law firms are willing to participate in such foolish exercise, or a public display of ignorance/dishonesty. Here's an explanation of the bias:

Well, what we've seen is a variant of it; basically, we only hear the voices of Team UPC, or those who are left to lobby for this thing. All those who gave up are walking away, silently. They really need to speak out about how ridiculous Team UPC has become. That would at least lend them a little credibility. ⬆