tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post5205293627419117961..comments2024-03-19T08:36:55.274+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Rumours from the AC, and four remarkable lettersVerónica Rodríguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger117125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-16027302020483782472016-01-09T10:28:54.010+00:002016-01-09T10:28:54.010+00:00A firefly on the firewall says…
2016!.. another y...A firefly on the firewall says…<br /><br />2016!.. another year of “Esprit de service” among the BB goon squad, a group that is amiable in the extreme, looking for full concurrence on every topic, with a complete absence of upsetting bickering that could ruin their cosiness. A comfortable consensus built around an illusion: that everyone in the squad had a perverse addiction to power. Yet no one questioned it. The main victim of the EPO’s “Esprit de service” is critical thought, which leaves behind a muddy trail of irrational…actions. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-38730815466661151462016-01-04T22:26:59.220+00:002016-01-04T22:26:59.220+00:00Anonymous said...
JLT-LawMaker said,,,
"Some...Anonymous said...<br />JLT-LawMaker said,,,<br /><br />"Some new CA-Docs are out." <br /><br /><br />Self-serving and to be expected. "On a proposal from the President,," nuff said? <br /><br />This is why many of us (who have been here for a long time - and admittedly - know that it is difficult at this stage of life) are looking for a way out of the shambles that the EPO is becoming.<br /><br />These people who are running (used jocularly) this place are beyond comprehension - they have no terms of reference - and yet they are given carte blanche. It only makes sense because the people that really count (elected politicians) are not just not interested enough or fail to see the bigger picture.<br /><br /> Luddites had the same problem back in the 18th century,,,,Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-46295324558994832482016-01-04T21:38:06.802+00:002016-01-04T21:38:06.802+00:00From what I heard, NL and DE did not abstain.
They...From what I heard, NL and DE did not abstain.<br />They voted against.<br />According to available information FR, GR, SE and SK abstained.<br /><br />But yes, it seems that NL and DE saw the legal implications.<br /><br />The ones who voted in favor were apparently smooth-talked into it by VP5 who seems to have assured them that it was completely unproblematic.AC Observernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-8613773938393487892016-01-04T16:46:11.208+00:002016-01-04T16:46:11.208+00:00JIT-LawMaker
Best wishes, everyone!
Some new CA-...<b>JIT-LawMaker</b><br /><br />Best wishes, everyone!<br /><br />Some new CA-Docs are out. Among them <br /><br />http://www.epo.org/modules/epoweb/acdocument/epoweb2/194/en/CA-D_18-15_en.pdf<br /><br />Nice one that is: Taylormade, just in time and retroactively applicable! <br /><br />I guess NL and D abstained in view of the law suit(s) that creates ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-63832993837568657452015-12-25T01:19:33.786+00:002015-12-25T01:19:33.786+00:00@SadCat: well, it would be unlikely to change jobs...@SadCat: well, it would be unlikely to change jobs that "short" before pension.<br />If I'd change now, my worries would be to find an employer willing to go confrontational if necessary.<br />The pensions can be sorted later, in my personal case.<br />In the case of the withheld allowances you mentioned (widowers, half-orphaned, ...) it is a different story, but these would not be hampered by a cooling-off period anyway, as the former EPO employee, for whom this clause would have applied, did not take up a new job...<br /><br /><br />But in my new job, the national rules would apply, and then the administration of the EPO could only try to enforce the non-consented amendment of my working contract through national courts, which take such rulings only in extreme rare cases.<br />And in most member states, such non-consented amendments limiting personal freedom are not taken favourably by the courts. In Germany and the Netherlands, every single employee would have to agree to such an amendment if her/his working contract. Agreement of the staff representation would not be sufficient, mere consultation even less.<br /><br />-one of those EPO examiners.<br /><br />PS: merry Christmas everyone!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-40432735329026801502015-12-24T10:02:35.533+00:002015-12-24T10:02:35.533+00:00Will the AC ever see it their duty to exercise the...Will the AC ever see it their duty to exercise their powers under Article 11(4) EPC, in view of a failure by He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named to properly exercise the powers given under Article 10(2)(a) EPC? Ensuring malfunctioning is not part of the job description.<br /><br />LastmanoutturnoffthelightsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-39000273178629866652015-12-24T07:33:47.785+00:002015-12-24T07:33:47.785+00:00@ one of those epo examiners. How? The same way th...@ one of those epo examiners. How? The same way the investigations into the suicides were stopped: by not paying the pensions. That is, even though illegal, a mighty good weapon in view of the fact that it takes 14 years to gain your case.<br />SadcatAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-91046766798310855462015-12-23T21:59:03.032+00:002015-12-23T21:59:03.032+00:00How could the EPO even enforce the ban on a new wo...How could the EPO even enforce the ban on a new work? This he would have to do under the national law of themember state where I would want to work, as only those courts apply to me then. And these court cases arenearly always lost, thus the employee may do the desired work.<br />I see more an issue finding sn employer who is willing to take the risk, as he could influence a proceeding revoking them their representative status, or as suggested above by Cynic..<br />Anyway, he should then also prevent any external ones from applying for posts at the BoA, as their previous colleagues could try to influence case in their client's favour.<br /><br />- one of those EPO examiners.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-58628813009975314842015-12-23T19:22:14.539+00:002015-12-23T19:22:14.539+00:00BB appears to be not completely unwilling to make ...<i>BB appears to be not completely unwilling to make new nominations next year. We'll have to wait and see what kind of surprise he has in mind.</i><br /><br />What do you mean? Jobs for the in-laws, second cousins, and hairdressers of his <i>garde rapprochée</i>?<br /><br />Perish the thought, I'm outta here.Roufousse T. Fairflynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-70717487494639861492015-12-23T19:18:37.581+00:002015-12-23T19:18:37.581+00:00@Cynic:
Will HR be equally self-financing? And, if...@Cynic:<br /><i>Will HR be equally self-financing? And, if so, how?</i><br /><br />Not even DG1 is self-financed. Searches cost money, examinations cost money, oppositions cost money, appeals cost money. DG0/2/4/5 cost money. The AC costs money. It's all funded by renewal fees.<br /><br /><i>Missing members - 18 now but how many after end of year retirements?</i><br /><br />According to <a href="http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2015/11/the-beautiful-game-view-of-epo-board-of.html" rel="nofollow">this post</a>, there will be 27 missing members at the end of this year.<br /><br /><i>There can't be anybody ready beyond personal nomination by him?</i><br /><br />Yep. It is almost surprising that it has not happened earlier.<br /><br />Regarding "how is he going to do that", I was mainly wondering how he is going to decide what the new proposal will contain if the AC has taken the task of drafting the proposal out of his hands. But the exact situation at the moment is not clear to me. If the recent interview is anything to go by, we're simply back to March this year... BB gets another try but this time without a user survey, so without the need to misrepresent input from users.platininoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-15742567296232407922015-12-23T18:48:57.025+00:002015-12-23T18:48:57.025+00:002016 budget
Board of Appeal planned to decrease i...2016 budget<br /><br />Board of Appeal planned to <b>decrease</b> in budgeted size by over 1%.<br /><br />President's Office planned to <b>increase</b> in budgeted size by nearly 20%.<br /><br />What more need be said?<br /><br />LastmanoutturnoffthelightsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-14859949887270098082015-12-23T17:53:20.054+00:002015-12-23T17:53:20.054+00:00Platini,
Battistelli seems to want be BoA to be se...Platini,<br />Battistelli seems to want be BoA to be self-financing and yet they are only an administrative organ rather than a judicial body. Will HR be equally self-financing? And, if so, how? Make your mind up!<br />Is sing members - 18 now but how many after end of year retirements?<br />New nominations? But no posts have been advertised for more than a year. There can't be anybody ready beyond personal nomination by him?<br />Preventing from working by attacking their pension (rights)? Delaying payment of final allowances? Going to court - a single case would frighten a few? Playing hard ball with their new employers? You think he wouldn't be creative?? (See you at the ILO in 10 years...)Cynicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-25926404732084131812015-12-23T17:38:50.422+00:002015-12-23T17:38:50.422+00:00We understand that you and the Administrative Coun...<b>We understand that you and the Administrative Council believe that the efficiency<br />of the Board needs to increase, and the independence needs to be assured. Can<br />you reassure people about that in the long-term but also in the short term, given<br />concerns about the number of members of the Boards?</b><br /><br /><i>The first thing to bear in mind is that when the EPC was discussed, signed and ratified the member states decided not to create a judiciary body that would be separate from the EPO. They decided to create an administrative unit within the EPO with the task of reviewing EPO decisions on granting or not granting a patent. It is recognised there is some ambiguity there but this was the choice made at the time. There have been several attempts over the past 40 years to change the situation, and they have never succeeded.<br /><br />So the situation is we have an administrative unit, composed mainly of former patent<br />examiners, who are independent in the decisions they make but not in their legal nature.<br /><br />In spite of the ambiguity during the past 40 years, the Boards of Appeal have built strong reputations for independence and expertise and have fulfilled their roles to everybody's satisfaction.<br /><br />Second, on independence, this has never been questioned. None of my predecessors or<br />myself have interfered in any specific case. But there was a decision of the EBA [R2/14] that said because of the links there was a risk of partiality. <br /><br />This decision obliged us to reconsider the links between the Boards of Appeal in general and the Office, so we started to reflect on a situation where we could increase the independence and the efficiency. I made some proposals to the Council, one of them to create a fully separate organisation, but this would imply a change to the EPC. The Council clearly indicated they cannot consider this option and asked me to make some proposals within the framework of the EPC.<br /><br />It's not easy because the EPC clearly gives the responsibility for the management of the Boards to the president of the Office. How can the president delegate this authority to someone else? We looked at creating a person with a new function of president of the Boards of Appeal, who would be the highest authority but also in charge of administration, like in many national courts. Somebody has to manage the Boards, and it cannot be the president of the Office as this would be understood as interference in their functioning. It's legally not easy because it has to be compliant with the EPC.<br /><br />We are also proposing to help the Council fulfil its duties by creating a subsidiary body composed of members of the Council and high level judicial people. This body will be consultative and will help the Council to fulfil its duties for the Boards of Appeal.<br /><br />I'm confident that we could make some proposals in the first months of 2016 in order to go forward.<br /></i>Sang Impurnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-70636751494002204862015-12-23T16:16:10.809+00:002015-12-23T16:16:10.809+00:00A short summary of the managing ip interview is he...A short summary of the managing ip interview is here:<br /><a href="http://www.managingip.com/Blog/3516717/Battistelli-defiant-in-interview-about-EPO-reforms.html" rel="nofollow">Battistelli defiant in interview about EPO reforms</a><br />The part about the BOAs only forming an administrative unit is not included.<br /><br />BB suggests that the appeal fee should cover 20-25% of the cost instead of 4% as is the case now. (A similar if not much larger increase of the opposition fee is not difficult to predict. To justify such increases one only needs to compare with the UPC fees!)<br /><br />BB says it is "short-sighted" to suggest the backlog of appeal cases has been created in the past few months due to positions being vacant ("few" being 18).<br />Yet another sign of intellectual dishonesty, as no one has suggested that the recruitment stop has <i>created</i> the backlog. The backlog was there already, but how is that an excuse for stopping recruitment.<br /><br />BB appears to be not completely unwilling to make new nominations next year. We'll have to wait and see what kind of surprise he has in mind.<br /><br />BB still wants to move the BOAs out of his sight and to prevent BOA members from working in private practice after leaving their position. How is he going to do that, now that the AC is said to have taken the reform out of his hands? But of course he still controls whoever will draft the new proposal.platininoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-74511679348388117872015-12-23T13:43:45.795+00:002015-12-23T13:43:45.795+00:00Here is a well documented article by Juve on the l...Here is a well documented article by Juve on the loss by the President of the AC´s support for the reforming of the boards of appeal<br /><br />http://www.juve.de/nachrichten/namenundnachrichten/2015/12/schoene-bescherung-epa-praesident-verliert-rueckhalt-des-verwaltungsrats-fuer-gerichtsreformAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-24098739366992472822015-12-23T12:32:52.642+00:002015-12-23T12:32:52.642+00:00Some of the more significant member states have to...Some of the more significant member states have told BB to behave. It is only natural that he decided to infuriate those member states even more.<br /><br />Apparently he is confident, or gambling, that the three-quarters majority that is necessary to remove him will not be reached.<br /><br />The EPC is on the verge of turning into a failed project.platininoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-82402731028221468642015-12-23T12:07:51.874+00:002015-12-23T12:07:51.874+00:00Maxdrei,
Being an Ena-teque, I suspect BB sees eve...Maxdrei,<br />Being an Ena-teque, I suspect BB sees everything as an administrative task with technical/judicial support functionaries. That reflects his treatment of staff in general. DG4 (HR et al) is the core and DGs 1 and 3 are support acts for the successful operation of DG4. While HR, IT etc. were previously the support, the system has changed and now examining and boards of appeal are downgraded to simple tasks which any non-ENA person can do.Old man of EPOnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-42277140074392973782015-12-23T11:25:31.947+00:002015-12-23T11:25:31.947+00:00Thanks George. As usual, the Americans do it bett...Thanks George. As usual, the Americans do it better. When they say their patent system enables Little David to triumph over the Giant Goliath, they are correct. It does, every so often. I know. My small client won an injunction and 40+ Million USD damages from a Big Corp infringer of his US patent. His lawyer worked on a contingency fees basis, of course, betting on getting a cut of the 40 mill.<br /><br />But when the Commission in Brussels sets up a pan-European patent litigation system, there is no way an SME can get anywhere with it. When was the last time an SME in Europe pulled 40 mill in damages? <br /><br />The Commission's answer? We know. But we need to set up a system by which an SME can insure against the costs of patent litigation. That will fix the problem. <br /><br />If you don't laugh, you would cry, at the level of ignorance and wilful blindness. At the moment, some national jurisdictions (NL, DE, GB) have systems that allow the Little Guy to prevail. That is not going to survive the advent of the UPC though, is it? Big Corp and ist lackeys are delighted. For them, it's Mission Accomplished. Special thanks to BB and the AC.MaxDreinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-37255544976949536512015-12-23T11:23:40.936+00:002015-12-23T11:23:40.936+00:00GB-N,
One man's decline is another's rise...GB-N,<br /><br />One man's decline is another's rise.<br /><br />After all, we are all created equal, just that some of us are more equal than others.The Pigsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-19453355182166313622015-12-23T10:47:23.635+00:002015-12-23T10:47:23.635+00:00Surely for the UPC to be a success the EPO needs t...Surely for the UPC to be a success the EPO needs to be granting strong patents. With the possibility of a UPC patent being revoked in all territories agents will need to consider whether to file for a single for a single UPC patent or several national patents. If the quality of a a UPC patent is poor national paten ts may be more appealing. Or is invalidating a UPC patent so expensive the quality doesn't matter?Ketaminnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-90266705079865882942015-12-23T10:30:28.148+00:002015-12-23T10:30:28.148+00:00MaxDrei, the reason is simple - DG3 is a cost burd...MaxDrei, the reason is simple - DG3 is a cost burden on the EPO budget. The only way to reduce it is to reduce the size of DG3, either through not appointing new members, encouraging current members to leave, or "disciplinary" measures.<br /><br /><br />ps: I assume maxdrei and MaxDrei are one and the same ...Kantnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-81533910644839381212015-12-23T09:14:44.969+00:002015-12-23T09:14:44.969+00:002/2
This type of development was already visible (...2/2<br />This type of development was already visible (or at least envisageable) in Peter Drahos' book "The Global Governance of Knowledge. Patent Offices and their Clients", Cambridge University Press 2010. Highly recommended reading for anybody who can afford to take the longer view. In all the discussions on IPKat on the EPO situation I have not seen one post or comment that has taken its inspiration from this perceptive book.<br /><br />Actually one may see an outline also from a 2008 response to Joff Wild (an apparently unabashed promotor of all undertakings from the EPO administration), by SUEPO (document No. su08163cl), which was recently made instantly available by the Techrights blog. But as the Boards of Appeal have until now been independent, it was not in 2008 possible to envisage that they and their legal framework would be so completely degraded.<br /><br />The system is beyond help -- there is nobody to change the course. It is truly a situation where the foxes are in charge -- or should we say we have an Orwellian 'Animal Farm'? All the suggested admininstrative changes are doable because there is nobody to complain to.<br /><br />The only way to combat the system would be for a united front to avoid using the UPC at all so that it dies of lack of funding. As we cannot expect conflicts to disappear, this would sadly lead to the general application of arbitration, which is characterised by not creating any jurisprudence others may learn from. However, in a rotten system, what good is jurisprudence anyway? And how do we re-create a good European examination system from the shards left over?<br /><br />All the best from an observer of massive decline,<br /><br /><br />George Brock-Nannestad<br />end 2/2Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-85924715653847433782015-12-23T09:13:52.264+00:002015-12-23T09:13:52.264+00:001/2
It is my impression that the present and in pa...1/2<br />It is my impression that the present and in particular the future legal situation concerning patents in Europe is becoming extremely uncertain. In a world where we thought that responsible persons would cooperate to maintain a legal framework that is predictable, we see massive attacks on integrity and a future situation akin to those states that merely registered and did not examine patents and left all patent construction to the courts. All the good words and the work to preserve the balance between those who invented and those who could afford to litigate is now being put in question and deliberately destroyed. <br /><br />A legal attorney, registered to practice as such in one of the member states of the EPC, is permitted to represent before the EPO without any proof of competence. Those attorneys who do precisely that will nevertheless have studied the EPC, the Guidelines, and the "Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office" anyway. However it now turns out that these texts are not to be valid anymore. In the future it will be absolutely useless knowledge, because attorneys will begin to represent holders of doubtful patents against possible infringers, and they will need to transfer to litigation and the rules being developed there in order to assist clients. A European Patent Attorney does not have the same possibilities.<br /><br />The massive reduction in the intellectual effort permitted by production goals in the EPO for examining applications will be felt in the Boards of Appeal as an extra workload in cases of opposition, which will become more frequent as individual companies and patent defiance associations will need to file them to match the onslaught of accepted but inherently defective European applications in their Unified Patent form. The present proposed change of status of the Boards of Appeal is in flagrant contravention of the EPC. But with the proposed changes it will administratively be made very difficult for the BoAs to reject an appeal, because that would be the end of the story. And it is definitely desired for the story to continue, and only an acceptance can ensure the survival of a patent that is useful for the UPC system. Alternatively, the time for opposition will be reduced to 3 months and the fee will be set at such a high and rising level that it may become cheaper just to give up the possibly infringing product line. Observations during examinations will be abolished because they endanger the patentability.<br /><br />This is not the way to increase competition between the SMEs and big transnational corporations!<br />end 1/2 by George Brock-Nannestad<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-80753106373175136652015-12-23T08:50:10.793+00:002015-12-23T08:50:10.793+00:00Why should BB and the AC trash DG3 like this? Do n...Why should BB and the AC trash DG3 like this? Do not underestimate the political influence (in Davos and Brussels) of the giant international Anglo-American patent litigation law firms, by lobbying to bamboozle Euro pols into supposing that the UPC will be an improvement, and by inducing BB to join their cause.<br /><br />Fact is, that disputing patent validity at the EPO (for 38 jurisdictions) is cheaper by a factor of from one to a hundred thousand than litigating validity in the USA. For more than 35 years, these law firms have been spitting in frustration, that the work is done not by them but by European patent attorney firms. They want their full wad and, with the advent of the UPC, they're gonna get it, OK?MaxDreinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-92200721447364123432015-12-22T23:08:34.079+00:002015-12-22T23:08:34.079+00:00I don't understand. I thought it was well sett...<i>I don't understand. I thought it was well settled, that DG3 is a judicial not an administrative instance. Is the EPO President so almighty that he can by fiat declare DG3 to be administrative and NOT judicial?</i><br /><br />BB's interpretation is not consistent with what is recorded in the Travaux Preparatoires:<br />http://webserv.epo.org/projects/babylon/tpepc73.nsf/0/4ADD77A7756D6D23C125742700497086/$File/Art23eTPEPC1973.pdf<br /><br />Quick ! Make a backup copy before they disappear online ...Travaux Preparatoiresnoreply@blogger.com