This page permanently redirects to gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2015/03/23/blackmail-at-the-epo/.
Posted in Europe, Patents at 5:00 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
The image below circulates around the EPO these days
Summary: Comments serve to highlight the role of bribes (or contrariwise blackmail), as allegedly exercised by the current management of the European Patent Office
THE European Patent Office (EPO) has lured many powerful people, such as politicians, into probe of its scandalous behaviour. Don’t expect the managers of the EPO to stay there for much longer.
=> ↺ EPO
Interesting comments on IPKat help expose a high degree of corruption and one comment reveals something which is worth highlighting in a standalone article.
“The following comment,” said a source of ours about this comment, “recently posted on the IPKat site (purporting to be from a Director in the Directorate for patent examination i.e. DG1) appears to refer to how Battistelli “buys” support from the AC delegations.”
“DG1Director” (no way to confirm is this is indeed the DG1 Director) said: “What do you mean the control the president has over the members of the AC by whatever means ? The means are obvious: You don`t bite the hand that feeds you. The president controls the support to the national offices. No support for the president means no support for your office. Just ask the Polish delegate what she was told after the latest AC meeting….”
We asked for an interpretation of this and a source told us this: “We have no idea what exactly what was said to the Polish delegation but it would seem that they were given to understand that if they didn’t support the President they shouldn’t expect any “goodies” from the EPO’s treasure chest for “cooperation” projects.”
In the mean time, based on this recent article from IPKat, the Administrative Council is planning to chop off members of the Boards of Appeal. To quote Merpel: “Now, it seems clear that the discipline according to Article 11 must stop short of “removal” according to Article 23, but there is disagreement between Merpel, who believes that this “removal” means permanent removal (so that a wide range of sanctions including suspension would be envisaged under Article 11), and a commenter who thinks that “removal” under Article 23 includes suspension, so that the Article 11 disciplinary provisions (which can be proposed by the President and do not need a proposal from the Enlarged Board of Appeal) must be rather limited in application.”
=> ↺ this recent article from IPKat
Benoît Battistelli has been dying to have total authority to just toss out everyone who is not loyal to him, even if that’s against the rules. In the coming day, ahead of important Administrative Council meetings, we are planning to speed up publication of Battistelli’s scandals. These Napoleonic (as in Napoleonic complex) people are truly destroying the EPO and the sooner they are tossed out, the better off EPO staff will be. █
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink Send this to a friend
=> Permalink | ↺ Send this to a friend
=> Techrights
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
text/gemini;lang=en-GBThis content has been proxied by September (ba2dc).