This page permanently redirects to gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2018/03/27/uk-ipo-lobbying-by-team-battistelli/.

● 03.27.18

●● The Administrative Council of the EPO Continues to Reaffirm Complicity in Battistelli’s Abuses

Posted in Europe, Patents, Site News at 9:29 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Do Tim Moss and Sean Dennehey really wish to be publicly seen with these people?

Summary: Team Battistelli is greasing up the British delegation, hoping that it would help legitimise the regime which even EPO staff isn’t tolerating, not to mention the effect on the Unified Patent Court (UPC), which is dead as long as the United Kingdom isn’t ratifying UPCA

STAFF, such as patent examiners, received a slap on the face from the Administrative Council of the EPO last week. Rumours persist that layoffs are coming to the EPO, yet the boss who is responsible for it received a massive new bonus (like two years of full salary!).

=> slap on the face from the Administrative Council | ↺ EPO | layoffs are coming to the EPO

“Battistelli already flew to Britain just to lobby his two predecessors, Lucy and Jo Johnson.”Adding insult to injury, the delegates of the pertinent nations, who attended last week’s meeting of the Administrative Council, now personally meet with Battistelli for some photo ops. It’s like they don’t really disapprove or reject him. Tim Moss from UK-IPO (Chief Executive of the UK Intellectual Property Office) did not look like he was going to challenge the Battistelli regime like his predecessor had done. Now we get assurance (or vindication) of that as not only him but Sean Dennehey (predecessor) and Gilles Requena (Bergot’s husband) are there too, along with the facilitator of the Battistelli regime, Raimund Lutz. We hoped that he would put up some resistance/distance, but he does not; instead he does a photo op with the crook. That 'collusion' with CIPA was sort of expected because CIPA is a core part of Team UPC, but why UK-IPO, which in some sense ‘competes’ with EPO? Battistelli’s or UK-IPO’s lobbying trip is a bad sign; we already know that the Unitary Patent is a major sham (crooked process and compromised/rigged votes); it’s also impossible after that Brexit vote (no matter which side one supported in that referendum). But yesterday’s puff piece (warning: epo.org link, see screenshot at the top) speaks of “preparations for setting up the new unitary patent system.”

=> did not look like he was going to challenge the Battistelli regime | 'collusion' with CIPA | crooked process and compromised/rigged votes | ↺ yesterday’s puff piece

“The puff pieces is all about Battistelli, as usual (the EPO’s Web site remains a shrine for that one person, a sort of cult of personalities).”What next? Will corrupt Battistelli keep lobbying ministers too? Is there a trip scheduled in which to lie to Sam Gyimah? Battistelli already flew to Britain just to lobby his two predecessors, Lucy and Jo Johnson.

=> Sam Gyimah

The puff pieces is all about Battistelli, as usual (the EPO’s Web site remains a shrine for that one person, a sort of cult of personalities). “Mr Battistelli and Mr Moss,” it says, “discussed recent developments in intellectual property, including the recently released annual results of the EPO, progress on strengthening bilateral co-operation activities and preparations for setting up the new unitary patent system.”

So Battistelli also sort of lied about the results, as usual. Yesterday, the EPO was talking about patent statistics from the UK. It said: “Patent applications from the Netherlands up 2.7%, after a drop of -3.6% the previous year…”

=> ↺ said

“The meeting, based on the above summary, was the usual UPC lobbying.”“Because you gave a major discount to applicants,” I responded to them, “so it’s not really a rise, e.g. in revenue” (details in our rebuttal). On the same day the EPO also wrote: “Meeting with UK Intellectual Property Office @The_IPO highlights role of #patents in supporting innovation” (here’s that buzzword again, “innovation”).

=> our rebuttal | ↺ wrote

The meeting, based on the above summary, was the usual UPC lobbying. For Dennehey too to attend and agree to a photo op with Requena, Lutz and Battistelli bodes badly for his reputation; some EPO staff actually liked him and trusted him because he was willing to listen to criticisms of Battistelli and sometimes voted against Battistelli’s proposals [1, 2]. █

=> 1 | 2

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.

Proxy Information
Original URL
gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2018/03/27/uk-ipo-lobbying-by-team-battistelli
Status Code
Success (20)
Meta
text/gemini;lang=en-GB
Capsule Response Time
331.007895 milliseconds
Gemini-to-HTML Time
2.393516 milliseconds

This content has been proxied by September (ba2dc).