This page permanently redirects to gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2020/12/03/epo-upc-fraudlinger/.

● 12.03.20

●● [Mail] Reader’s Comment on ‘Fraudlinger’

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 2:49 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Sent by E-mail today

Dear Techrights,

The UPC impact assessment has been facked since the beginning not to attract critics of the cost for SMEs.

In 2009, the Harhoff impact assessment was a “study” which did not address the cost of litigation, probably on purpose.

In 2012, when the UK requested an updated impact assessment at the signature of the UPC, Mdme Frohlinger said in a meeting that she did not want to redo another one, even though the structure of the court had been totally changed (self-financed by companies in 2012 vs financed by the EU in 2009), because it would “attract critics”. The “attract critics” means the European Commission tried to hide the high costs for SMEs since the beginning of the project. The CZ and PL procured studies made those countries walk away, and the European Commission are still pushing other countries to ratify the UPC while they know the net result of the UPC is negative for the economy.

This is fraud.

Margot Fröhlinger’s 2017 puff piece.

Summary: ‘Fraudlinger’ (as our reader calls Margot Fröhlinger) is knowingly lying to Europe, just like the EPO routinely does, both to workers and to the general public/journalists

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.