Is Bristows UPC Falsifying UK-IPO Quotes or Just Using Informal Words to Lobby for the Unitary Patent (UPC)?
Summary: The statement from the UK-IPO (the IPO) says nothing like what Bristows attributes to it, raising all sorts of questions about who is steering IPO policies nowadays
What Team UPC and Team Battistelli (EPO management) have in common is that they both lie. A lot! Bristows, for example, is perpetually lying about the stance/views of British people and it's doing this to enrich itself.
"Bristows, for example, is perpetually lying about the stance/views of British people to enrich itself."Why do they want the UPC so badly? Litigation. Lots and lots of it. Battistelli is like Trump with "See you in court!"
Battistelli is gradually demoting if not demolishing examination, meaning that more patents get granted (even bogus patents), and more litigation is to be expected (except against Battistelli, as he insists that he is immune from prosecution).
"Battistelli is gradually demoting if not demolishing examination, meaning that more patents get granted (even bogus patents), and more litigation is to be expected (except against Battistelli, as he insists that he is immune from prosecution)."The whole idea of patent examination (proper examination!) is, people can't just baselessly drag other people into court/out-of-court settlements. It requires some sort stamp approving some merit to one's claim/s; that's what patents are for. The UPC lobbyists, truly dishonest people (Team UPC) along with Battistelli, have a lot in common except cluelessness on science; they want litigation and money. Money! It has gotten so bad that, as we pointed out this morning, Team UPC 'took over' IP Kat and is now using that blog to help Battistelli. Meanwhile, few British firm are trying to sell their stinkin' services around the UPC, regardless of how much damage such a regime would cause to British businesses that actually produce something.
What really got on our nerves today is this Bristows "news" from Liz Cohen, which is promoted in Twitter as "UK confirms it is "fully on track" to meet UPC timetable" (with quote signs included).
"Are we seeing IPO entryism by Team UPC?"Where does that message come from? Where are those words from? The MIP spin? Those 4 words from unnamed "spokesperson"? Well, nobody said that in a site; there is no way to verify that it isn't just made up, conjured from memory, or even fabricated. Here, last week, we wrote about that in great detail and someone pointed out something similar in IP Kat comments, demanding an actual link to a statement or a source.
Are we seeing IPO entryism by Team UPC? Where does the quote come from? Is MIP (or Bristows) now spokesperson of IPO?
Well, let's inspect the original, as there is no source (not even a link) in the post from Bristows and the same goes for MIP, which also used a paywall. We need to be careful with anything that comes from Bristows as we already know their inclination to lie and distort. "Anyone can produce a diff to see what has been updated," Benjamin Henrion asked this afternoon. So we decided to take a look at what UK-IPO actually says.
The page, as per the Internet Archive, used to say (about patents post-Brexit):
The referendum result has no impact on UK businesses' ability to apply to the European Patent Office for patent protection.
It will remain possible to obtain patents from the EPO which apply in the UK. Existing European patents covering the UK are also unaffected. British exit from the EU will not affect the current European patent system as governed by the European Patent Convention (EPC).
The UK remains a Signatory State of the Unified Patent Court at present. We will continue to attend and participate in UPC meetings in that capacity. There will be no immediate changes.
After the inane remark from Lucy this became (mind last paragraph):
The UK remains a Signatory State of the Unified Patent Court at present. On 28 November, the UK government confirmed its intention to proceed with arrangements to ratify the Unified Patent Court.
"The IPO is keen to hear your views about these issues," it says. Well, it seems to be hearing only from lawyers, not those affected by their actions. And now this is their statement (updated yesterday):
The UK's exit from the EU will not affect the current European patent system, which is governed by the (non-EU) European Patent Convention. UK businesses can continue to apply to the European Patent Office for patent protection which will include the UK. Existing European patents covering the UK are also unaffected.
While the UK remains a full member of the EU, businesses can continue to apply for and be granted Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) for patented pharmaceutical and plant protection products using the current SPC system.
Existing UK SPCs granted under that system continue to be valid.
Once the UK leaves the EU, UK businesses will still be able to apply for SPCs in all remaining EU Member States under the existing system.
The government is exploring options for SPC protection in the UK after we leave the EU.
The UK remains a Signatory State of the Unified Patent Court at present. On 28 November, the UK government confirmed its intention to proceed with arrangements to ratify the Unified Patent Court Agreement.
Preparations for ratification are progressing and we expect to be ready to begin the period of provisional application in the spring.
The UK government has signed the Protocol on Provisional Application and is ready for that to commence to the timetable foreseen by the Preparatory Committee. It is planned that the UPC will open for business in December 2017.
The "Preparatory Committee" is just Team UPC, i.e. a bunch of greedy lobbyists like Bristows. Sounds like entryism and a legitimate cause for anger over scandal/mischief.
"Wittingly or not, Bristows has become an expert in lying, not an expert in UPC matters."Where does the quote "fully on track" come from? Who said it and when? Will Bristows retract that nonsense? Well, it's not as though Bristows has much of a reputation to guard. They're so desperate for the UPC, almost as if the firm would go bankrupt if the UPC does not come to the UK. Wittingly or not, Bristows has become an expert in lying, not an expert in UPC matters. Maybe the employees should change their career to lobbying, as some already have. █
Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink Send this to a friend
If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.
Pages that cross-reference this one
Expect No Progress Whatsoever on the Unified Patent Court (UPC) During the Summer and Likely Too Little Even in Fall
Bristows LLP is Still Trying to Attach Wings to the UPC and Distract From Serious (Likely Fatal) Barriers to It
Wouter Pors Under Fire for Lying or Manipulating in the Name of the Unitary Patent (UPC)
Unitary Patent (UPC) Will Start "Real Soon" Now… Said Team UPC For So Many Years
Even UPC Proponents, Paid by the EPO's PR Firm, Admit That UPC May Never Happen
Team UPC Still Twists and Fabricates Statements to Make It Seem Like Unitary Patent is Happening Soon
Bristows and IAM: Brits Who Lobby for Patent Trolls in Britain
Unified Patent Propaganda Courtesy of a Cabal of Firms That Constructed the UPC
Blog 'Takeovers' by Bristows and Then Censorship: Now This Firm Lies About the Unitary Patent (UPC) and Then Deletes Comments That Point Out the Errors
The European Patent Office Has Just Killed a Cat (or Skinned a 'Kat')
Bristows-Run IP Kat Continues to Spread Lies to Promote the Unitary Patent (UPC) and Advance the EPO Management's Agenda
No, Bristows, UPC Won't Happen Just Because You Mislead About It
Unitary Patent (UPC) is Stuck as the "British Are Hesitant in UPC Ratification," According to New Report
Lying Has Become the Norm When It Comes to the Unitary Patent (UPC)
The EPO's Management is Silencing Its Critics by Sheer Intimidation
IRC logs for Friday, January 17, 2020
Links for the day
IRC logs for Thursday, January 16, 2020
Microsoft is working hard to describe itself as the exact opposite of what it is and what it has been; 'Internet rot' helps a lot with this agenda, not to mention control of the media (the narrative)
The EPO continues to scatter invalid patents (IPs) that are European Patents (EPs) all over Europe and nobody can stop this, not even the judges of the EPO because they lack independence (by their very own admission)
The tactics of Team UPC aren't changing, only the shamelessness associated with these tactics is changing (because it looks like the end of days to them)
A reader's explanation of what Microsoft is trying to accomplish with its so-called 'embrace' and what steps will come next (how they manifest themselves)
IRC logs for Wednesday, January 15, 2020
The photo (or meeting) may mark the turning point of the Openwashing as-a-Standard Initiative (OSI), which less than a year earlier took a bucket of money from Microsoft
IRC logs for Tuesday, January 14, 2020
Unwittingly, people are being reminded of the 'special relationship' between Microsoft and the US Army (or government); The back doors or bug doors are still there, even 7 years after Edward Snowden's NSA leaks
The window is closing (and Windows/Vista 7 closing down); the chance to use machines that the users actually control is still there
Dishonesty for short-term financial gain (e.g. advertising money) will be a big loss in the long run. There's a reason why so many news sites perish and Datamation (where I wrote more than a decade ago) now throws away remnants of reputation by spreading a big lie from Microsoft.
The patent-granting extravaganza of what a reader and contributor of ours likes to call "Club Med" will result in great pain (not just for the Office but for Europe as a whole); pointing out who's to blame (the culprits) is an exercise in practicality
Team UPC's delusions continue to unmask UPC proponents (in 2020) as totally and entirely detached from reality
A reminder of Microsoft's universal "PC tax" ambitions — evidence that the company was never interested in 'playing nice' with anybody
The 'constitution' or the convention upon which the EPO is based (known as EPC) is routinely violated and nobody seems to care anymore; the EPO governs itself and conducts itself without as much as a fundamental legal text
Microsoft says it "loves Linux" and the Gates Foundation insists it "loves children" but the real underlying motivations have more to do with monopoly (Windows, Monsanto etc.) and nothing to do with "Linux" or "children" or whatever
The ridiculous lies about prospects of the Unified Patent Court are now spreading to EPO-friendly publishers — few powerful people to whom truth isn't valued as much as the customers (their subscribers and sponsors are law firms)
IRC logs for Monday, January 13, 2020
Thomas Grzybowski's explanation of why GitHub poses a risk to software freedom and what can be done about it
When GNU started it needed to clarify that it wasn't UNIX but a UNIX-like replacement for it; now it needs to argue, sometimes in vain, that calling GNU with Linux just "Linux" is factually wrong
We take our first glimpse at court documents and a preliminary look (overview) of what the case in question entailed, with updates on the record for almost 5 years
IRC logs for Sunday, January 12, 2020
New letter to the founder of GNU and the FSF; the authors "wish to have it published as an open letter as well."
Contact us (encrypted/PGP)
IRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time