-- Leo's gemini proxy
-- Connecting to gemini.techrights.org:1965...
-- Connected
-- Sending request
-- Meta line: 20 text/gemini;lang=en-GB
Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 10:26 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
UPC is dead, but those who spent years promoting it just don’t want to see it (or anyone else to see it)
Summary: The lobby for UPC continues to behave as though the UPC will be a reality “real soon now!” (maintaining an illusion of momentum) even though the reality is rather grim as Britain prepares to exit the EU
THE prevalence and frequency of lies emanating/coming from the EPO (Team Battistelli) and from Team UPC is verging the unimaginable*. For those who still think that the UPC is just around the corner, read the following recent series of articles:
The UPC Scam Part I: EPO-Bribed Media Outlets Lie to Brits (and to Europeans) About the UPCThe UPC Scam Part II: The Patent Echo Chamber at Work, Prematurely Congratulating Itself in Its ‘News’ SitesThe UPC Scam Part III: The “Patent Mafia”The UPC Scam Part IV: Bumps Along the Road for UPC, With or Without the UK and BrexitThe UPC Scam Part V: Unitary Patent Regime a Fantasy of Patent TrollsThe UPC Scam Part VI: The Real Story Which People Missed Due to Puff Pieces Seeded by Battistelli-Bribed Media is That UPC Technically Cannot Come to the UKThe UPC Scam Part VII: A Fine Mess in the Making, as Nothing Can be Made of It Amid/After BrexitMemo “Deliberately Leaked to Cover up the UPC” With Its Many Associated Issues Amid BrexitIgnore the Bristows UPC Echo Chamber, the UPC is Not HappeningAnother New Book, This Time From Dr Luke McDonagh, Chronicles the Demise of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Agreement
Unlike Battistelli, Team UPC, etc. we have no vested interest (let alone financial interest) besides the truth. A good analogy here would be the “WoMD” claims about Iraq. Some of these people know they are lying through their teeth (unless they actually believe their own lies), but there’s so much money at stake, so they cannot help themselves.
Germany, based on this one patent law firm, wants UPC and patent litigation to be managed around Germany, but with Brexit here in the UK the UPC is essentially in a deadlock. Here is what the firm said:
> Yesterday the draft by the German Federal Government for the implementation of the UPC Agreement was published. In this draft the Federal Government gives some statements on the costs and expected case number. The German Federal Government will invest the one-time sum of €1 million for starting the Central Division in Munich and expects a further €450,000.00 of yearly operational costs. Starting the four Local Divisions is expected to cost about €2 million and additional yearly operational costs of €900,000.00.
An article by Robert Smyth and Todd B. Buck of Morgan Lewis also entertains the UPC right now, in spite of the obvious issues due to Brexit. There were also many comments about it in IP Kat this week and last week, clustered around the usual Bristows UPC propaganda that is so habitually posted in IP Kat these days (the site is used by Bristow for propaganda purposes because nobody reads news from Bristows’ own site). Brexit has effectively made the UPC impossible (for the UK at least, if not all of Europe), but the fantasy lives on and Bristows staff writes:
> Yesterday, the UK’s deputy permanent representative to the EU, Shan Morgan, signed the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities of the Unified Patent Court. The Protocol is necessary for the UPC and its judges to carry out their activities. The UK was the final remaining compulsory signatory to the Protocol to sign. The others – France, Germany and Luxembourg – signed the Protocol on 29 June 2016 (soon after the referendum). The UK still needs to pass national legislation to implement the Protocol before it can ratify. This will be done by way of a statutory instrument (SI). The UK’s signature of the Protocol will be recorded on the Council’s website shortly.
Just some words on a Web site (again) won’t remove the obvious legal barriers, not to mention the public backlash that would ensue. Ordinary businesses do not want the UPC; parasitic firms like Bristows do. Bristows is clearly in the propaganda business, not just the patent business. This distortion of facts does the firm no favours. █ ______* Speaking of EPO lies, see this new EPO tweet linking to an article with sentences like “there were roughly 250 patent applications per 100,000 people” and conflating it with innovation/invention. Only a fool or a liar like the EPO’s PR department would use number of patents (expensive for people in poorer countries) as a measure/yardstick for inventiveness.
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
----------
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
-- Response ended
-- Page fetched on Sat Jun 1 23:19:23 2024