-- Leo's gemini proxy
-- Connecting to gemini.techrights.org:1965...
-- Connected
-- Sending request
-- Meta line: 20 text/gemini;lang=en-GB
Posted in Europe, Patents at 2:16 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Video download link
http://techrights.org/videos/eba-club-med.webm
Summary: We’re working on another phase of coverage about G 1/21 — a case that serves to demonstrate what a “Giftküche” (poison kitchen) this Swedish chef has been running for nearly half a decade (with his term proactively or prematurely extended for another half a decade)
THIS afternoon we released an important article about the latest developments in the high-profile Enlarged Board of Appeal (of the EPO) referral case G 1/21.
“We don’t mind a deep crisis at the EPO if such a crisis will eventually restore a sense of justice and lawfulness at the EPO.”The decision has so much at stake; it’s about more than just patents. For us in Techrights there are many aspects to discuss aside from patents (privacy, outsourcing, access to justice, monopolies and so on), so we intend to spend the rest of this month debating the situation. It has serious ramifications for legal systems outside the domain of patents and it also impacts schools/universities (education).
As hinted at the start and the end of the video (ended up a lot longer than anticipated; it was not scripted in any way), there’s a lot of coverage impending. Techrights will be writing a lot more about G 1/21 in the coming days and weeks. The outcome, we can hope, is that partiality of these panels will be affirmed and accordingly tackled by the asleep-at-the-wheel EPO Administrative Council. Failing that, maybe the German FCC (Federal Constitutional Court) will get involved yet again. We don’t mind a deep crisis at the EPO if such a crisis will eventually restore a sense of justice and lawfulness at the EPO. Examiners aren’t machines; laws aren’t mere ‘recommendations’, either.
As the video notes, the EPO is now engaging in censorship against stakeholders, not just bloggers and media. █
“What really worries me is that the courts might choose a muddled half-measure—by approving an interpretation of “indecent” that permits the doctor program or a statement of the decency rules, but prohibits some of the books that any child can browse through in the public library. Over the years, as the Internet replaces the public library, some of our freedom of speech will be lost.”
–Richard Stallman, 1996
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink > Image: Mail
Send this to a friend
----------
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
-- Response ended
-- Page fetched on Wed May 8 18:29:04 2024