THIS is the first part of a rather long series which will last as long as the misinformation persists. It can take a long time to complete as we expect disinformation, misinformation, FUD and outright lies to continue for days, weeks if not months to come. COVID-19? Not a problem. Team UPC probably moans a lot more about UPC than it does about dead strangers (unknown to them). A lot of Team UPC is British, Dutch and German, not Spanish or Italian (two languages that are maliciously excluded by the UPCA).
"We still have a number of drafts in the pipeline, so kindly stay tuned."This will be an honest breakdown of what we found after hours of researching what was posted, who it was posted by and so on. The patterns say a lot about what goes on, who's bribing who, who speaks for which company (the media is not independent) and so forth.
The "astroturfers are already engaged on spinning against the victory," says this new summary, sent to us this morning by a reader. "Those that wish to continue to break the law see a lot of money on the table. The EPO has been illegally granting software patents in recent years..."
Yes, all those software patents being granted in Europe would typically be tossed out by patent courts everywhere in the continent and its islands. We wrote a great deal about that.
Notice who's amazingly quiet about the whole thing! Not a single word from the European Patent Office (EPO) about this decision regarding the UPC. When they don't lie it's because they say nothing at all.
"Notice who's amazingly quiet about the whole thing! Not a single word from the European Patent Office..."We've seen nothing from the President of the Office or even the Vice Presidents. One of them, who has a Twitter account, is active only in the sense that he posts Coronavirus stuff. But never a single mention of the decision. Anywhere!
Isn't that transparency in its finest form?
One thing we did see the EPO saying that day was this tweet: "Our colleague Azzurra talks about her job as a #patent examiner in the field of computers....
Software patents reduced to... "computers"?
As we noted the other day, in relation to so-called 'results' for 2019, the EPO uses increasingly vague and broad terms for patents on algorithms. "CII" is becoming a bunch of buzzwords or a whole 'discipline' like "digital" or "tech".
"Software patents reduced to... "computers"?""What did you get a patent on, Bob?"
Bob says "tech"...
Or Bob says, "something digital..."
Lovely!
Anyway, here's what the summary from SN said last night:
The Fed€er€al Con€sti€tu€tion€al Court of Germany (FCC) has delivered a decisive win for software users and developers around Europe. In a recently-published court decision, 2 BvR 739/17 (in German) from February, it has declared that the Act of Approval to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPC) is void. The Unified Patent Court has been widely considered to be a shell for bringing software patents into Europe through the side door, in violation of international treaties which prohibit by name patents on programs for computers.
The Act of Approval to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court ("the Act of Approval") to confer sovereign powers on the Unified Patent Court is void. In its outcome, it amends the Constitution in substantive terms, though it has not been approved by the Bundestag with the required two-thirds majority. This is what the Second Senate of the Federal Constitutional Court decided on a constitutional complaint in an order published today. In its reasoning, the Senate stated that, in order to safeguard their right to influence the process of European integration by democratic means, this, in principle, also entails the right of citizens that sovereign powers be conferred only in the ways provided for by the Basic Law. An act of approval to an international treaty that has been adopted in violation thereof cannot provide democratic legitimation for the exercise of public authority by the EU or any other international institution supplementary to or otherwise closely tied to the EU.
Once more for emphasis, software is protected by copyright law and that governs distribution. Patents govern usage and function, regardless of origin. So had the EPC gone through and forced software patents into Europe, neither clean room nor independent implementations would have protected either end-users, software-using businesses, or developers.
It is predicted that the European Patent Office (EPO) which, despite the name is outside the jurisdiction of the European Union, and which has long been a proponent of injecting software patents into the European market, will bemoan this decisive win for business and research. Their astroturfers are already engaged on spinning against the victory: Those that wish to continue to break the law see a lot of money on the table. The EPO has been illegally granting software patents in recent years in direct violation of the European Patent Convention of 1973, also known as the Convention on the Grant of European Patents of 5 October 1973. The EPC explicity prohibits granting of patents on many things including but not limited to scientific theories, mathematical methods, aesthetic creations, schemes, rules and methods for performing mental acts, playing games or doing business, and programs for computers.
"In the next part we'll show how incredibly disconnected from reality Team UPC is and how corrupt media has become (it's in the pockets of Team UPC if not directly controlled by it)."Then came another joke: "Software patents do solve problems. For example, the problem of how to make money if you lack the ability to actually create something. A solution software patents offer to this problem is known as patent trolling."
Geeks have a sense of humour, unlike many litigators.
"That is not a bug, that's a feature," said a geek-type joke. "No, really! Nothing to be solved there."
In the next part we'll show how incredibly disconnected from reality Team UPC is and how corrupt media has become (it's in the pockets of Team UPC if not directly controlled by it). ⬆