A Sincere Word of Solidarity to Patent Examiners at the EPO
A call for EPO leakers and whistleblowers
THE peculiar notion that patents make innovation (and the nebulous concept of discovery, which typically boils down to merely improving or mere extensions of what was done before) is classic reversal of cause and effect. EPO examiners are trained in science, so they know that the work comes first, then come the patents (market exclusivity or monopoly). There's the argument that without patents there would be no incentive to invest and thus no research; that too has been debunked many times before (many grants come from government, i.e. taxpayers, especially in areas like medical research which can be long and expensive/laborious). In the case of software patents, it would be hard to argue a developer with a keyboard needs a large lab and 10 years of clinical trials. It would be hard to argue that for software development investment would be needed either from government or the private sector. Many software innovations happen in some basement or garage or bedroom, not some lab. Those innovations aren't physical; they're a logic assemblage of computer instructions, improved and refined over time.
Over the past 2.5 months we wrote about the EPO every day. Without exception. We'll try to keep that up!
We know the examination division is grossly understaffed (we heard it from many people and it was brought up in the General Assembly). We know that António Campinos - like Benoît Battistelli before him - is pressuring examiners to fake "production" (usually via minions below him, e.g. the Chief Operating Officer). We also know there's a mental health crisis and pressure to overwork, resulting in fatigue, burnout, even mental breakdowns and physical wear (like ergonomic matters). We heard plenty of stories, sometimes in private. Many people basically destroyed their mind, their body, or both. All for an EPO salary. The "compensation" wasn't enough. Professional integrity or pride associated with that job (or institution) has eroded. People who once boasted about working in an organisation that requires about 3 university degrees and fluency in about 3 languages now observe that the recruitment bar was lowered a great deal, and salaries likewise. Retired examiners have barely seen their pensions keeping up with humongous inflation rates.
Solidarity is needed here. Sympathy is warranted too.
The EPO isn't run by scientists anymore. It's run for and by lawyers and politicians. It's only run for money. Even the so-called 'courts' (either internal tribunals or the illegal UPC) aren't there for justice but for business. Heck, litigation itself is Big Business. The examiners hand over munitions and fodder.
There is a wave of strikes sweeping across Europe at the moment (e.g. Finland, France, Germany). Our Daily Links are filled with examples - about half a dozen every day so far this month. Whether they will accomplish much - or not - remains to be seen, but at least the workers are trying. There's always a majority (i.e. more people) at the "bottom" than at the "top". It is a pyramid. And the distribution of power and wealth, absurdly, is an upside-down pyramid. This needs to change. The aforementioned people with 3 university degrees deserve more capital than a flunky like Campinos, who compensates for his insecurity complex by cursing at staff representatives.
The patent system, as it stands at the moment, empowers those at the top, not the stereotypical "sole inventor" seeking to protect himself or herself from Big Business. Just have a quick look at how much patent attorneys charge per hour compared to the daily salary of a mythical "sole inventor" in some country like Cyprus or Slovakia.
There's no simple way to correct the EPO and rectify the situation, but without a doubt dissent will be needed. That includes transparency. Whether willful or imposed (e.g. leakers and whistleblowers), transparency can improve the situation.
Techrights relies on brave actions of EPO insiders. We hope to facilitate transparency or act of a medium (of communication) between one insider and many colleagues at the EPO. If enough insiders found the courage to do this, colleagues would be better informed. We remind everyone that in nearly 18 years of this site's existence we never burned a source. I can be contacted with encryption, as always (since more than 20 years ago), and I will exercise caution to prioritise safety of sources. █