[Patents] Re: Press release : Statement by Dr Roland Grossenbach

[Ram'on Garc'ia Fern'andez ramon@jl1.quim.ucm.es]

On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 11:29:36PM +0100, PILCH Hartmut wrote:
> >    The Conference has also created the legal basis for special agreements
> >    between the contracting states concerning the translation of European
> >    patents and the introduction of a central court system for the
> >    enforcement of European patents, issues which are also of importance
> >    for the Community patent proposed by the European Commission.
> 
> This again is very dangerous.
> There should be no European patent court, because such a patent court will
> not be subject to any constitution.   It will most likely be as
> unaccountable as the EPO's Technical Board of Appeal, which is the chief
> culprit of the patent-inflationary law-bending activities since 1986.
> Independence of national courts provides a check and balance against such
> law bending.


This reminds me the Courts of Appeals of the Federal Cirtuit (CAFC),
that was created in the US to increase patent power. Before the
creation of the CAFC, 75% of patents were rejected as invalid in
lawsuits. Now, 72% are accepted.

Ramon