Re: [Patents] Amsterdam impressions

[Xavi Drudis Ferran <xdrudis@tinet.org>]

El Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 11:41:30PM +0200, PILCH Hartmut deia:
> > Someone pointed out that the GB patent numbers I supplied were to
> > published patent applications, not issued patents.  It would be
> > nice if the big world patent database WIPO maintains made it easier
> > to more quickly distinguish the two types of patents.
> 
> I also overlooked the difference between A1 and B1 two years ago, but
> I am quite surprised that this can still happen to someone like you.
> 

I'm a bit confused. Where is the WIPO database?. 

2 years ago I thought (after Probert's explanation) than there was
no way to tell a granted patent from an application in espacenet. 
I thought when you found a B1 you knew it was granted, but when 
you found an A1 it might be granted but only the (wider) A1 application 
stored in the database or it might be still in tramit, or rejected. 

This seems to be good for finding patent prior art, but not for 
knowing what's patented, and I thought Greg was refering to this obvious
shortcoming in the WIPO database (that I assumed would work like espacenet).

> 
> The EU Commission's urge to grab power from Munich is understandable and
> could even be considered legitimate.  But they are chosing the wrong
> allies.  Relying on oligarchies is very short sighted and can ruin the EU
> project.  A lot of legislative crap has already accumulated in Brussels
> and the currently waiting piece is a particularly crappy one.  I wonder
> how long the CEC can still afford this.  I don't think that their power
> base is so rock solid.
>

There's something I don't understand in all this story. How is the transfer 
of power going to happen?. The EPO won't lose a bit of power with the 
Community
Patent, for sure, since it is the EPO who grants and collects income from 
the Community Patent. It will simply help it grow (by lowering patent price
and increasing patent applications). 

So what's the deal?. A flying license in exchange for a fictious
transfer of power?  I believe it's simpler than that. Dismatling the
EPO and setting up a UE Patent Office under democratic control wold be
the sensible thing to do, specially when new member states enter the
UE that are not in the EPO (or else transforming the EPO in such an UE 
body with due supervision arrangements). What the Comission does not want is
admitting it has left the EPO run wild, and it built it without checks
and balanaces to begin with, and is going to great lengths to pretend 
there is no problem. The most convincing part from their story is the 
"unpolemical" nature of the directive. That's their main goal. Avoid 
polemics. 


-- 
Xavi Drudis Ferran
xdrudis@tinet.org