The Imperial Edition, which has been released in America and the UK in 2008 was awaited by various fans in pleasant anticipation. Not only because of the official uncut version, as well for the included Alternate Version. There were a lot of hopes this alternative version would contain material from the legendary ‘Cannes Cut’ and would correct some cutting mistakes from the unrated version which lacks continuity.
Let’s have a look at the details the alternate version does not contain. It has definitely nothing in common with the ‘Cannes Cut’ (allegedly 210 minutes). On the contrary, its running time is with its 153 minutes even shorter than the uncut version (156 minutes). It is also not a new version of the movie and contains more or less the known unrated version.
The reason why this alternate version is that important for true fans is shown in the detail. As we know the uncut version starts with a scene in the forest.
The AE shows this scene in its actual context. In addition, every hardcore material which has been inserted by Bob Guccione is missing and now the audience can see the softcore material by Tinto Brass. Because of this editing the ‘Imperial Bordello’ sequence seems to be completely different and the lesbian sequence of the two Penthouse girls is missing. These changes are the most obvious ones and it is quite strange that there is not much more of additional material available in the AE.
Considering the bonus material shows the reason: Most of the scenes are in a horrible condition, often just workprint quality or worse, often just from one camera angle, sometimes black and white or without sound but with massive damages. So what is he deal with this AE?
It is a fictive cut of the movie where Guccione and his cutters had ended their incompetence and decided that the movie has to have lot more of hardcore sexual intercourses. This means the catastrophic cut also influenced the AE massively. If someone didn’t notice yet, Gucciones cutting contained various test-takes and weird camera angles as well as many scenes which have been set to wrong positions. Scenes which have been positioned in a wrong way.: When Caligula meets Marco and the doctor of Tiberius, a lot of torture and punishing scenes were cut in between. These scenes actually belong to the sequence where Caligula is welcomed by Nerva in the mansion of Tiberius on Capri. There Caligula disappears behind a curtain and hears some noise of the torture.
The scene where Caligula awakes from a nightmare and is calmed down by Drusilla is the actual initial scene of the movie (as it is in the AE). The uncut uses this sequence right after Tiberius’ grotto which doesn’t make any sense because Drusilla didn’t come to Capri. Right before the birth of Caligula’s daughter one can see him playing with a rat and a black bird cages itself in a curtain. This scene is actually seen after the birth because one can see Caesonia and her child right beside him. Cut scenes: The scene with the killing machine the uncut version fades away after Caligula whispers something into Longinus ear and both start to laugh like maniacs.
The Italian re-cut ‘IO, Caligola’ shows why they are laughing: Caligula ordered that Proculus has to be pushed in front of the killing machine. As this happens Proculus tries to survive, overpowers a guardian and climbs up to the killing machine.
Caligula honours him right away as a Roman hero. This shows the following scene of the raping in the kitchen in a completely different light. After Caligula had to subscribe some laws he disappears in the uncut and just a comment can be heard that he will have some ‚fun’ with Proculus. It is missing how he climbs up some furniture and is talking to Longinus. He ponders about conquests and wars and orders food deliveries for the preparation of the sea fight.
Scenes which have been generated while cutting: While Caligula is in his bed because of severe illness, Caesonia walks onto the terrace and observes some noblemen who are planning the time after Caligula’s death. The dialog has been re-made and can be heard off-screen. The dialog between the men who wash themselves in the red mud has been re-made which can be seen at the different lip-movement. Missing scenes: Caligula replaces the heads of various statues with his own image.
Caligula destroys those heads later with a hammer and starts crying afterwards, Caesonia gives a massage to Caligula after he was elected to a god by the senate. Caligula smashes the head of a priest of Jupiter and claims to have spoken to Jupiter. Afterwards he robs the treasure hold of the temple. For his war costs Caligula collects donations and takes a bath in his money.
Caligula elects his horse to a consul. These facts are just little excerpts, there are lots of other scenes which are missing in the uncut version. Some sources claim that the kitchen scene was also more graphical and more brutal.
It is conspicuous that a lot of scenes from the last third of the movie are missing where Caligula’s antics gone wilder. The AE is a small step to a completely restaurated version of this legendary movie, but still lacks new aspects. Caligula maniacs are more likely in love with this AE while the uncut version with its hardcore scenes seems to be for newcomers.
Especially the bordello scene is much more boring in the AE. So this is he comparison of the Alternative Version and the Uncut Version, both are included in the Imperial Edition by Arrow Films. Runtime Uncut: 2:35:58 Runtime AE: 2:32:58 The uncut version offers more material in 15 scenes which has been extended or replaced, furthermore there are 20 contextual differences. All time notes are based on the uncut version.
As it is not described differently the pictures from the AE are on the left side and those pictures from the uncut version are on the right hand side. 01:01 After showing the text boards the uncut versions provides the viewer with the scene in the woods. Caligula and Drusilla are running around and keep cuddling with each other. This scene doesn’t have any context to the actual beginning of the movie: Caligula doesn’t wear a beard! Directly after this scene he has got a beard which is only cut off when Nerva dies. Uncut 154 Sec. Longer, pictures from the uncut version 05:43 When the intro fades away one can see Caligula who awakes from a nightmare.
He says that Tiberius wants to kill him. His sister Drusilla tries to calm him down and tells him he is the only heritage of Tiberius. Caligula gets out in panic and Drusilla laughs at him. Caligula calms down and jumps back on his bed.
Here the uncut starts. The beginning of this scene comes pretty much later in a completely illogical sequence. Longer, pictures from AE 18:52 While the uncut version shows a masturbating man, the AE shows a woman who is leading a goat to her pubic area. No time difference. AE Uncut 19:13 Here the uncut version shows a HC scene of a couple in cowgirl position (no pictures) and right after a SC shot with fellatio. The AE shows a woman who tries to do “something” with a swan. No time difference.
AE Uncut 26:24 The uncut version shows a scene which has been shown in the AE at 05:29 – Caligulas nightmare and the black bird. While on Capri this scene does not make any sense. Uncut 108 Sec. Longer 50:12 When Caligula finds both spiest he AE lacks another HC shot. Longer, pictures from the uncut version 55:46 The first close-up of the masturbating love slaves has been shortened in the AE so one can not see the right guy ejaculating (no pictures). Uncut 0,5 Sec.
Longer 55:50 A shot where the love slaves collect her semen in a bowl is missing in the AE (no pictures). Longer 59:02 When Caligula discharges Ennia with her bed the uncut fades to the royal terrace.
This fading is missing in the AE and one can not hear how Ennia is screaming for Caligula. The AE shows the forrest sequence which has been shown at the beginning of the uncut version. Beside several shots of Caligula and Drusilla one can also see the penthouse pets who find the sleeping shepherd and try to get close to his penis. The whole scene is very beautiful and just makes any sense in this context. Tiberius is dead, Marco has been replaced by harmless Caerea, Caligula and Drusilla don’t have to keep their love secret.
Longer, pictures from the AE 1:03:03 The uncut version shows several shots of the penthouse pets who are touching each other. The AE shows a top-down shot of the whole pool.
No time difference. AE Uncut 1:19:44 While Drusilla and Caesonia care Caligula the A lacks a zoom on the hole in the wall where two pets are watching the scenery. Uncut 10 Sec. Longer, pictures from the Uncut 1:20:01 Again the AE lacks another shot of the pets. Longer, pictures from the Uncut 1:20:22 Shortly after Caligulas kisses Ceasonia the uncut version shows the pets again.
Longer, pictures from the Uncut 1:20:40 Caesonia and Drusilla are kissing each other. Just the uncut version shows the next sequence with the pets. Uncut 34 Sec. Longer 1:21:16 Here the AE is cut in a strange way.
There is a jump-cut while Caligula lays his arm on Drusillas back. Longer 1:21:28 Again only the uncut versions shows the scene between the lesbians. Uncut 13 Sec.
Longer 1:21:41 The AE lacks a shot of Caligula, Caesonia and Drusilla. The next part of the lesbians is also missing.
Uncut 32 Sec. Longer 1:22:13 The uncut version lacks a scene where Caligula strokes Drusillas bottom. Longer, picture from AE 1:22:16 The next part of the leasbian scene can only be seen in the uncut version.
Uncut 35 Sec. Longer, pictures from the Uncut 1:22:51 The uncut shows a scene which was missing at 1:22:13.
Afterwards the great final of the pets can be seen. Uncut 114 Sec. Longer, pictures from the Uncut 2:07:43 The first HC shot from the „Imperial Bordello“ scene (fellatio between two men) was replaced with a shot of swinging women. No time difference. AE Uncut 2:09:21 The first shot of a female love slave which tries to overpower a dwarf is still available in the AE.
The uncut shows afterwards how the woman starts to please the dwarf with her mouth. The AE replaces this scene with more swinging women. No time difference. AE Uncut 2:10:09 The uncut shows a zoom of the blowjob.
The AE shows several shots of the orgy where the pets can be seen longer. No time difference. Pictures from the AE 2:10:54 Again a replacement of the blowjob with softer material. No time difference. Pictures from the AE 2:11:08 Again HC elements were replaced with SC material – this time a whole scene. No time difference.
AE Uncut 2:11:48 And again the AE replaces HC with SC. No time difference. AE Uncut 2:13:31 The uncut shows a couple while having a good time, the AE shows guests. No time difference. Picture from the AE 2:13:41 While the uncut version shows the couple in a reverse cowgirl position, the AE shows more guests. No time difference.
Biology of plants raven pdf rapidshare free. Eichhorn offers the most significant revision in the book's history. Evert and Susan E. Every topic has been updated with information from the most recent primary literature. 43 MB Format: PDF, ePub, Docs Download: 679 Read: 680 The eighth edition of the highly regarded botany textbook Raven Biology of Plants by Ray F. The chapters have been carefully reorganized, with extensive updating of the Diversity Section and the Angiosperm Plant Body Section.
AE Uncut 2:14:11 The blowjob shots from the uncut have been replaced with more swinging women. No time difference.
AE Uncut 2:15:37 When the soldiers start to march around the ship the uncut version has several scenes of blowjobs in between. The AE replaces these elements with the soldiers from a different angle. No time difference.
AE Uncut 2:15:54 Identical to the former shot. No time difference. Bild nur aus AE 2:16:19 Again an identically change. No time difference.
Picture from the AE 2:16:31 The blowjob has been replaced with a camera panning of the ship. No time difference. Bild nur aus AE 2:16:34 Identically. No time difference. Bild aus AE 2:16:42 Again a blowjob has been replaced with swinging girls.
Io Caligula Streaming Megaupload Shutter
No time difference. 2:16:47 Identically. No time difference.
2:16:50 The final of the blowjob, a second girl watches the scenery in a pleased manner. The AE shows again more swinging women. It seems that the imperial bordello scene lacks a second soundtrack so the AE also uses the uncut soundtrack. No time difference. AE Uncut 2:17:20 The riders can be seen a it earlier in the uncut version. Uncut 1,5 Sec.
Longer, picture from the Uncut.
Summary: The campaign to dethrone Michelle Lee and replace her with someone like Andrei Iancu is almost complete; the objective is to turn the USPTO (US patent office) into a trolls-friendly and PTAB-hostile place HE has been headless since Michelle Lee got bullied out (like Ms. Brimelow at the ). Her colleague was thereafter the PTO Director (in the interim). He too got mobbed/bullied at times, but not to the same degree.
The patent microcosm was eager to replace him with one of its own. “The patent microcosm was eager to replace him with one of its own.”Here is a reminder of. Will they ‘get’ that? Do not listen to Koch-funded ‘scholars’ like Adam Mossoff, who are (“Here’s just one of many examples of how small biz & individuals need stable & effective #IP protections, contrary to the rhetoric that IP hurts new creators, startups & small biz.”) because their aim is to prop up the litigation ‘business’ and patent trolls.
And speaking of which, Watchtroll IBM’s patent chief Manny Schecter (close to Watchtroll) in noting, based on, that “Senate Schedules Andrei Iancu Confirmation Vote for February 5″; Schecter: “Says here that the full Senate will take up confirmation of Andrei Iancu as US Patent & Trademark Office Director on Monday, February 5 (“EXECUTIVE CALENDAR”). These people would love to see a patent microcosm person like Iancu in charge of the PTO. They lobbied towards that. And lobbying being noted, watch what.
Trump never even mentioned patents, but Dennis Crouch already ‘helps’ by ‘interpolating’ and filling the ‘blanks’, so to speak. For example: “Although, high drug prices are, in many cases, premised upon exclusive rights granted by patents, the Administration has – thus far – not offered any indication that it will be breaking (or bending) pharma patent rights.” “These people would love to see a patent microcosm person like Iancu in charge of the PTO.”There are no “patent rights” because — a miconception just repeated again in (“Respect for Patent Rights” is very lawyer/liar talk). What these people generally hope for is a PTO Director who uses nonsensical terms like these. The last thing they want is a person like Lee, herself a former scientist with high qualifications.
A few hours ago (Thursday) Watchtroll was once again defending the Mohawk patent scam, quite frankly as usual. That scam relies on misconceptions such as patents being “property”. With anti-PTAB on their agenda, such overt misconceptions too are considered “OK”. Mitchell Feller, partner with Gottlieb, Rackman & Reisman, that “Native American tribes have the same types of sovereign immunity that states do. Absent a waiver, they too are immune from lawsuits asserting infringement of Federal patent, trademark, and copyright laws and subject to the same types of waiver considerations.” “What these people generally hope for is a PTO Director who uses nonsensical terms like these. The last thing they want is a person like Lee, herself a former scientist with high qualifications.”But those patents have nothing to do with tribes. It’s a major scam.
A Federal judge and several politicians have already called it that. “In September,” he continued, “2017, the large pharmaceutical company Allergan took steps to employ tribal immunity to protect its patents on the drug Restasis. Allergan assigned its patents to the St.
Regis Mohawk Tribe. The tribe then licensed the patents back for $13.5M and more than that amount in yearly royalties. Immediately afterwards, the Tribe argued that an IPR challenging those patents could not proceed because of tribal immunity. The motion has not been decided.” At the moment, as, this tribe is just being completely exploited by the patent microcosm as a vector for attacks on PTAB. For a large sum of money the tribe has basically disgraced its name/reputation.
What we have here isn’t US interests being served but the profits of few ultra-wealthy individuals being guarded so that they can deny access to medicine (e.g. “What the US needs is a technology-centric PTO; what it might soon get, however, is a legal ‘industry’-centric PTO, promising to further exacerbate things for the benefit of patent trolls (not technologists but litigators).”The notion that patent maximalism is somehow “great” for the US is a false one; it’s promoted by people who profit from litigation activity. Depending on what the highest court has to say (if anything) about design patents , , we may soon see. Apple uses patents against a Korean giant that now yields more chips than the US-based Intel (as per new reports). As sales of “iPhone” fall (many reports about this throughout this week) the patent case too seems to be falling apart. 2 days ago in Law.com: Apple will soon return to court to continue its legal battle with Samsung over Samsung’s infringement of Apple’s iPhone design. The latest chapter of this saga concerns the proper methodology for calculating damages that Samsung must pay to Apple for infringing Apple’s design patents.
As background to this case, a jury trial in the Northern District Court of California back in 2012 resulted in a verdict ordering Samsung to pay Apple more than $1 billion for willfully infringing Apple’s design patents. The damage calculation was based upon 35 U.S.C. 289 of the Patent Act. Section 289 includes a special profit-disgorgement provision for design infringement damages requiring that “Whoever during the term of a patent for a design sells or exposes for sale any article of manufacture to which such design or colorable imitation has been applied shall be liable to the owner to the extent of his total profit.” What the US needs is a technology-centric PTO; what it might soon get, however, is a legal ‘industry’-centric PTO, promising to further exacerbate things for the benefit of patent trolls (not technologists but litigators). The US Supreme Court has been pushing back against patent maximalism, but will it carry on? Summary: While patent extremists and patent maximalists salivate over the growth in number of US patents, it is becoming clear that many are farcical at best and HE SHEER NUMBER of -granted patents is insane (compare it to Europe for instance).
Many patent maximalists have been raving in recent days that there will soon be 9-digit long patent numbers (over 10 million in total). We don’t want to entertain this senseless pseudo-jingoism with links; they obviously think it’s some sort of “score” or a numbers “game”.
Patents are monopolies and granting them must therefore be a process requiring great care. Earlier today the EFF published January’s. Vera Ranieri argued it could “effectively become stupid patents for the entire world.” (the EFF ought to petition PTAB against such patents) From the post: For more than three years now, we’ve been highlighting weak patents in our Stupid Patent of the Month series. Often we highlight stupid patents that have recently been asserted, or ones that show how the U.S. Patent system is broken.
This month, we’re using a pretty silly patent in the U.S. To highlight that stupid U.S. Patents may soon—depending on the outcome of a current Supreme Court case—effectively become stupid patents for the entire world. Lenovo was granted U.S. 9,875,007 PDF this week.
The patent, entitled “Devices and Methods to Receive Input at a First Device and Present Output in Response on a Second Device Different from the First Device,” relates to presenting materials on different screens. We have been writing about some other awful patents. Many were equally bad. The Supreme Court, we still hope, will tackle design patents (more on that later tonight), having already tackled business methods and software patents in Alice. So far this week we have also seen reports about, Amazon, and so on. Apple has its share of worrying new patents as well and a day ago its patent ventures were mentioned in: Back in May, 2015, Apple filed a patent with the European Patent Office (EPO) covering a ‘multimedia-centric video headset’ – a device which, via a connected iPhone or iPad, was designed to provide users with a realistic viewing experience of live events.
Nearly three-years after it’s application was sent into the EPO, PatentlyApple reported that Apple was awarded a similar video display patent from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
We have already learned (but promised not to publish) stories regarding Apple’s rogue patents at the EPO. These get granted anyway (they should not). Patents were also mentioned this week in a few other domains, e.g. It’s very hard to exhaustively cover these kinds of things because in addition to thousands of legal cases (patents alone) every single year there are about twice as many threats and millions of patents. Related: He was talking about readers of Kluwer Patent Blog (because they don’t agree with him about UPC) Summary: Team UPC proudly shuts opposing views out of the debate and then brags about it, in order for a legislation that benefits patent trolls to slide through like a Trojan horse, without resistance from the ‘wrong’ people (like scientists and technologists) or a ‘nuisance’ like facts, constitutions, laws and so on HE distinguished lack of manners in management extends to its loud supporters from Team UPC. There’s barely even room for a rational debate anymore. Here we see Team UPC, after it increased censorship (it promotes patent trolls’ agenda while blocking critics): #NowWithReducedTrolling “There’s barely even room for a rational debate anymore.”.
This one particular individual is calling people whom he doesn’t agree with (because they threaten his financial interests as well as patent trolls’) “trolls”. The irony A fellow Team UPCer, Brian Cordery from Bristows, wrote while making these extraordinary claims about UPC: “UK is expected to be ready in February (see here) and the German parliament has passed a draft law (see here) with promulgation on hold due to the case pending in the German Federal Constitutional Court.” “It’s worth noting that Team UPC is also pushing SEP/FRAND (there’s a correlation there, especially among the motivations of their large clients).”Team UPC has basically just lied (yet again) about the situation/process in both Britain and Germany. Cordery makes the UPC sound so inevitable. So he is either deluded or intentionally lying (neither is particularly flattering a possibility). Team UPC has become like a demented person; no matter how many times you remind them of something obvious (facts), they ‘forget’ it, resort to their “alternative facts”, then claim innocence.
It’s pretty worrying to think that these people provide professional legal advice to firms and people, and charge for it at extortionate rates. It’s worth noting that Team UPC is also pushing SEP/FRAND (there’s a correlation there, especially among the motivations of their large clients). Managing IP, which pushes hard for the UPC, as recently as days ago (basically a hefty patent tax that helps exclude from the market small/new companies). It first wrote about (authored by Battistelli’s old friend James Nurton, who quotes the patent microcosm and not actual technologies impacted by SEP). From the outline: Both patent owners and implementers have welcomed the European Commission’s communication on standard essential patents. Does that mean it has successfully balanced competing interests or merely dodged the difficult questions?
James Nurton investigates A second article about SEP: The fourth US bench trial to determine a FRAND royalty is the first to use a top-down approach, and has parallels to the UK’s Unwired Planet decision. Managing IP also reports on a possible change in the Department of Justice’s approach to SEPS and analyses Huawei’s win over Samsung in China We are sadly seeing coverage about these matters (FRAND, SEP, UPC) mostly coming from people who stand to profit from these.
They’re not journalists but lawyers and/or their front groups. Watch what IAM has just: “It’s not just wicked foreigners that undermine US IP. Someone should tell the president that American patent owners are likely to have more success enforcing their rights in countries like Germany and China than they are at home. Twitter.com/commercegov/st China’s a big market for Apple. Talk of IP trade wars may make them a touch nervous down Cupertino way! Chinese mobile companies, on the other hand, have only a tiny footfall in the US. Twitter.com/iammagazine/s Top 10 smartphone sellers in China for 2017: 1.
Huawei (102 million) 2. Apple (51) 5. Xiaomi (51) 6.
Meizu (17) 7. Gionee (15) 8. Samsung (12) 9. Lephone (5) 10. Lenovo (2) Source: GfK chinadaily.com.cn/a/201801/31/WS” “Those who don’t agree with them are being framed as some sort of a “foreign plot” and there’s nothing they won’t do to demonise voices of reason”This was said in a slightly different context than SEP, but the message is the same. Those who don’t agree with them are being framed as some sort of a “foreign plot” and there’s nothing they won’t do to demonise voices of reason (they’ve already ). Be careful of Team UPC; they rarely if ever, they just argue for money (theirs).
So the UPC is a Dead Man Walking, Surely? Summary: A look at the sad state of justice for EPO workers and the effect of brain drain combined with work pressure on the quality of work AVING published about the EPO, we have enough evidence to show that the EPO has, especially in recent years, been treating its workforce like dirt. Staff must never be treated like dirt. Many of them feel it. Many are depressed. The EPO’s management, moreover, lies as a matter of routine and always gets away with it.
It now lies (by omission) about the latest ILOAT decisions. To quote a new comment: It should be remembered that the ILO-AT is an adminstarative sic tribunal and not a court of justice – it checks that the procedural aspects were correct but not that the judgement was just.
One point to note. The EPO publishes internally a summary of the ILO decisions. In the current round, some important decisions were, exceptionally, pronounced early in December while the remainder were pronounced last week. The summary by the EPO mentioned all the cases the management had won but none of the ones they lost. Additionally commentary was given which aimed to deter filings at the ILO by suggesting that it was a waste of time and wasted the tribunals time. Huszar basic dysrhythmias pdf viewer. That the decisions against management were not worthy of comment says it all since those decisions highlighted the corruption of internal justice where the accuser was also leading the prosecution case and advising those who sat in judgement.
One would have thought lessons could be learnt and at least some token gesture would be made to recognise managerial errors and promise to improve. Apparently not. One last point. The decisions which went against the judge and the union rep included decisions against intermediate steps (asking for but being refused return of confiscated personal property (a USB stick) and refusal to investigate harassment by the internal investigative unit). In both cases the tribunal considered that these were part of a procedure which was ongoing but not concluded (at that time). Interesting precedents which give carte blanche for abuse since if one wins a case, no matter how unlikely, there will be no opportunity to appeal and hence no justice for usually unallowable behaviour. There’s no justice for EPO workers, neither at the IAC nor ILO.
One begins to wonder if there’s patent justice at examination, oppositions, the Boards and the envisioned UPC (all of which Battistelli always controls or hopes to control). The perceptions of both justice and independence are farcical. Earlier this week it had received “an Intention to Grant notice in Europe,” alluding to the EPO., not to mention the CRISPR patent, should give them reason for pause. “Don’t get too excited,” I told them, as the EPO “receives many oppositions, makes lots of errors and thus you get fool’s gold” European Patents no longer come with the same value or level of legal certainty. They just don’t.
The examiners work faster and many of the experienced examiners have left or got sacked. It’s not a pretty picture. The so-called ‘reforms’ have been crazier than anything we’ve even seen at the, with patently ridiculous concepts such as Early Certainty (as if one can determine patentability before actually doing the full assessment/examination/prior art search). Finally, if not belatedly, large corporations are expressing concerns about the EPO’s approach.
![]() Io Caligula Streaming Megaupload Shutters
According to from a few hours ago: Following critisism sic from the industry, the European Patent Office has drafted a proposal to allow exemptions to its Early Certainty Initiative. Industry associations had pressed the EPO not to limit the time to grant a patent to 12 months arguing it would have detrimental effects on the life sciences sector. This is especially true for the life sciences sector who had voiced concerns over the past year that a 12-months examination time could block innovation and harm the whole sector. We have already seen prominent attorneys too expressing concerns about Early Certainty. What clients want is legal certainty, not “Early Certainty” — whatever that even means in practice. Weickmann & Weickmann PartmbB has just published titled “EPO revises examination guidelines: key aspects for applicants” in which it says that one “amendment is a way for the EPO to further streamline examination proceedings for applications. Therefore, it is expected that at least some examiners will readily make use of this new possibility.” Examiners aren’t flexible; their hands are tied by an authoritarian management and line managers who were selected and promoted based on loyalty rather than skills.
All they now care about is so-called ‘production’, as if the goal of a patent office is to grant as many patents as possible. As the EPO lowers patent quality, staff quality, and quality of procedures (recipe for disaster) we’re left wondering in what state — if any at all — the EPO will be a decade from now. Related: Summary: The EPO acting like a high-risk investment bank rather than a patent office has become enough of an issue that even Kluwer Patent Blog writes about it HE ‘s and utterly gross misuse of funds has long fascinated us. How can Battistelli get away with all this? “Money corrupts. EPO budget corrupts absolutely.
It can even buy votes and journalists in order to ensure they play along, in effect siding with the abuser.”We have already seen the EPO shelling out stakeholders’ money for illegal activities like obtrusive surveillance, plenty of bodyguards for Battistelli and his cronies, a secret little pub for Battistelli and his cronies, alleged ‘bribe’ money for votes, money for lawyers who financially destroy staff (e.g. In ILO), several law firms that legally bullied me on behalf of Team Battistelli, ‘soft’ bribes to media companies, ‘soft’ bribes to academia and so much more. The EPO is being treated like a bottomless money pit, mostly by Battistelli. It’s a new thing. He also (they give themselves generous ‘bonuses’). Stakeholders deserve to know all this.
It’s their money; they’re being milked. It’s about the EPO, as. Here’s how it starts: Recently, “New Investment Guidelines of the European Patent Office” (CA/F 18/17 Rev. 1) was published among the “Administrative Council documents” on the EPO web site. The Investment Guidelines relate to management of the treasury of the EPO and outline a more flexible approach for investing the funds in the treasury.
In particular, rather than being limited to fixed income bonds and income bearing securities, as in the replaced Guidelines (CA/F 11/15), the EPO will be allowed to invest according to a more flexible strategy. In principle, this sounds sensible. However, the Investment Guidelines include the following disconcerting text Read on. They’re being far too soft on the EPO, calling this “sensible” (even if just “in principle”). Much of what we’ve seen so far exceeds our expectations. Hours ago I even replied to the EPO (it “follows” me in Twitter — something that some of our readers find rather odd), after it had cited a ‘study’ from a large German news publisher whom Battistelli paid (again) some months ago.
No wonder German media is so docile if not silent regarding EPO scandals. Money corrupts. EPO budget corrupts absolutely. It can even buy votes and journalists in order to ensure they play along, in effect siding with the abuser.
Remember that in exactly 5 months from now the EPO will have a new President. He’s a former banker. He prefers not to talk about it.
Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |