BLOG@IPJUR.COM

Earlier in May 2009 I had reported that Ms Brimelow is not going to apply for a second term in Office as President of the European Patent Office beyond her term ending in June 2010. After considerable woes, the Administrative Council (AC) of the European Patent Organisation (EPOrg) eventually managed to elect her successor by a 3/4 majority of votes on March 01, 2010.

On the very same day, Ms Alison Brimelow has held the second Annual Francis Gurry Lecture at the University of Melbourne, Australia.

The Francis Gurry Intellectual Property Lecture was established by Melbourne Law School, in conjunction with the Institute of Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys of Australia, in 2009. The lecture is named in honour of the Law School's distinguished alumnus, Dr Francis Gurry, Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).

Not aiming at a second term as President of EPO and preparing to retire from her office, it can be assumed that Ms Brimelow felt free to talk on certain issues in relation to her role with less restrictions and considerateness as usual. With other words, Ms Brimelow's presentation at Melbourne University might resemble something like a privileged peek behind the scenes of European patent politics. Hence, I would be inclined to recommend reading her presentation in full. Below is an excerpt giving some overview on the topics covered; however, it is not intended to replace the full text:

There are fresh reports on Twitter saying that Mr. Benoît Battistelli today has won a sufficient majority on the session of the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation (EPOrg) running the European Patent Office.

Mr Battistelli currently is Director General of France's Institut national de la propriété industrielle (INPI), and has served as Deputy Chairman of the EPO's Administrative Council. He represents France in the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation. As a graduate of the ENA he worked in public administration, followed by various functions in the Directorate General for Competition and Consumption, and in the Directorate of the Economy and Finance Ministry responsible for external economic relations, in particular with regard to trade with Italy, India and Turkey. As of 1997 he was regional director responsible for the external commerce of the Ile de France, and from 1999 was "chef de service" responsible for innovation and competitiveness, as well as industrial property rights in the Ministry for Economy and Finance. Before becoming Director of INPI he worked for the legal practice of Nicole Fontaine.

See the announcement on the Official EPO website here.

Meanwhile the EPO Central Staff Committee has pointed out that in their view EPO (and with it the staff, administration and the Administrative Council) have suffered as a result of an unfortunate tandem presidency of Mr Alain Pompidou and Ms Alison Brimelow. In particular, they argue that the Presidency of the EPO emerges discredited and weakened and the Office has strayed from the European Public Service spirit originally foreseen by its founding fathers, the social climate being extremely unsettled, which is ineffective and costly both in human and financial terms. Having in view the professional career of Mr. Battistelli indicating a strong attachement to Public Service, EPO Central Staff Committee express their hope that he will demonstrate the sorely missed capacity to listen and to respect, to present and communicate clearly his goals.

[UPDATE 2010-03-04] See also this report with details on the voting process in Managing IP

On July 23, 2009 I had reported that the European Patent Office (EPO) had concluded a Memorandum of Understanding with the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Inc Standards Association (IEEE-SA). In this context Mr Wim Van der Eijkof the EPO also had indicated that EPO was in talks with the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) to conclude similar agreements with them.

Now the Expert Panel for the Review of the European Standardisation System (EXPRESS) entrusted with its task by the EU Commission, 'Enterprise and Industry', has published a final report saying, inter alia,

It has always been difficult for contemporaries to recognise the peculiarities of their own epoch in which they live. Later on, after decades or centuries, it is much easier to analyse and explain things ex post in countless doctoral thesis and other scholar work. Nevertheless, those who here and now get at least some vague idea of what might be a distinguishing feature vis-a-vis history will surely enjoy the benefit of a more appropriate assessment of options and actions.

For example, in the 1960s the world saw the heydays of mechanical engineering, and in particular Germany had a strong reputation for construction and manufacturing of high quality machining tools. The automotive industries were booming, and a linear extrapolation of the near time expectations of those days to longer time scales resulted in utopian dreams of universal mechanical three-dimensional mobility by flying saucers available for everyone expected to become reality soon after the year 2000.

Nothing of that has happened. Instead, other big things are going on.

As it is well known to all stakeholders involved, the patent system in Europe is highly fragmented: On the one hand, there is a system of patents granted or registered by national patent offices throughout Europe. On the other hand, in parallel there has been set up a European Patent Office (EPO) having the power to grant patents for up to 36 Contracting States forming the European Patent Organisation (EPOrg) on the basis of the European Patent Convention (EPC). Court proceedings in nullification and infringement matters concerning patents granted by national Patent Offices are governed both by substantial and procedural laws of the respective nation. However, unfortunately also European patents as granted by EPO disintegrate at the applicant's discretion expressed by a system of designations and national validation procedures into a bundle of national patents governed by national law. According to Article 64 EPC, a European patent confers in each Contracting State in respect of which it is granted the same rights as would be conferred by a national patent granted in that State, and any infringement of a European patent is dealt with by national law. Concerning the patent lifespan after the lapse of the Opposition period, Article 138 EPC states that a European patent may be revoked with effect for a Contracting State only on one or more of the grounds listed in a fixed catalogue of reasons set on EPC level, but all procedural matters are left to national law.

On February 05, 2010, the General Secretariat of the EU Council has published Document 6164/10 titled “Commission communication 'Enhancing the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the internal market' - Revised proposal for a Council Resolution” replacing its predecessor published in Document 5808/10. It has been drawn up by the EU Presidency for discussion at the meeting of the Intellectual Property Attachés on 9 February 2010. As was to be expected, the EU Council is, inter alia, about to

A session of the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation (EPOrg) is going on from December 08-11, 2009.

Reports are coming in that yesterday another round of voting to determine the next EPO President has failed. According to Article 11 (1) EPC, the President of the European Patent Office shall be appointed by the Administrative Council. According to Article 35 (2) EPC, a majority of three-quarters of the votes of the Contracting States represented and voting is required therefor. There appears to be no exception which might lead to the election of a new President, bypassing the 75% quorum rule.

And it looks as if none of the candiates of the present tableau has managed to reach this quorum.

Meanwhile it has come to be known that Mr Jesper Kongstad has withdrawn as candidate for EPO president.

According to my knowledge, Mr Roland Grossenbacher (Switzerland), Director of the Eidgenössisches Institut für Geistiges Eigentum, and Mr Benoît Battistelli (France), Director General of the Institut National de la Propriété Industrielle, have been the frontrunners in the voting process but both failed to pass the quorum.

Now the Administrative council might re-open the application process for new candidates or retry to get a sufficient majority on the next session in 2010.

[UPDATE 2009-12-11] Ms Brimelow's term of Office extended by up to 6 months.

[UPDATE 2009-12-11] Serious dispute concerning transparency in today's session of EPOrg AC - IAM Blog

(Photo: (C) 2008 by ME°°'s photostream via Flickr under a CC-BY licence)