● 12.10.21

Summary: Today — or tonight — we finally resume our long series which investigates National Patent Offices (NPOs) that voted on illegal proposals over the past decade or so

In the earlier parts of this series the focus was on the 28 delegations that voted in favour of Battistelli’s “Strike Regulations”.

In this part, we turn our attention to the small number of delegations that withheld their support from the manifestly unlawful proposal submitted to the Administrative Council by the EPO President for adoption in June 2013.

↺ EPO

“It does happen on occasions that votes are cast against a proposal from the Office President but it’s a relatively rare occurrence. The more usual course of action for delegates who have reservations about a proposal is to abstain.”

In the “Bizarro” world of EPOnia, the national delegates on the organisation’s governing body are remarkably slow to vote against measures proposed by the EPO President, no matter how flawed and misguided these may be. This is apparently due to the obscure unwritten rules of “diplomatic protocol” which determine how business is conducted in international intergovernmental organisations like the EPO.

↺ “Bizarro” world

“…not a single delegation actually had sufficient integrity and moral courage to vote against Battistelli’s “Strike Regulations”.”

It does happen on occasions that votes are cast against a proposal from the Office President but it’s a relatively rare occurrence. The more usual course of action for delegates who have reservations about a proposal is to abstain.

An abstention is a mild expression of disapproval. Basically, it’s intended to signal that a delegation is unhappy with a proposal but doesn’t want to rock the boat too much.

As we already noted, not a single delegation actually had sufficient integrity and moral courage to vote against Battistelli’s “Strike Regulations”.

However, a total of seven delegations withheld their support by abstaining, namely: Belgium, Italy, Norway, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden.

“In the next part we will begin with the delegation representing Belgium, the only one of the Benelux states that refrained from endorsing Battistelli’s liberticidal proposal.”

Because Article 35 (4) of the European Patent Convention specifies that abstentions “shall not be considered as votes”, Battistelli could claim quite truthfully that his patently unlawful “Strike Regulations” had been endorsed "unanimously" by the Administrative Council.

endorsed "unanimously"

In the upcoming parts we will take a closer look at the delegations that withheld their support from Battistelli’s “Strike Regulations”. In the next part we will begin with the delegation representing Belgium, the only one of the Benelux states that refrained from endorsing Battistelli’s liberticidal proposal. █

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

Permalink > Image: Mail

Send this to a friend

Permalink

↺ Send this to a friend

----------

Techrights

➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.