The EPO's Vision and Reality (I)

Thanks Thorsten for your always enlightening blogs. I am looking forward to the next issues. One thing seems however sure, is that all what the EPO and the people at his helm claim to be wonderful is abundantly contradicted by hard facts. Just one thing: the differed examination which is thought off, has nothing to do with listening to the users. It has more to do with the fact that in some technical areas filings are going down so that the cupboards will be empty much quicker than expected in view of the tremendous production pressure. The same reason is behind the 5 years contracts for examiners. But this mere thought shows that the people coming up with such ideas do not have the faintest idea of what the examiner work entails. The EPO has been degraded to a play pen for would be managers. In the real world, they would have been fired a long time ago. There is no vision, just manoeuvring in order to show that administration schools are there for something, and if one measure goes to far, then the rudder is thrown to the other side in the hope that it will not end in a catastrophe. Nothing against waking up the EPO from its sleeping trot, but not in the way it has been done since 2010. Treating people as they have been treated since 2010 is a disgrace. At least it is requested that the AC plays the role it has been set up for, and that the tail stops wagging the dog. Immunity does not mean impunity, and I hope that something will be done, so that at least the ECHR applies to the staff of the EPO. Techrigts: while you request others to respect the rule of law, you take great deal of not doing so yourself. You did not respect my wish not to use my comments even by a mere link. People in glass houses should not throw stones. So fingers off in whichever way you may think of using my comment.

Bravo Thorsten. I await with interest and attention, for you to "take the measure" of EPO management. Perhaps it was at the ENA, that trainee mandarins were first taught that you can make an omelette only if, first, you break a few eggs. Or dismiss a few key employees pour encouragez les autres. Of course, like all managements, that at the EPO loves the metrics, can count how many omelettes it churned out last year, with how few employees, and so measure how much more increasingly "efficient" are the services it delivers to the world. But for EPO management, that's all that counts, isn't it? How shall it measure whether the "quality" of its omelettes is rising or falling. What managers can't measure doesn't come within their field of "vision", regardless how many platitudes they churn out, when telling us on their website what is their "mission" in life. In the end though, Thorsten, it's only patents, isn't it? Lifting our eyes and looking outside our professional field, the crisis within the UK National Health Service is much more serious. Patients are dying on trolleys in corridors or in ambulances queuing outside the A&E reception area. NHS managers will be proud to tell you how "all the indicators" show that the Service is much more "efficient", these days. But efficiency isn't everything. Even as NHS professional staff and helpers are as dedicated and expert as ever (ever more so, in my experience), the precious goodwill accumulated over more than half a century, that has made the NHS what it is today is being shamelessly (perhaps even deliberately) squandered by the politicians in charge, in league with their sponsors, the circling corporate vultures, waiting to take everything out of State ownership. Thorsten, what do you think? Does anybody of substance out there in the great wide world actually care, whether EPO-produced omelettes are any good? Does anyone care whether any esprit de corps is left at the EPO these days? Or is EPO management just mouthing platitudes?

“trust, transparency, fairness and mutual respect”. Unbelievable. Thank you Mr Bausch. Looking forward to read your next contributions. Although it will be rather difficult for someone of the outer world to understand what is happening right now at the EPO. You have no idea, I am afraid. Next month the Administrative Council will have to decide on one of the most destructive amendments of our service regulations. Forget the five years contracts. If they vote yes, the president will be authorised to dismiss anyone at the EPO, “should his/her services be not needed” anymore. He will have absolute power on our lives. So much for trust, transparency, fairness and mutual respect.

You should also keep in mind that any comments with respect to the vision make only sense if you compare the EPO to other patent offices and not only to the state you wish it had in a perfect world.

It is very easy to understand what the EPO means these days: take any slogan and consider it means exactly the opposite of what is written. For example, the slogan about "Expert, well-supported and motivated staff" while it is clear that the staff is not well trained, has little support and is demotivated. I'll leave the other bullet points as an exercise to the reader. BTW: the idea that slogans mean exactly the opposite of truth is a feature of all systems where governance is failing and not only in the EPO. It happens in exactly the same way and for the same reasons in all dictatorships and is a central theme in Orwell's 1984 where "newspeak" calls the Ministry responsible for perpetual war the "Ministry of peace", etc... It happens when the executive does not need to follow the Rule of Law because of lack of check and balances. It is a symptom of a failing governance. Therefore, the real problem with the EPO is governance. The President of the EPO is outside of all legislative control and has worked the past years to systematically undermine and sabotage whatever checks and balances were in place. The problem will not disappear with a new president, as it is in the system and not in the person.