Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Saturday November 28 2015, @01:18AM   Printer-friendly
from the fingering-a-corrupt-governmental-agency dept.

How many people out there have been subjected to censorship and/or self-censorship by European Patent Office aggression against the media?

Roy Schestowitz at TechRights reports

What the EPO did to us [1, 2, 3] last month and earlier this month (for a number of weeks) is important because it can help inform other sites of what EPO has been up to and how to stand up to it. We already have evidence to show that Team Battistelli is using the "chilling effect" against politicians, lawyers, bloggers, journalists, and even government delegates. How far will these sociopaths go?

[...] [We noticed that] EPO lawyers had lazily used a template and didn't even change the name when they sent a threatening letter. [...] This kind of evidence suggests that other such letters were sent to other publishers, demanding that they take down their articles about the EPO. [...] We already know that SUEPO [Staff Union of the European Patent Office] removed some links from its public site. EPO management put them under threat, hence FOSS Patents links and Heise links got removed. [...] Any information about what exactly happened back then would be greatly appreciated. There is a campaign of "chilling effect" against dissent and if nobody speaks out, as a French blogger did a few months ago, we wouldn't know just how widespread this campaign is.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @02:04AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @02:04AM (#268946)

    I'll try to relate what i understand so far, for some reason:
    A techright.org blogger criticized the EPO (European Patent Office) for something related to corruption and human rights:
    From http://techrights.org/2015/10/16/epo-bullying-critics/#post-85514 [techrights.org]
          "THE EPO wants to be publicly viewed as a professional European establishment that fosters innovation and creativity. It wants to attract businesses (it now refers to applicants as customers or clients, some of which it likes more than others). In reality, the EPO is a malicious organisation where Chinese standards for human rights and free speech hold true (and are actively enforced quite aggressively). The EPO is very fearful that the European public will find out the truth and then spread the truth. In other to hide the truth it is even eager to attack, intimidate, and impose mental stress on educated/informed members of the public. This makes the EPO an inherently nasty organisation residing at the very heart of Europe with total impunity; it’s on par with the Mafia, at least in some senses, and politicians are too afraid to intervene. Law enforcement is hardly even interested. The EPO is ruled by an elite and guarded by mega-corporations whom this elite obediently serves. This is institutional corruption."

    Apparently, in response to the criticism, the EPO called in the lawyers against the blogger for defamation or something. Apparently this type of behavior by the EPO has been directed at politicians and others as well.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +5  
       Informative=5, Total=5
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Saturday November 28 2015, @05:38AM

    by frojack (1554) on Saturday November 28 2015, @05:38AM (#269005) Journal

    You forgot the part where Techrights is pretty much a bomb thrower's blog.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Saturday November 28 2015, @12:42PM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday November 28 2015, @12:42PM (#269073) Journal

      You forgot the part where Techrights is pretty much a bomb thrower's blog.

      Why would that excuse suppression of speech? It just means that Techrights is an easy target since they won't get a lot of support from anyone else.

      • (Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday November 28 2015, @09:16PM

        by frojack (1554) on Saturday November 28 2015, @09:16PM (#269235) Journal

        Why would that excuse suppression of speech?

        Is there any evidence that Techrights speech has been suppressed? Because I sure can't see any.

        --
        No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
        • (Score: 2) by canopic jug on Sunday November 29 2015, @10:25AM

          by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Sunday November 29 2015, @10:25AM (#269398) Journal

          Is there any evidence that Techrights speech has been suppressed? Because I sure can't see any.

          Then look a few weeks back. An article alleging collusion between M$ and the European Patent Office (EPO) [soylentnews.org] was pulled. Presumably that is it in addition to other threatening e-mails Techrights has received. Several EPO related sites have also been pressured to stop linking to Techrights also. Roy has been getting a lot of material about the EPO scandals and writing it up. Apparently we are just seeing the tip of the iceberg since problems at the EPO [techrights.org] are being hidden.

          If for no other reason, it should matter to you because in contradiction to the European Patent Convention (EPC) of 1973, the EPO has been granting software patents and other invalid patents. As you recall, article 52, paragraph 2, excludes from software from patentability by name.

          --
          Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.