Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by Fnord666 on Saturday July 25 2020, @05:13PM   Printer-friendly
from the UPC-seal-of-approval dept.

brexit means brexit

UK formally abandons Europe's Unified Patent Court, Germany plans to move forward nevertheless:

The UK has formally ditched the Unified Patent Court (UPC), a project to create a single pan-European patent system that would fix the confusing mess of contradictory laws currently in place.

In a written statement in the House of Commons on Monday, the British undersecretary for science, research and innovation Amanda Solloway noted that: "Today, by means of a Note Verbale, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has withdrawn its ratification of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court."

The reason is, of course Brexit. "In view of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union, the United Kingdom no longer wishes to be a party to the Unified Patent Court system. Participating in a court that applies EU law and is bound by the CJEU would be inconsistent with the Government's aims of becoming an independent self-governing nation," she said.

[...] The whole idea of the UPC has been fought for over a decade now, making many its adherents borderline fanatical in making it a reality, even more so given frequent setbacks. In their unerring support, however, many seem willing to overlook or turn a blind eye to serious problems, not least of which is the mess that is the European Patent Office (EPO).

[...] The EPO is, of course, a big fan of the UPC and insists the UK leaving is a mere trifle to the larger European dream of a single patent system; a system that would give it significantly more power:

"These economic benefits for European companies and especially SMEs will not be affected by the announcement of the United Kingdom," it insisted in its submission to the German government.

"Even without the UK, the UP package will lead to significant simplification and cost reduction for the companies of the participating EU member states, which is also largely recognized by European companies."


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This discussion has been archived.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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 26 2020, @02:51PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 26 2020, @02:51PM (#1026582)

    To really compete with China, we need to lose a lot of overhead more than we need to cut pay. Real estate costs, legal overhead, business overhead, etc. Those solid mahogany conference tables in huge conference rooms in the middle of the most expensive real estate in the U.S. don't come cheap. Executives may need to go back to only making 300% more than the average pay, like they did in the '50s.

    This. The effect real estate becoming an investment vehicle for a rent seeking class has on entrepreneurship and wealth is disastrous. Framing the rise of kleptocratic financialization as a disaster of capitalism is an absurdity predominately understood by the productive (ie: wealth creating) members of society. Rent controls are an aberration but there's a strong argument to be made (on both sides of the political debate) for progressive taxation on reckless corporate profiteering from property. [nypost.com]