We're listening, say the EPO
The European Patent Office has launched a new web-based consultation platform for proposed changes to European patent law and practice, as announced here.
How it works
The EPO will publish on its website preliminary drafts of proposed amendments to European patent law and practice, such as major changes to the Implementing Regulations to the European Patent Convention (EPC), to the Rules relating to Fees or to examination practice.
 |
| Like a serval on the Serengeti, the EPO is listening intently |
The public will then be invited to submit comments on these drafts, and (we are assured) all responses will be analysed carefully. The EPO says that by opening up the process to the public, they aim to increase transparency, and, ultimately, enhance the usefulness of changes for users of the patent system.
You can be alerted to any new consultations by filling in a form, which you can access here. The EPO warns:
Please note that your submission may be subject to publication or disclosure. If you do not want your name, your submission or an extract of it to be made public or disclosed, please state this clearly in your submission. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.
What happens in this regard is not entirely clear, as the EPO does not specify which submissions will in fact be published or how they will decide on requests not to publish a submission, or indeed whether consideration will be given to submissions which have been submitted subject to a non-publication request to which the EPO does not want to adhere.
First consultation: failure to file a translation of priority document
The first consultation has already been launched: a proposed amendment of Rule 53(3) EPC, which runs until 20 January 2012. As it currently stands, Rule 53(3) authorises the EPO to invite the applicant to supply a translation of the priority document (if this is not in English, French or German) where the priority claim is relevant to patentability, but does not provide a sanction if the applicant does not supply the translation.
It is proposed to amend Rule 53(3) by adding the following sentence:
If a requested translation is not filed in due time, the right of priority for the European patent application or for the European patent shall be lost. The applicant for or proprietor of the European patent shall be informed accordingly.
Further processing will be available in the event that this sanction is applied. Let the EPO know what you think by visiting the consultation page.
The IPKat welcomes this new development, but wonders what happens if the responses are predominantly opposed to a future proposed change? The EPO's announcement is silent on what the process is following the closing of the consultation period.
Indeed, there was a great deal of opposition to the Rule 36 changes (setting a two year cut-off for filing divisionals) which, despite being clearly and indeed vociferously expressed, were largely ignored by the powers that be. Let's wait and see and in the meantime, the IPKat urges its readers to give the EPO the benefit of their expertise in the first of these consultations.
Merpel says: another way to get some real engagement from users would be to allow them to set the agenda by submitting their own proposals for rule changes? Maybe start with some implementing regulations to dictate how Article 123 is to be applied during examination? Would the EPO have any interest in rolling back the expansion of this seemingly innocuous prohibition on added subject-matter if that was the desire of the vast majority, one wonders? This provision has been transformed (by case law and not by any legislative change) into a restriction against perfectly sensible amendments which, in the early days, would not have even raised the eyebrow of even the most sceptical and stringent examiner? All other suggestions for subversive rule changes to merpel.mckitten@gmail.com (who may even publish the best ones, anonymously of course), or in the comments below.
