update on the content of the report and media strategy
Dear all
it seems that we now have a group of editors working on the report, which will discuss some drafts and content. Very good (see other mail).
Besides that I wanted to share with all of you my latest selection of 8 examples of plants (which will be part of the report). It tries to cover the most relevant categories of patent applications. 4 are on mutation breeding (sent around earlier, small changes added in red color) and 4 are on other examples.
Are we happy with this selection as starter?
Are we happy with the short description as used which somehow tries to follow a standard pattern (what is claimed? what is the invention? what is the technical topping? what is the problem? will it be granted?)
If we agree, we can finalise these examples in English and German and use them for starting the media work / public outreach, even if the report is not yet ready to go.
Media work / strategy:
as soon as we agreed our examples we would
* finalise the text (in at least German and English, maybe French, Danish and Portuguese) * prepare visuals for each example * start media communication (drafting press releases) and social media work.
By doing so, we could closely cooperate with the campaign work as going on in Austria to gain synergies and more public outreach.
In parallel I keep on working on the report (also adding the examples on animals) which will be needed as soon as the Enlarged Board publishes its decision. I will exchange further drafts with the group of editors.
So please till end of upcoming week let us know if the examples should be used for further campaign work.
Cheers
Christoph
Thanks Christoph for the overview. Looks like some good examples to me, with some including clear linkages to the Global South. With such a number of examples we can almost publish one each month for the remainder of this year. If possible, we could contact the ABS focal points in India and Mexico to check whether 1) they are aware of the patent application and 2) whether any ABS agreement is warranted according to their national ABS laws and 3) whether such agreements were indeed established with the applicant/user of the genetic material. Best regards,
Bram
From: Npos_2018 npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de On Behalf Of Christoph Then Sent: Sunday, 8 March 2020 11:21 To: npos_2018@testbiotech.de Subject: [Npos_2018] update on the content of the report and media strategy
Dear all
it seems that we now have a group of editors working on the report, which will discuss some drafts and content. Very good (see other mail).
Besides that I wanted to share with all of you my latest selection of 8 examples of plants (which will be part of the report). It tries to cover the most relevant categories of patent applications. 4 are on mutation breeding (sent around earlier, small changes added in red color) and 4 are on other examples.
Are we happy with this selection as starter?
Are we happy with the short description as used which somehow tries to follow a standard pattern (what is claimed? what is the invention? what is the technical topping? what is the problem? will it be granted?)
If we agree, we can finalise these examples in English and German and use them for starting the media work / public outreach, even if the report is not yet ready to go.
Media work / strategy:
as soon as we agreed our examples we would
* finalise the text (in at least German and English, maybe French, Danish and Portuguese) * prepare visuals for each example * start media communication (drafting press releases) and social media work.
By doing so, we could closely cooperate with the campaign work as going on in Austria to gain synergies and more public outreach.
In parallel I keep on working on the report (also adding the examples on animals) which will be needed as soon as the Enlarged Board publishes its decision. I will exchange further drafts with the group of editors.
So please till end of upcoming week let us know if the examples should be used for further campaign work.
Cheers
Christoph
Dear Christoph, dear all
I also believe that these are good examples helpful for our advocacy work.
To select the right cases I think it is crucial that they alrealdy have an EP number – so it is clear that the company intends to file at the EPO. If we use other cases our argument that they are using loopholes etc. might not work.
* Therefore I suggest to use patents with an EP A number (maybe with 1-2 exceptions).
Regarding the media work:
It’s not clear to me what is in the report and whats not.
I suggest to have all these examples in a first report which could be published before the decision by the Enlarged Board is published – the message would be: «8 reasons why the EPO needs to ban patents on conventional plants». Then in a second report, to be published right after the decision we focus on the political process and our political demands – while referring to the examples published in the first report.
Would be great, if you could give us an approx. date when we could give feedback to the draft report –
So we could include it in our personal planning.
Thanks and best wishes
François
Von: Npos_2018 npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de Im Auftrag von Bram de Jonge Gesendet: Montag, 9. März 2020 12:01 An: Christoph Then info@no-patents-on-seeds.org; npos_2018@testbiotech.de Betreff: Re: [Npos_2018] update on the content of the report and media strategy
Thanks Christoph for the overview.
Looks like some good examples to me, with some including clear linkages to the Global South.
With such a number of examples we can almost publish one each month for the remainder of this year.
If possible, we could contact the ABS focal points in India and Mexico to check whether 1) they are aware of the patent application and 2) whether any ABS agreement is warranted according to their national ABS laws and 3) whether such agreements were indeed established with the applicant/user of the genetic material.
Best regards,
Bram
From: Npos_2018 <npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de mailto:npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de > On Behalf Of Christoph Then Sent: Sunday, 8 March 2020 11:21 To: npos_2018@testbiotech.de mailto:npos_2018@testbiotech.de Subject: [Npos_2018] update on the content of the report and media strategy
Dear all
it seems that we now have a group of editors working on the report, which will discuss some drafts and content. Very good (see other mail).
Besides that I wanted to share with all of you my latest selection of 8 examples of plants (which will be part of the report). It tries to cover the most relevant categories of patent applications. 4 are on mutation breeding (sent around earlier, small changes added in red color) and 4 are on other examples.
Are we happy with this selection as starter?
Are we happy with the short description as used which somehow tries to follow a standard pattern (what is claimed? what is the invention? what is the technical topping? what is the problem? will it be granted?)
If we agree, we can finalise these examples in English and German and use them for starting the media work / public outreach, even if the report is not yet ready to go.
Media work / strategy:
as soon as we agreed our examples we would
* finalise the text (in at least German and English, maybe French, Danish and Portuguese) * prepare visuals for each example * start media communication (drafting press releases) and social media work.
By doing so, we could closely cooperate with the campaign work as going on in Austria to gain synergies and more public outreach.
In parallel I keep on working on the report (also adding the examples on animals) which will be needed as soon as the Enlarged Board publishes its decision. I will exchange further drafts with the group of editors.
So please till end of upcoming week let us know if the examples should be used for further campaign work.
Cheers
Christoph
Dear Francois,
Thanks a lot for your comments.
Regarding EP numbers: I do not think this will not work and I do not think this is necessary.
Many applications I selected are from 2019. I am looking for content and story telling potential, we expect most of them will be transferred to the EP phase anyway. We will explain this in the report.
on the media strategy I would like to have some more ideas from Arche, since they are running a campaign and are mostly interested in getting some material in time.
I do not know yet, when the first draft of the report will be available, I just have to keep working on it.
Cheers
Christoph
Am 09.03.20 um 18:12 schrieb francois.meienberg@prospecierara.ch:
Dear Christoph, dear all
I also believe that these are good *examples* helpful for our advocacy work.
To select the right cases I think it is crucial that they alrealdy have an EP number – so it is clear that the company intends to file at the EPO. If we use other cases our argument that they are using loopholes etc. might not work.
- Therefore I suggest to use patents with an EP A number (maybe with 1-2 exceptions).
*Regarding the media work: *
It’s not clear to me what is in the report and whats not.
I suggest to have all these examples in a first report which could be published before the decision by the Enlarged Board is published – the message would be: «8 reasons why the EPO needs to ban patents on conventional plants». Then in a second report, to be published right after the decision we focus on the political process and our political demands – while referring to the examples published in the first report.
Would be great, if you could give us an approx. date when we could give feedback to the draft report –
So we could include it in our personal planning.
Thanks and best wishes
François
*Von:*Npos_2018 npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de *Im Auftrag von *Bram de Jonge *Gesendet:* Montag, 9. März 2020 12:01 *An:* Christoph Then info@no-patents-on-seeds.org; npos_2018@testbiotech.de *Betreff:* Re: [Npos_2018] update on the content of the report and media strategy
Thanks Christoph for the overview.
Looks like some good examples to me, with some including clear linkages to the Global South.
With such a number of examples we can almost publish one each month for the remainder of this year.
If possible, we could contact the ABS focal points in India and Mexico to check whether 1) they are aware of the patent application and 2) whether any ABS agreement is warranted according to their national ABS laws and 3) whether such agreements were indeed established with the applicant/user of the genetic material.
Best regards,
Bram
*From:*Npos_2018 <npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de mailto:npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de> *On Behalf Of *Christoph Then *Sent:* Sunday, 8 March 2020 11:21 *To:* npos_2018@testbiotech.de mailto:npos_2018@testbiotech.de *Subject:* [Npos_2018] update on the content of the report and media strategy
Dear all
it seems that we now have a group of editors working on the report, which will discuss some drafts and content. Very good (see other mail).
Besides that I wanted to share with all of you my latest selection of 8 examples of plants (which will be part of the report). It tries to cover the most relevant categories of patent applications. 4 are on mutation breeding (sent around earlier, small changes added in red color) and 4 are on other examples.
Are we happy with this selection as starter?
Are we happy with the short description as used which somehow tries to follow a standard pattern (what is claimed? what is the invention? what is the technical topping? what is the problem? will it be granted?)
If we agree, we can finalise these examples in English and German and use them for starting the media work / public outreach, even if the report is not yet ready to go.
Media work / strategy:
as soon as we agreed our examples we would
- finalise the text (in at least German and English, maybe French, Danish and Portuguese)
- prepare visuals for each example
- start media communication (drafting press releases) and social media work.
By doing so, we could closely cooperate with the campaign work as going on in Austria to gain synergies and more public outreach.
In parallel I keep on working on the report (also adding the examples on animals) which will be needed as soon as the Enlarged Board publishes its decision. I will exchange further drafts with the group of editors.
So please till end of upcoming week let us know if the examples should be used for further campaign work.
Cheers
Christoph
Dear all,
I can support Christoph. You get EP numbers only about 15 month after the WO publication date, often also later. The earlier communication between EPO and applicant is not in the open documents (in the register). With interesting applications from 2019 we don't have theses numbers. We cannot know if some of the applications will be withdrawn. Most will get an EP number.
Cheers,
Ruth
Am 10.03.2020 um 12:16 schrieb Christoph Then:
Dear Francois,
Thanks a lot for your comments.
Regarding EP numbers: I do not think this will not work and I do not think this is necessary.
Many applications I selected are from 2019. I am looking for content and story telling potential, we expect most of them will be transferred to the EP phase anyway. We will explain this in the report.
on the media strategy I would like to have some more ideas from Arche, since they are running a campaign and are mostly interested in getting some material in time.
I do not know yet, when the first draft of the report will be available, I just have to keep working on it.
Cheers
Christoph
Am 09.03.20 um 18:12 schrieb francois.meienberg@prospecierara.ch:
Dear Christoph, dear all
I also believe that these are good *examples* helpful for our advocacy work.
To select the right cases I think it is crucial that they alrealdy have an EP number – so it is clear that the company intends to file at the EPO. If we use other cases our argument that they are using loopholes etc. might not work.
- Therefore I suggest to use patents with an EP A number (maybe with 1-2 exceptions).
*Regarding the media work: *
It’s not clear to me what is in the report and whats not.
I suggest to have all these examples in a first report which could be published before the decision by the Enlarged Board is published – the message would be: «8 reasons why the EPO needs to ban patents on conventional plants». Then in a second report, to be published right after the decision we focus on the political process and our political demands – while referring to the examples published in the first report.
Would be great, if you could give us an approx. date when we could give feedback to the draft report –
So we could include it in our personal planning.
Thanks and best wishes
François
*Von:*Npos_2018 npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de *Im Auftrag von *Bram de Jonge *Gesendet:* Montag, 9. März 2020 12:01 *An:* Christoph Then info@no-patents-on-seeds.org; npos_2018@testbiotech.de *Betreff:* Re: [Npos_2018] update on the content of the report and media strategy
Thanks Christoph for the overview.
Looks like some good examples to me, with some including clear linkages to the Global South.
With such a number of examples we can almost publish one each month for the remainder of this year.
If possible, we could contact the ABS focal points in India and Mexico to check whether 1) they are aware of the patent application and 2) whether any ABS agreement is warranted according to their national ABS laws and 3) whether such agreements were indeed established with the applicant/user of the genetic material.
Best regards,
Bram
*From:*Npos_2018 <npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de mailto:npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de> *On Behalf Of *Christoph Then *Sent:* Sunday, 8 March 2020 11:21 *To:* npos_2018@testbiotech.de mailto:npos_2018@testbiotech.de *Subject:* [Npos_2018] update on the content of the report and media strategy
Dear all
it seems that we now have a group of editors working on the report, which will discuss some drafts and content. Very good (see other mail).
Besides that I wanted to share with all of you my latest selection of 8 examples of plants (which will be part of the report). It tries to cover the most relevant categories of patent applications. 4 are on mutation breeding (sent around earlier, small changes added in red color) and 4 are on other examples.
Are we happy with this selection as starter?
Are we happy with the short description as used which somehow tries to follow a standard pattern (what is claimed? what is the invention? what is the technical topping? what is the problem? will it be granted?)
If we agree, we can finalise these examples in English and German and use them for starting the media work / public outreach, even if the report is not yet ready to go.
Media work / strategy:
as soon as we agreed our examples we would
- finalise the text (in at least German and English, maybe French, Danish and Portuguese)
- prepare visuals for each example
- start media communication (drafting press releases) and social media work.
By doing so, we could closely cooperate with the campaign work as going on in Austria to gain synergies and more public outreach.
In parallel I keep on working on the report (also adding the examples on animals) which will be needed as soon as the Enlarged Board publishes its decision. I will exchange further drafts with the group of editors.
So please till end of upcoming week let us know if the examples should be used for further campaign work.
Cheers
Christoph
Npos_2018 mailing list Npos_2018@testbiotech.de https://lists.testbiotech.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/npos_2018
Dear Christoph,
Following on from François‘ comments:
I understand the technical challenges in relation to the EP number, but the lack of an EP number does make the telling of this already complicated story more complicated. Can we at least check if the patents do already have an EP number? (If so this would influence my choice of which examples to use with the media.) If necessary, we can ask our intern to do the checks.
Regarding the media strategy:
We discussed here, and without the Admin Council meeting as a “hook” and the dominance of Corona, it is now very unlikely that we can interest in the patent issue before Easter. But if it – the “X examples why the EPO must stop patents on plants and animals” report – is ready by the end of next week, we would still give it a go (any later and too many journalists will be gone for the Easter holidays).
Can you confirm the plan is to split the report into two, with the political discussion in a separate report for after the decision? In that case it would be important that all the examples in the first report could still be granted if Rule 28(2) is confirmed (to keep the communication as simple as possible).
And a last point on the Admin Council:
Did you ask if there is any kind of virtual meeting or exchange in place of the physical meeting? We should think about alternative ways to get in touch with the country representatives instead of our event before the decision. We could send them the report and offer a (Corona appropriate) virtual meeting in early April to explain the issues from our point of view? Christoph I know you are on holiday but perhaps others of us could do the meetings (in reality it is unlikely to be very many anyway.)
Thanks Katherine
Von: Npos_2018 [mailto:npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de] Im Auftrag von Christoph Then Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. März 2020 12:17 An: francois.meienberg@prospecierara.ch; npos_2018@testbiotech.de Betreff: Re: [Npos_2018] update on the content of the report and media strategy
Dear Francois,
Thanks a lot for your comments.
Regarding EP numbers: I do not think this will not work and I do not think this is necessary.
Many applications I selected are from 2019. I am looking for content and story telling potential, we expect most of them will be transferred to the EP phase anyway. We will explain this in the report.
on the media strategy I would like to have some more ideas from Arche, since they are running a campaign and are mostly interested in getting some material in time.
I do not know yet, when the first draft of the report will be available, I just have to keep working on it.
Cheers
Christoph
Am 09.03.20 um 18:12 schrieb francois.meienberg@prospecierara.chmailto:francois.meienberg@prospecierara.ch: Dear Christoph, dear all
I also believe that these are good examples helpful for our advocacy work.
To select the right cases I think it is crucial that they alrealdy have an EP number – so it is clear that the company intends to file at the EPO. If we use other cases our argument that they are using loopholes etc. might not work. è Therefore I suggest to use patents with an EP A number (maybe with 1-2 exceptions).
Regarding the media work: It’s not clear to me what is in the report and whats not. I suggest to have all these examples in a first report which could be published before the decision by the Enlarged Board is published – the message would be: «8 reasons why the EPO needs to ban patents on conventional plants». Then in a second report, to be published right after the decision we focus on the political process and our political demands – while referring to the examples published in the first report.
Would be great, if you could give us an approx. date when we could give feedback to the draft report – So we could include it in our personal planning.
Thanks and best wishes François
Von: Npos_2018 npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.demailto:npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de Im Auftrag von Bram de Jonge Gesendet: Montag, 9. März 2020 12:01 An: Christoph Then info@no-patents-on-seeds.orgmailto:info@no-patents-on-seeds.org; npos_2018@testbiotech.demailto:npos_2018@testbiotech.de Betreff: Re: [Npos_2018] update on the content of the report and media strategy
Thanks Christoph for the overview. Looks like some good examples to me, with some including clear linkages to the Global South. With such a number of examples we can almost publish one each month for the remainder of this year. If possible, we could contact the ABS focal points in India and Mexico to check whether 1) they are aware of the patent application and 2) whether any ABS agreement is warranted according to their national ABS laws and 3) whether such agreements were indeed established with the applicant/user of the genetic material. Best regards,
Bram
From: Npos_2018 <npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.demailto:npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de> On Behalf Of Christoph Then Sent: Sunday, 8 March 2020 11:21 To: npos_2018@testbiotech.demailto:npos_2018@testbiotech.de Subject: [Npos_2018] update on the content of the report and media strategy
Dear all
it seems that we now have a group of editors working on the report, which will discuss some drafts and content. Very good (see other mail).
Besides that I wanted to share with all of you my latest selection of 8 examples of plants (which will be part of the report). It tries to cover the most relevant categories of patent applications. 4 are on mutation breeding (sent around earlier, small changes added in red color) and 4 are on other examples.
Are we happy with this selection as starter?
Are we happy with the short description as used which somehow tries to follow a standard pattern (what is claimed? what is the invention? what is the technical topping? what is the problem? will it be granted?)
If we agree, we can finalise these examples in English and German and use them for starting the media work / public outreach, even if the report is not yet ready to go.
Media work / strategy:
as soon as we agreed our examples we would
* finalise the text (in at least German and English, maybe French, Danish and Portuguese) * prepare visuals for each example * start media communication (drafting press releases) and social media work.
By doing so, we could closely cooperate with the campaign work as going on in Austria to gain synergies and more public outreach.
In parallel I keep on working on the report (also adding the examples on animals) which will be needed as soon as the Enlarged Board publishes its decision. I will exchange further drafts with the group of editors.
So please till end of upcoming week let us know if the examples should be used for further campaign work.
Cheers
Christoph
Dear Katherine
thanks a lot!
The EP numbers were checked by Ruth already and the number of patents was updated (five patents did not make it so far - see my powerpoint)
I doubt the report will be ready by end of next week. But my suggestion is - especially in Austria and Germany - to start with media releases on selected examples as soon as the Austrian campaign is ready to go. I would start for example with the Carlsberg patents saying our recent research found these examples and explain what it means and then take next examples or publish the whole report. It might be difficult, to run media releases for each of the example, but for sure we can run social media communication on each of them, especially if the prepare for some visuals. This social media campaign also would allow flexibility to react to the decision of the EBoA and choose our examples accordingly. There are also new cases (applications) from 2020 which can use to keep things going.
I would not suggest to physically split the report. But it should be made very clear within the report what the two different scenarios will mean. I suggest to have one report, similarly as the last ones, as short as possible, explaining the scenarios by the using the examples. but still giving the whole picture in a well readable way.
On the Admin Council: I asked them if there is any other possibility to meet, they answered so far, they did not make any further decisions when the meeting will be hold and how...
have a nice weekend!
Christoph
Am 12.03.20 um 10:20 schrieb ARCHE NOAH Katherine Dolan:
Dear Christoph,
Following on from François‘ comments:
I understand the technical challenges in relation to the EP number, but the lack of an EP number does make the telling of this already complicated story more complicated. Can we at least check if the patents do already have an EP number? (If so this would influence my choice of which examples to use with the media.) If necessary, we can ask our intern to do the checks.
Regarding the media strategy:
We discussed here, and without the Admin Council meeting as a “hook” and the dominance of Corona, it is now very unlikely that we can interest in the patent issue before Easter. But if it – the “X examples why the EPO must stop patents on plants and animals” report – is ready by the end of next week, we would still give it a go (any later and too many journalists will be gone for the Easter holidays).
Can you confirm the plan is to split the report into two, with the political discussion in a separate report for after the decision? In that case it would be important that all the examples in the first report could still be granted if Rule 28(2) is confirmed (to keep the communication as simple as possible).
And a last point on the Admin Council:
Did you ask if there is any kind of virtual meeting or exchange in place of the physical meeting? We should think about alternative ways to get in touch with the country representatives instead of our event before the decision. We could send them the report and offer a (Corona appropriate) virtual meeting in early April to explain the issues from our point of view? Christoph I know you are on holiday but perhaps others of us could do the meetings (in reality it is unlikely to be very many anyway.)
Thanks
Katherine
*Von:*Npos_2018 [mailto:npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de] *Im Auftrag von *Christoph Then *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 10. März 2020 12:17 *An:* francois.meienberg@prospecierara.ch; npos_2018@testbiotech.de *Betreff:* Re: [Npos_2018] update on the content of the report and media strategy
Dear Francois,
Thanks a lot for your comments.
Regarding EP numbers: I do not think this will not work and I do not think this is necessary.
Many applications I selected are from 2019. I am looking for content and story telling potential, we expect most of them will be transferred to the EP phase anyway. We will explain this in the report.
on the media strategy I would like to have some more ideas from Arche, since they are running a campaign and are mostly interested in getting some material in time.
I do not know yet, when the first draft of the report will be available, I just have to keep working on it.
Cheers
Christoph
Am 09.03.20 um 18:12 schrieb francois.meienberg@prospecierara.ch mailto:francois.meienberg@prospecierara.ch:
Dear Christoph, dear all I also believe that these are good *examples* helpful for our advocacy work. To select the right cases I think it is crucial that they alrealdy have an EP number – so it is clear that the company intends to file at the EPO. If we use other cases our argument that they are using loopholes etc. might not work. èTherefore I suggest to use patents with an EP A number (maybe with 1-2 exceptions). *Regarding the media work: * It’s not clear to me what is in the report and whats not. I suggest to have all these examples in a first report which could be published before the decision by the Enlarged Board is published – the message would be: «8 reasons why the EPO needs to ban patents on conventional plants». Then in a second report, to be published right after the decision we focus on the political process and our political demands – while referring to the examples published in the first report. Would be great, if you could give us an approx. date when we could give feedback to the draft report – So we could include it in our personal planning. Thanks and best wishes François *Von:*Npos_2018 <npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de> <mailto:npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de> *Im Auftrag von *Bram de Jonge *Gesendet:* Montag, 9. März 2020 12:01 *An:* Christoph Then <info@no-patents-on-seeds.org> <mailto:info@no-patents-on-seeds.org>; npos_2018@testbiotech.de <mailto:npos_2018@testbiotech.de> *Betreff:* Re: [Npos_2018] update on the content of the report and media strategy Thanks Christoph for the overview. Looks like some good examples to me, with some including clear linkages to the Global South. With such a number of examples we can almost publish one each month for the remainder of this year. If possible, we could contact the ABS focal points in India and Mexico to check whether 1) they are aware of the patent application and 2) whether any ABS agreement is warranted according to their national ABS laws and 3) whether such agreements were indeed established with the applicant/user of the genetic material. Best regards, Bram *From:*Npos_2018 <npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de <mailto:npos_2018-bounces@testbiotech.de>> *On Behalf Of *Christoph Then *Sent:* Sunday, 8 March 2020 11:21 *To:* npos_2018@testbiotech.de <mailto:npos_2018@testbiotech.de> *Subject:* [Npos_2018] update on the content of the report and media strategy Dear all it seems that we now have a group of editors working on the report, which will discuss some drafts and content. Very good (see other mail). Besides that I wanted to share with all of you my latest selection of 8 examples of plants (which will be part of the report). It tries to cover the most relevant categories of patent applications. 4 are on mutation breeding (sent around earlier, small changes added in red color) and 4 are on other examples. Are we happy with this selection as starter? Are we happy with the short description as used which somehow tries to follow a standard pattern (what is claimed? what is the invention? what is the technical topping? what is the problem? will it be granted?) If we agree, we can finalise these examples in English and German and use them for starting the media work / public outreach, even if the report is not yet ready to go. Media work / strategy: as soon as we agreed our examples we would * finalise the text (in at least German and English, maybe French, Danish and Portuguese) * prepare visuals for each example * start media communication (drafting press releases) and social media work. By doing so, we could closely cooperate with the campaign work as going on in Austria to gain synergies and more public outreach. In parallel I keep on working on the report (also adding the examples on animals) which will be needed as soon as the Enlarged Board publishes its decision. I will exchange further drafts with the group of editors. So please till end of upcoming week let us know if the examples should be used for further campaign work. Cheers Christoph
participants (5)
-
ARCHE NOAH Katherine Dolan -
Bram de Jonge -
Christoph Then -
francois.meienberg＠prospecierara.ch -
Ruth Tippe