Slashdot Log In
EU Software Patent Law Moves Forward
Posted by
Zonk
on Wed Feb 09, 2005 12:46 PM
from the grey-skies-are-gonna-clear-up dept.
from the grey-skies-are-gonna-clear-up dept.
Zygfryd writes "Just when we were all celebrating, the Polish Press Agency (PAP) reports that the Patent Directive is not likely to return to the first reading as the Commission may ignore the Parliament's vote on restarting the process. Revisions are said to be still possible, but under political pressure the Polish government stated they would no longer oppose the directive's adoption and support the former agreement made in May. Polish diplomats will, however, support any opposition initiated by other countries on the February 17 meeting." At the same time, drseuk writes "The Spanish Senate has just voted against Software Patents. This should hopefully require the Spanish EU representative to vote against any attempts by the Council of Ministers to ignore the will of the European Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Demonstration (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Demonstration (Score:3, Interesting)
Despite doing a lot of distantly EU and Commission-related work, I honestly haven't a clue what's going on with this patents thing. I do know that the Commission is very pro-Open Source and pro-small-business, and I think half the reason I'm working on various EU-funded projects is because I'm definitely not the expensive, proprietary route.
I just hope that the higher-ups all realise what impact patents could have on software develop
hmpf, maybe another thing... (Score:3, Interesting)
Ofcourse, this would involve knowing the adresses of all the ministers (of the counsel) involved, or at least trying to hand it over to them as they enter the building.
But it might be a neat idea that could be worthwhile. Ofcourse, someone has to do it,
Re:B-topic? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not entirely sure about that. As Polen has demonstrated, not all countries agree with it any longer (see also Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany, which have been under parliamentary scrutiny, the fact that the % of vote-power changed because of the enlargement, etc.) It leaves little doubt that, if it were to be discussed and voted again by the coun
Thursday, not Tuesday (Score:4, Informative)
That's appearantly next Thursday, not Tuesday. Thursday the 17th of February, 2005. Mentioned just in case someone who won't be attending still wants to know...
Parent
Re:Demonstration (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Demonstration (Score:3, Informative)
First of all, no they can't: if the directive is withdrawn, they have to wait at least two years before proposing a new directive. And after that, Poland and everyone else who's now being forced to swallow that hideous Council text would be free to object to it. There's no way such a text could ever again be supported by a qualified major
Re:Demonstration (Score:3, Informative)
It would indeed be funny if the Commission hadn't written in the explanatory memorandum that this was actually the goal: prevent a drift towards US practice, prevent business method patents and whatnot... Same goes for the Council, for that matter. We are
Political pressure from whom? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Political pressure from whom? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Political pressure from whom? (Score:5, Informative)
These companies claim to represent "the" European IT industry and that they need patents on "computer-implemented inventions" (which generally are pretty much the same as what would be called software patents in the US). In reality, SMEs represent a much larger part of the European economy (both IT and non-IT, and software patentability obviously goes much further than just IT), they are heavily opposed (see e.g. UEAPME [ueapme.org] and CEA-PME [ffii.org]).
The larger companies are of course much better organised regarding lobbying, so it's mainly their voice which is heard at the top levels. Slowly, we are changing this though.
Parent
Re:Political pressure from whom? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Oh please... (Score:3, Insightful)
The US and EU are geographical areas, so I can't insult it, but I know what you mean. However, the insult (if it is that) stands.
You may not like to believe this, but in the Real World, all the other countries are trying to kiss the arse of the gov. of the US of A (who after all have all the nukes and WMD, and have shown they aren't afraid to use them).
So
Re:Political pressure from whom? (Score:3, Insightful)
He, also seems to be the one influencing our good friend, Dubya.
And when Spain changes it's mind... (Score:2, Funny)
WTF (Score:5, Insightful)
Though I am afraid I don't know as much about how all of this works as I should, it seems this entire mess ought to be a real wake-up call to the people of Europe that they have given too much power too quickly to an entity without enough democratic safeguards. Either the EUs power needs to be scaled back, or the democratic influence needs to be expanded to give the EU responsibilities to the people in proportion to the powers it holds. Unfortunately I fear that this is an issue that the average person will not understand well enough to realize the significance of what has happened.
Hey, Europe, do you want to be a significant software player, or do you want America to have the ability to artificially lock you out of the market? Because the ONLY people who benefit from this patent directive in ANY way, and the only people who are promoting it, are American companies... and they are NOT promoting it for YOUR benefit.
The EU system has been shown to be such that American companies can engineer and pass EU-wide legislation for their own benefit and there is apparently nothing either you, or your elected local governments, can do to stop it.
Could stop it but don't want to... (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, the problem is that you, your elected local goverments, et. al. could stop this if you wanted to badly enough to actually try, instead of just moaning about it.
Those who want software patents are taking positive steps ( $$$ ? ).
What are YOU doing?
Parent
Re:Could stop it but don't want to... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Could stop it but don't want to... (Score:2)
Re:Could stop it but don't want to... (Score:5, Interesting)
I remember my brother-in law telling us about how he watched a group of police assemble in Wapping at the time that News International bought the Sun, a "newspaper" in the UK. The resulting purge of print workers from the Wapping factory led to demonstrations of striking workers one of which was marching past his flats at the time. He had a perfect view of the whole demo as he lived on the 5th floor and could see nothing apart from a peaceful march in progress.
The police stormed around the corner and piled into the marchers starting a very widespread fight that was reported on the news as evil protestors attack police shock.
The same happened at the Poll tax protest in the 80's when a Police van hitting a pram in Trafalgar Square triggered a riot (seen the film from CCTV at the point the riot was triggered). Further into the demo more Police came pouring out of South Africa House (despite the fact that sanctions were in place against the aparthied regime Maggie was a great friend of SA) but this time their were enough "normal" middle class people there to see what was going on and the "evil commies start riot" line didn't stick.
Funnily enough I feel sorry for the police who, bound by the job, have to put up with being painted as uniformed thugs after carrying out the politicians dirty work. Conversations with many coppers on duty during demos have shown that they generally don't want to end up in a punch up as it sours the taste of the overtime cheque they get.
The repeated use of start a fight and then blame the protestors worked well through the 80's but Maggie overdid it and the strategy was finally seen through. Still, in most cases the government just went ahead and did what they wanted anyway leading people to believe that regardless of what you do it will make no difference. 2 million protest against invading Iraq (biggest march in English history) because no-one believes the "evidence" of WMD - Government goes ahead anyway and refuses to apologies when it turns out that there was no evidence.
Politicians know why voter turnout is around 30% i.e. no-one believes that they work in the public interest anymore. Blair himself is in power not because people believe he's the best man for the job but because he's percieved as the least worst of an appalling range of choices. The patent issue just demonstrates the accuracy of this belief and should, despite the best efforts of those of us who still give a shit, the law go through it'll just strengthen the apathy and feeling of helplessness.
The truly shocking thing is that two of the countries who stand to gain most from the success of Open Source and Linux e.g. France and Germany seem so willing to play along.
Parent
Commission critised before (Score:5, Insightful)
Then the commission grew too strong and the countries objected, so a co-decision process was created to bring more democracy into the EU.
The Parliament and Commission are supposed to agree a compromise under the co-decision process.
The Council of ministers can bypass this (which they did thanks to Brinkhorst telling porkies).
JURI has concluded that Commission are misleading Parliament and the wording they want DOES make software patentable. Commission still claims it does not.
Commissions response to Parliaments request to restart in a more honest transparent way seems to be a diplomatic "FUCK YOU".
Its no longer about patents its about accountability, democracy and the Commission walking all over the co-decision process.
If the Commission can walk all over the Parliament like this then the Parliament has to be strengthened. It is the only democractic part of the EU.
Parent
Re:Brinkhorst is a Dutch EU commissioner (Score:3, Informative)
this is getting ridiculous (Score:5, Interesting)
Ignore me, I have nothing constructive to say, I just want to punch someone in the face (preferably Mr. Prodi)
Democratic? (Score:5, Funny)
Hmmm...
Parent
This is a joke (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess this is where a fascists would-be dictator steps in and uses this case to showcase his agenda, namely that democracy == corruption.
And this is democratic how? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:And this is democratic how? (Score:4, Informative)
The parliament does have some power. It can still vote this whole directive down, and there's at least a chance that it will if only out of anger at being ignored. I think it can dismiss the EU commission as well, though I doubt that's going to happen. It would be satsifying.
Who exactly are the ministers accountable to?
Their own national legislatures and electorates.
Parent
A novel device for creating corporate legislation. (Score:5, Insightful)
Every time the EU government demonstrates that it rejects patent law, it springs up again immediately. Why not? Just a cost of doing business, until it finally passes. Meanwhile, people without a profit motive get "opposition fatigue" - some of the outrage at first being confronted with these artificial monopolies goes away merely with repeated contact, though the opposition remains. Something like a "three strikes and you're out" rule for laws, where a policy repeatedly fails in its process, should be applied. At least such failed policies attempts should produce a new policy statement, to the effect that no such policy is in effect, despite much deliberation. To be considered the next time such a policy is attempted.
And how can it be possible that the Spanish EU rep can misrepresent the Spanish Senate decision for Spain? Or that Dutch traitor last year? That sounds like sedition to me. What's the power hierarchy here? The parliament exerts its power, merely to suggest something to an unelected bureaucrat, who's unaccountable when ignoring it? The whole contraption is completely geared in favor of corporate gaming, and against any sensible representation of the people.
Weak parliament is the problem (Score:2, Informative)
All the power resides in the hands of comissars and the council. They, in turn, are career bureaucrats chosen - undemocratically, mind you - by the member states.
Re:Weak parliament is the problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:A novel device for creating corporate legislati (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, the decision was arrived at only this week. Nevertheless, the Spanish representative was the only one that voted against the Council's proposal last May. Abstention counted as votes against, but Spain was the only country that voted no. So rather than misrepresent the decision, the Spanish rep foreshadowed it.
If anything, the Spanish representatives in the EU have done as much as the Polish on
Checks and Balances (Score:5, Interesting)
Because of that appearance, could someone tell me what the "check and balance" is in the EU system against abuse of power by the actual EU vs the populace? Here in the US, as broken as it is, if someone ticks the populace off enough they have to worry about re-election...
Re:Checks and Balances (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, let's not talk about the republican and democratic party then. They seem to be there no matter what. I know they aren't a person but in Europe, maybe except the british, parties change.
Re:Checks and Balances (Score:3, Informative)
In Scotland, the Conservatives are mainly supported by voters who have good earnings and wish to keep their money (company directors, property owners). Labour are mainly supported by those with poor earnings (the benefits culture located in the inner cities). The Liberal Democrats are supported by professionals (educated to degree and abov
Re:Checks and Balances (Score:3, Insightful)
The EU is an ECONOMIC union. This has been deeply embedded within its history. The EU only focuses on international industry and economy, and it is completely indifferent to what happens to people and small companies.
As such, it pushes globalisation, it makes laws that enable multinational co
Re:Checks and Balances (Score:5, Informative)
At first (decades ago) the parliament was selected by the national governments and it was supposed to just monitor the decision making. The actual decision makers comprised the commision, whose members were selected by each local (national) government and whose main task was to propose Europe-wide legislation but to do so without consideration of local / national interests, and the council, which was the organization comprising the actual member governments and who had to approve any new legislative proposal.
With time it was decided that the members of the European Parliament should be directly elected by European citizens (which has now been the case for quite a long time). In addition, it has gained the power to sack the commision (though not individual members, only the entire group) in a vote of misconfidence should it want to. Meanwhile the EU as such has been expanded from a purely economic organization to a sort of quasi-government involved in all sorts of issues, including foreign policy, economic policy, environmental protection, labour issues, law enforcement, etc. The parliament has been granted more and more powers and actually has veto power over some, but not all, of the EU policy areas (in those that it lacks veto powers, it's supposed to have an advisory role).
At this point, an overview of the most important institutions might look like this:
1) European Commision. Members (one per country for small countries, two per country for large countries) selected by national governments and supposed to work for what is best for the EU as a whole. Members have to disavow strictly national interests and concerns. Has the role of proposing new legislation for Europe as a whole.
2) European Council. Comprises national governments and / or their diplomatic representatives. Concerned with the "national" interest. Has veto power over new legislation. In many policy areas a single country can stop an EU law, while in other areas a qualified majority (defined differently depending on policy area) is sufficient to pass any law. Small countries have more votes per person.
3) European Parliament. Directly elected by EU wide elections every five years. Organized in EU-wide political party groupings that correspond to the national political parties (for example, liberals, greens, conservatives, social democrats, communists, independants, etc). In some policy areas has veto power over new legislation. In other areas has merely advisory power. Small countries have a higher percentage of representatives per citizen (sort of like vote distribution in the council) to reduce the risk of large countries trampling all over small ones. Not unlike the vote distribution aspect of the US electoral college, I suppose.
4) European Court of Justice. Overrules national courts and is empowered with interpreting law and treaties / constitutional issues and resolving conflicts. Each country has exactly one judge although judges are of course expected to be legal professionals and not represent their nationality.
5) The European Ombudsman, tasked with investigating abuse by and within EU institutions.
What I think has happened with the patent issue, is that the Council members (i.e. national governments) have decided on their own to go ahead with the patent proposal, bypassing the other EU institutions and making it national law immediately (which would be subject to national parliaments, though). This may seem strange but if we remember that the council is just a collection of the national governments it sort of makes sense, they would be able to do this even if the EU didn't exist just like other groups of countries sometimes get together to form treaties and laws. It admittedly is a problem, though.
Ultimately what happens in the EU is something that national governments and EU parliamentarians have control of. Accountab
Parent
Thank Spain (Score:2, Interesting)
I knew this would happen... (Score:4, Interesting)
These politicians are constantly pressured by the corporations, and that's all they hear. They are told its "good for business and the economy" and then they announce they support "A broad software agenda to increase jobs in the EU" and most people who know nothing about software patents think their government is doing a great job, instead of just selling out.
It really is time for a revolution...
Council of Ministers (Score:2)
any attempts by the Council of Ministers to ignore the will of the European Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee.
Can anyone explain to me why the EU has established this 'Council of Ministers' and what role it has in making law? It seems to me to be undemocratic.
Spain already voted against software patents (Score:3, Interesting)
Since the Spanish government opposes software patents and voted against them last May this decision won't change the majorities in the EU council. It would be much more important if both the German and Dutch government finally respected the decisions of their parliaments.
Re:Spain already voted against software patents (Score:3, Informative)
I don't believe that these two events are directly related. The German representative (whoever that will be) is not bound by the decision of the Bundestag anyway.
a moment of enlightement (Score:3, Insightful)
Just imagine the situation that a governement is doing something you are convinced is terribly wrong, and you cant find a way to change their mind, you might not have any other choice than using violence. I'm certainly not saying violence is good, don't get me wrong with that, but these days it seems more and more an alternative. I expected such things to happen in, I don't know, Arabia (seems like i'm a little influenced by propaganda as well) or something like that, but even in Europe... I'm truly losing my belief in the world
Who the fsck is behind this? (Score:3, Interesting)
Who is the person pushing them? How can we build a defense? Why do I feel helpless about this?
No doubt this is all funded by the eu, and whoever is behind it has little to pay, but any aim of repealing this would cost a lot.
WHat is the point of having a parliament, and who is putting political pressure on
How about we stop letting them play behind masks, and make everyone put thier cards on the table for a change. Anyone who opposes a controversial law is always in the lime light, but those pushing it through for thier own gain, you never read about them.
I met a Polish person on a server playing MTA:VC (multi player GTA), I said I loved them, and chased them around trying to hug them. I ended up stealing thier car and running them over with it, but it is the thought that counts.
Definition of a software patent (Score:3, Interesting)
I do not, however, know how one can clearly distinguish between software and non-software patents.
It is not as easy as one might think. Many things we call "software patents" do not mention software or even computers. This didn't use to be the case. They used to insist that an example hardware system be described in the patent, perhaps as a "preferred embodiment". Now many patents simply describe an algorithm. Whether that algorithm is carried out by computer, sliderule, abacus, or pencil and paper is often not explained.
A further complication arises when software is a part of an invention that also has hardware components. There are many such inventions today.
Unfortunately, "I know a software patent when I see one" probably wouldn't cut it in the courts. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than I could comment on this problem.
Dead end of capitalism as we know it (Score:3, Insightful)
Capitalism and free market can be done only in theory - when people are mostly driven by money. Hoverer, I have my own theory on this. Most big coorporations are not driven by money, but by people with low self-esteem who wants power by any cost. If they have been motivated by money, they have already stop all this after first, second milion. But no...
I guess that is where it has a big problem - our society tends to forget what human being really is - it is NOT ONLY an animal driven by his basic needs, but complex intelligence creature which needs are much more difficult to deal with.
This creature needs attention, care, peace, and yes...that stupid little thing love.
Personally I think behind each crime against humanity, each greedy, stupid demonstration of power like this is one, small tortured soul which has lost it's way to love.
Ok, it was outright sentimental, but it is what I think about it
Take note of Rousseau's words (Score:4, Insightful)
Donate today! (Score:3, Informative)
Donate money to FFII today:
http://ffii.org/money/account/index.en.html [ffii.org]
Re:Yet again another proof... (Score:2, Funny)
Settle down... One step at a time: first, learn how to spell "its". This will help others take you more seriously. Changing the whole world order is a bit further down the track...
Re:Software patents are bad? (Score:4, Insightful)
This is true. Microsoft and similar companies only lobby for software patents out of altruism. They are desperately trying to help small companies against themselves. Really.
Unfortunately there is a conspiracy amongst economists to deny the benefits to small businesses. *Boo* *boo* the evil economists. Fortunately the good and just patent lawyers come to the small companies' defense *hurray* for the patent lawyers. They too are acting out of altruism and not lining their own pockets. Really.
Parent
Re:Software patents are bad? (Score:3, Insightful)
You,obviously, have not read the vast amount of literature on the Web which simply shows that s/w patents are very anti-innovation.
You, obviously, are completely unaware of the fact that small and medium-sized companies do not have the time, money or resources to check that every two or three lines of code may not be infringing on a patent.