EU Commission Declines Patent Debate Restart 367
maxkueng writes "I just recieved an email from NoSoftwarePatents.com. They say: 'The EU Commission, under the leadership of someone who previously failed as Portuguese prime minister and as per the suggestion of a Microsoft puppet, has decided to decline the European Parliament's request for restarting the process on the software patent directive.' More can be read on Florian Mueller's Forum post."
You really have to admire their loyalty. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You really have to admire their loyalty. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You really have to admire their loyalty. (Score:2, Funny)
> figures don't fall victim to the same shortcomings
> that American ones do. They can't be bought. They
> are superior in every way, go take your worthless
> sentiments to some other message board.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Re:You really have to admire their loyalty. (Score:2)
Mark Twain on politicians (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Mark Twain on politicians (Score:4, Informative)
Let us hope they get sacked (again).
Re:Mark Twain on politicians (Score:3, Interesting)
A slap in the face... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A slap in the face... (Score:3, Insightful)
Somewhat different... (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Pay fat campaign contributions
2. Blow vast amounts of money on convincing the sheep (voters).
EU model:
1. Let voters choose their national government
2. Lobby the EU beurocrats
3. Watch the EU do whatever the hell they want, regardless of national opinion.
So while EU might have a democratic deficit too, I don't think it is the same as the US. More like a modern aristocracy (Government by a ruling class) than a plutocracy...
Kjella
Re:A slap in the face... (Score:4, Insightful)
I seriously doubt it. The positions will be filled in short order, and the chicanery will continue unabated. I propose that the people strip their governments of the power to regulate patents. There is a strong argument in favor: In effect, patent restricitions are government regulation, and if the EU member nations are looking to create economic growth, the last thing they need is more regulation. Or perhaps they're only looking for economic growth in their own wallets.
Re:A slap in the face... (Score:5, Insightful)
I am very grateful to the EU as it is tying together all the countries in the continent that has suffered the most from wars in the last century. By making all the countries depend on each other in trade, none of them will ever think of going to war against each other again.
Now with the addition of eastern Europe, the EU can help the poorer countries of Europe create better living situation for their citizens.. that alone will make things so much easier for Europe's future.
Your "logic" sounds like the FUD that anti-everything use on any government or international organization they don't like these days. It is just not right.. Criticism is good, but bullshit just makes things worse.
Why can they do this? (Score:5, Insightful)
It just seems really odd that when the elected groups say "game over" the other group can just say "too bad, we're doing it".
Re:Why can they do this? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Why can they do this? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Why can they do this? (Score:2, Interesting)
Whatever I do, my government (the Dutch) has already stated that whatever the outcome of the vote is allright: if the majority votes in favour then we win, but if the majority votes against, then we are stupid and they will protect us against ourselves by ignoring that.
They rather like to call it referendum (interglot says this is 'plebiscite' in english, which I doubt) and
Then parliament should sack the commission (Score:4, Insightful)
Since the unelected European Commission insists on treating democracy with open comtempt, the European Parliament should sack them.
Re:Then parliament should sack the commission (Score:3, Informative)
It sort of reminds me of that Discworld novel, where the only decocracy on the Disc was where people elected a new tyrant every year. Each year all of the candidates would promise to do things differently and not terrorise the populace, and
Re:Why can they do this? (Score:5, Interesting)
Antefact: our bipolar system rotates around 2 "coalitions" that compete for an electoral bonus. The winning one gets over represented in parliament and the appointment to run the country for a legislature.
During the last non-legislative elections, the Right (Berlusconi's currently in-office "Casa delle Libertà") got a sound beating for a long list of reasons, but simply put: Berlusconi takes care of his judiciary & financial problems and gives a damn about anything else. The internal discipline is formidable, for, whenever there's a Bill or some other Act the Boss desires to pass, rank & file politicians and smaller parties get to execute orders like diligent servicemen.
Compensations vary but one party, the xenophobic Lega Nord, got most of the leftovers among the minor parties and was given way too much media coverage. Those that were left out became jealous of this and worried for their own base as it balked at the sheer ineptitude of the current administration.
The electoral beating gave them a chance to voice their dissent and it took a full year for them to get quiet, some Chair shuffling and a great deal of threats. In particular, one democristian party, led by a man called Follini, was becoming the proverbial thorn in the ass. Enter Buttiglione; he offered to split the party and minoritize Follini.
His service was immediately rewarded with a prestigious nomination to the EU Commission that could be smuggled as tangible recognition to the party's relevance in the coalition (hypocrites). Clearly, the EU parliament wasn't amused for this obvious exchange at it's own cost: Buttiglione took up Mario Monti's slot (yeah, the guy that stood up agains Microsoft...) and grilled the idiot at the first chance; Buttiglione's attitude was also surprising as he did everything possible to get kicked out. He obviously wanted to get kicked out and chose some petty argument to be dealt with championing his fundamentalist catholic agenda.
This long winded post hasn't even scratched the surface of the issue but hopefully it gived an idea of what happened.
Re:Why can they do this? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Why can they do this? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Why can they do this? (Score:5, Informative)
Now this isn't exactly a problem of democracy. It's just that the favored scale of democracy in Europe is national, not European. Europe is not a federation like the US, where States really have not much power compared to the federal power, for "macro" policy matters (including intellectual property).
Thus the important decisions are always taken by mutual agreement of the governments of the countries themselves. It used to be that unanimous agreement was required, but now with the extension to more countries I think the requirement has been relaxed to a "qualified majority" for some issues.
Getting a vote at the European Parliament brings in little more than publicity.
The right place to petition against software patent would not be the European Parliament, whose advice gets routinely ignored anyway, but the *individual governments of each country*.
They keep the real power, and even though they usually say "it's been decided by the Commission in Brussels" to avoid getting the heat when the shit hits the fan a few years later in each country, the truth is that *they* have been deciding it in Brussels.
The respective place of national and European government is something that Europeans have really struggled with since the earliest days of reconstruction following WW2. Even in some States, some contend that the federal govt is taking away too much... picture what would happen if each State in the US spoke a different language and had had a distinctive political history dating back to the Middle Ages...
Re:Why can they do this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why can they do this? (Score:5, Interesting)
false.
The history of the European Union was not an attempt to reach democracy. You can see this very clearly if you follow several decisions. You will see that the (11-person?) European Commission has the most power, and the parliament can hardly do anything, which is not the same as what you are saying: you say the EU has no decision power, but actually the EU DOES, but there is no proper democratic control.
You may remember too that the European Union initially was not started as a democratic thing, but as an alliance between France and Germany, it had to do with the iron and coal industry or what. It was then called the European Economic Communion and the word Economic describes exactly what it was about. Back then the main lobbyists were the larger transnationals. They still are the most dexterious in getting their plans through.
If you want to read more on the european "democracy", look for 'Trans European Network', 'patents on life' or 'Paul van Buitenen'.
Re:Why can they do this? (Score:3, Insightful)
The governments of the respective countries were the entities to ask for a new start of the process. The commission is an independent body elected by the council.
Its power to deny requests for fundamental democratic procedures is what's scaring me.
I can't see anyone in his electorate envisioning this guy just dismissing a
Re:Why can they do this? (Score:4, Informative)
No, no and no.
The European Council consists of members of the governments of the member states. They are the ones that have to accept this directive proposal for it to become law. There are obviously countries that want the proposal to go through very badly, and some (maybe enough) that don't. The prospect of opposition is why they are afraid to reopen discussion on the proposal inside the Council.
The Parliament asked for the restart. The Commission chose not to listen to the parliament, but instead listen to the countries on the Council who want the proposal to go through.
The Commission is an independent body, but the members are chosen by the council and approved by the Parliament. Both the Council and the Parliament would have the power to fire the Commission(which will NOT happen, believe me), but the Parliament has no power whatsoever over the Council.
So yes, the GP post was correct -- at this stage the *only* people to complain to are the ministers in your government. They're the ones who will make the vote when the item comes up in a Council meeting.
Re:Why can they do this? (Score:3, Insightful)
on a very practical level, an individual state is very much like a country.
On paper, anyway. And in practice in some respects, but states' rights have been eroded rather badly over the last century or so. The combination of the massive stretching of the commerce clause and the constitutional amendments making senators publicly elected and giving the federal government the right to levy direct income taxes have weakened the states dramatically.
People differ on whether that's a good thing or a bad thin
Re:Why can they do this? (Score:5, Funny)
Follow the money.
"Can any informed Europeans tell us why ICANN is so bad" [eweek.com]
Follow the money.
"Can any informed Europeans tell us why the US invaded Iraq"
Follow the money.
*this is a recording*
Re: (Score:2)
I think we know what the EC thinks of him. (Score:5, Funny)
Florian Mueller, the manager of the pan-European NoSoftwarePatents.com campaign, condemned the Commission's decision in the strongest terms: "A wannabe Napoleon who heads the Commission and a Microsoft puppet that runs the DG (directorate general) in charge have decided to negate democracy. Now we call on the EU Council to demonstrate a more democratic attitude and to reopen negotiations of its Common Position at the forthcoming meeting of the Competitiveness Council on Monday (7 March)."
It would appear the European Commission has moderated him -1 Flamebait and will be ignoring him.
Re:I think we know what the EC thinks of him. (Score:3, Informative)
FFIIs statement [ffii.org] was much better. While still being highly critical of the decisions it avoids personal abuse.
Re:I think we know what the EC thinks of him. (Score:3, Funny)
I am Napoleon! Just ask Josephine, my sock-puppet!
Re:I think we know what the EC thinks of him. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I think we know what the EC thinks of him. (Score:2, Insightful)
Free Software will never be ready for prime time until we learn to muzzle our wackos.
Re:I think we know what the EC thinks of him. (Score:3, Informative)
Huh? (Score:4, Insightful)
Failed to decide to decline to request to restart the process on the directive?!?
Normally I cringe at stupid comments like "Microsoft puppet" but in this case, it was the only clue I had to unravel the rest of that tangle and conclude that this is a win for the pro-patent side.
"Microsoft puppet" is a stupid comment? (Score:2)
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
Been thinking about this lately... (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree that a lot of software patents are a joke (the isNot example comes to mind)--but so are a lot of non-software patents. I think we just have a preference here because software patents "hit closer to home."
If it were as easy to get "duh-obvious" patents in the hardware realm, the hardware world would similarly be handicapped. In my opinion, we simply need more, better-educated people working at the USPTO, as well as stricter, more consistent rules for granting patents.
A great new idea that no one has thought of before can theoretically exist in any field, even software.
I can see how free software is threatened (I am myself an advocate), but I fail to see how any other hobby activity is also not similarly threatened, except for, say, building remote control cars isn't as easy to "publish" than software.
I guess my point is that the real problem is crappy patents, and they exist in every field, and they cause similar problems. Maybe there is a place for software patents that do truly contain unique and innovative ideas--or at least such a software patent would have more merit to me than a frivolous hardware patent.
Re:Been thinking about this lately... (Score:5, Insightful)
Software is more than adequately protected by copyright. The only good solution for software patents is no software patents. I can sort of see the point of patents on hardware, but again, they need to be quality patents or the problem is worse than the solution.
Re:Been thinking about this lately... (Score:2)
You miss the point that hardware is a thing, whereas software is, in source form, a free expression of ideas, as any novel in literature is.
I don't necessarily agree with that. There are lots of patents that cover "ideas" outside of software. If I tried to patent the idea of using a separate CPU to process graphics commands back before this idea had been implemented, I might have been able to get such a patent, if the guys reviewing my application were as braindead as some of the guys who review softwa
Re:Been thinking about this lately... (Score:2)
What is it that tells a particular CPU to do graphics work rather than some other sort of work? It certainly isn't hardware. It is some sort of software. Maybe the operating system, or a device driver, or some firmware stored on a rom chip on the motherboard.
Re:Been thinking about this lately... (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm not sure who "our" refers to, but historically there has been a policy that patents should be awarded for inventions, not ideas, not even really clever ideas. Software patents (and business patents) represent a backing away from that policy.
Re:Been thinking about this lately... (Score:2)
A friend of mine got a patent that incorporated a patent dating back to the 1860's that contained essentially the idea of using a pipe of a certain size in a certain manner for a certain task. It was definately an "idea" as it only combined components that already existed in a unique way. Of course, you could argue that all inventions are just that--so what if I combine a bubble sort, a hash table, IPC, etc?
I agree with you, though, the patent system is getting worse in that it's allowing increasingly ob
Deeper problem (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunately many companies who would otherwise only patent solid ideas, get pushed into trying to patent everything.. why? because their competitors are doing it.
If company A has thousands of patents and company B has thousands of patents then you hit something like mutually-assured-destruction. Where it's generally impractical to sue each other since it's a virtual certainty that each is infringing on the o
Due Dilligence... (Score:3, Interesting)
This such a thing as barratry with lawyers after all.
Re:Been thinking about this lately... (Score:2)
It is a symptomatic geek way of thinking to believe that when things only differ quantitatively, they do not differ at all. That is so not true.
The quantitative difference is so huge between the difficulty to make hardware and software, and between how many patents are involved in a physical device vs. a program, that it makes a qualitative difference.
One has to consider the two "potential worlds": the one with software patents, the other without, and try to figure out which one is more desirable. The v
The real problem with patents. (Score:2)
is the fact that the software ones are being looked at.
As to needing better educated ppl at uspto, that would never solve it. You are asking that somebody has knowledge of x-over patenets as well as in the field. Since they have such a short timer per patent, it becomes unfeasable. Instead, it strikes me that we need to create a much better search engine that works on the patent itself. It would have to deal with more than just search-terms, but even that would be useful. An ideal situation is using an AI
Democracy? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Democracy? (Score:2, Informative)
The Commission is intent on ignoring the democratic will of the parliament.
However, a democracy cannot be negated; the fact is, a democracy is a form of government where the people as a whole have the final say.
In this case, the elected representatives of the people are being ignored and unelected ministers will have the final say - that's negating the democratic process.
The European Commission is not directly elected - it is
Re:Democracy? (Score:2)
First of all, there IS no true democracy. We are all 'represented'. Yeah, right. Now if you can swallow that, think about this:
'Thwarting intent' is NOT the same as breaking the law. The Commission was empowered by the Parliament with the included bybass rule. Sure, it sucks, but the PEOPLE VOTED FOR THE SYSTEM. Just like in 2000 - the system worked. You might not have liked HOW it worked or WHO was elected, but ther
Re:Democracy? (Score:2)
The {EEC|EC|EU} happened because it was an inevitability after the war and with regard to the Soviet threat, but the organisations by which it is governed are not
Re:Democracy? (Score:2)
I'm not an American, so I'm not sure how the US political system works. Does the US president have the power to enact laws without involving Congress in any way? If yes, I would indeed conclude that the US is not a democracy according to my understanding of a democracy. If no, your analogy is flawed.
Re:Democracy? (Score:2)
Is it not democracy unless a time limit is instituted?
Re:Democracy? (Score:3, Informative)
I didn't ask about "things", I asked about enacting laws. Note that while a EU directive is not a law, the EU member countries are required to transform it into a national law, so it has the same power as a law.
To answer my own question: Some web searching has revealed that the US president cannot enact laws without involving Congress.
Re:Democracy? (Score:2)
Re:Democracy? (Score:3, Insightful)
It is simply the willfulness of one man (the Irish rep McCreevy peeping out of Si
OK (Score:5, Interesting)
Patent laws: made for the benefit of little inventors, opposed by little inventors, pushed by big corporations. Something is quite wrong.
In the name (Score:4, Funny)
But we had to get him out of here!
Re:In the name (Score:2)
What in the world!!! (Score:5, Funny)
You will never replace Jim Henson, Mr. Gates... do you hear me?!?!?!! WELL, DO YOU!!?!?
Man, first I quit taking methamphetamines, and now this... If it wasn't for my talking sofa and the giant fat men, I don't think I'd make it through some days...
--
I have no idea what inspired this comment.
Re:What in the world!!! (Score:2, Funny)
Next Muppet Movie Title... (Score:2)
Re:What in the world!!! (Score:3, Funny)
You haven't seen sock puppet Bill [slashdot.org].
"someone who failed as Portuguese prime minister" (Score:4, Funny)
John.
Re:"someone who failed as Portuguese prime ministe (Score:3, Insightful)
It's actually another thing also, closely related to that, and I speak as a portuguese: the attraction of Brussels is that it gives the - generally mediocre - local politicians a sense of "grandeur". It's *the EU*, they can privy with really important people, they will be talked in their place of birth as "having a high place in Brussels...". It's the petty burgoise thinking applied to politics, some weird sense of self importance that comes from talking trough an interpreter and having "
Re:"someone who failed as Portuguese prime ministe (Score:3, Funny)
I would have said the belgian beer, but you could be right too.
antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:2)
Hope that helps (and that it's accurate, although I obviously pulled the timeframes out of my behind)
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:3, Informative)
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:5, Informative)
It's confusing so I will screw some of this up.
A law was propsed. It got shot down in parliment, The EC picked it up, and tried to ram it through anyway, it got shot down and sent back to the begining of the process to be rewritten. the EC ignored that and is trying to shove it through again.
Somebody wants this law so badly they will bend and break any EU rule they can to get this software patent legistaltion through.
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:5, Insightful)
None other than Bill Gates. There is a reason he showed up in Brussels the day before the JURI commission was to decide whether the process should be restarted or not. There is a reason that Charlie McCreevy, former head of the Commission and now self-appointed leader of the committee that decides whether to take such steps as ignore the unanimous direction of the European Parliament to restart the process, dances on the end of Bill's string. What is this reason? As former minister of finance of Ireland, and Microsoft being the largest taxpayer in Ireland, Bill Gates paid McCreevy's paycheck. Bill Gates probably still pays McCreevy's paycheck. There is a reason for everything.
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:5, Insightful)
As an American I'm torn - if the EU does not have software patents, they'll easily pull ahead of the United States in the software arena while we litigate ourselves into irrelevancy. However, I'd much rather see the playing field made level by eliminating our own software and business method patents then burden the Europeans with the same yoke.
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:4, Funny)
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:3, Informative)
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:2, Informative)
The "compromise" from the council (under the Irish presidency - remember that Microsoft, Intel and IBM basically 0wn Ireland) erased all the european parliament's amendments that would have at least granted patent exemption for int
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:3, Informative)
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:3, Informative)
Okay, I admit that I had to look that up on google.
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:5, Informative)
The process started with a directive that would permit software patents. After much discussion and popular outcry from individuals and small and medium-sized businesses, the Parliament amended the directive to prohibit software patents, and passed the resulting version.
The Council (which is composed of people appointed by the democratically-elected governments of the member countries, rather than directly elected individuals), on the other hand, set aside the amendments and passed the original version of the directive, and then claimed that they had reached agreement with the Parliament.
The Commission is supposed to determine what, exactly, the Council and the Parliament have done. They keep trying to sign off on the process without a vote, on the theory that the Council and Parliament agree (on the Council version). Various Commission members have kept this from happening. Meanwhile, various committees of the Parliament have been calling for the entire thing to start over, and the Commission has been ignoring them. Furthermore, the support in the Council for the version is eroding as national parliaments send instructions to their government's representatives not to support it.
So the current status is: the legality of SW patents in Europe is current ambiguous and nobody wants to leave it this way; the resolution currently on the table permits SW patents; the Council is refusing requests from the Parliament to restart the process from scratch, which would permit an anti-SW-patent result.
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:5, Informative)
AFAIK, Poland has stopped the law getting as far as 5 twice, and Denmark(?) once. Then the Parliament's legal affairs comitte (JURI) decided almost unanimously that the legislation should be scrapped. But the commission doesn't actually have to listen to the democratic parts of the EU, so now we are at 9-10.
If we are very lucky, MEPs will be angered by the comission's undemocratic actions and reject the common position at 11. Unfortunatly this requires a 70% absolute majority, meaning that 70% of all MEPs (not just those who turn up) have to vote against the legislation. If this happens then we will be proceed to 15, and the European software industry will be saved.
Write to your MEP today! Even if they are neutral on the SWPat issues, they are likely to be angry at how the commission is trying to ignore the entire parliamentry institution.
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:4, Interesting)
"In the mean time, highly placed government sources have also confirmed that the directive will once more appear as an A-item on 7 March, this time on the agenda of the responsible Competition Council formation. All hope for a democratic and balanced resolution now rests on the shoulders of the ministers and officials who will attend that Council meeting."
Like the article says, get in contact with whichever part of your government will be attending the Competition Council meeting: for UK readers, I believe that is these people: http://www.competition-commission.org.uk/footer/c
Competition Commission
Victoria House
Southampton Row
London
WC1B 4AD
Although I doubt it will be possible to change Labour's mind on the issue, council decisions must be unanimous; that's how Poland and Denmark(?) managed to block the decisions before.
Re:antidisestablishmentarianism (Score:3, Interesting)
More pressure needed on ministers and officials (Score:5, Informative)
In the mean time, highly placed government sources have also confirmed to the FFII that the directive will once more appear as an A-item on 7 March, this time on the agenda of the responsible Competition Council formation. All hope for a democratic and balanced resolution now rests on the shoulders of the ministers and officials who will attend that Council meeting. Turning the directive back into a B-item, i.e. a discussion point, seems to be the only proper way out now.
http://wiki.ffii.org/Com050228En [ffii.org]
Any celebrations about the directive being thrown out were premature - the BBC site for one got carried away:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4274811.stm [bbc.co.uk]
The European Parliament has thrown out a bill that would have allowed software to be patented.
We wish! The headline was more accurate than the sub-text:
EU software patent law faces axe
Faces, but the axe isn't falling yet.
Seriously (Score:5, Insightful)
With unhinged comments like that he's never going end up anywhere else than in the populist fringe.
Re:Seriously (Score:3, Insightful)
Congratulations! Your phrase "populist fringe" has won the Best New Oxymoron award! It will now join the ranks of such timeless classics as "military intelligence", "compassionate conservative" and "Microsoft Works"
No Banana Union ?! (Score:5, Informative)
Sigh (Score:4, Insightful)
Very similar to the hunting ban in the UK, the lords didn't want to ban it so the Government used an act ment for emergencies to force it through and get their way. Surely the EU have a clause which can do the same in some form..
Re:Sigh (Score:2, Interesting)
Very similar to the hunting ban in the UK, the lords didn't want to ban it so the Government used an act ment for emergencies
The parliment act requires a bill to be passed by the Commons twice, in separate sessions more than a year apart. If you can wait a year it is not an emergency. The act is designed to stop the unelected Lords blocking the elected Commons and that is exactly what it was used for.
...and, in related news: (Score:2, Funny)
This is just teh start (Score:2)
Relax (Score:2)
In the Land of Adults... (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, that's the kind of insight that gives so many of those people the great reputation they have in the Land of Adults.
Regardess of the merits, or lack thereof, on either side of this issue, that virulent phrase manages to combine the two central themes defining how many free software advocates relate to the rest of the world:
1) Anyone who disagrees with me is incompetent.
2) Anyone who disagrees with me is also taking Microsoft money.
on the other hand (Score:5, Insightful)
Szo
Bill Gates on why SoftPat is good (for him) (Score:2, Informative)
If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today.
"
Bill Gates 1991
This was quoted by Fred Warshofsky in "The Patent Wars" of 19
Charlie McCreevy (Score:5, Informative)
While Minister for Finance in Ireland he was forced to row back on a number of announcments made in his budgets due to opposition from the general public. He also gave 50m to an equestrian center without going through the correct procedures; for no apparent reason other than he likes horses.
Eventually his tactics were hurting the government party so badly that he was shafted and sent to Europe for retirement.
Whether he can maintain his current position on patents I do not know, but as an Irish person it isn't surprising to see Charlie's tactics remain the same.
Denmark goes against software patents (Score:3, Informative)
The directive no longer have a majority support in the parliarment, and so the government has no mandate to vote in favour of the directive.
This means that even if the directive appears as an A-item, it must be blocked.
In danish (sorry - I have no english equivalent):
http://www.computerworld.dk/default
Re:a Microsoft puppet!? (Score:5, Funny)
Fozzie Bear is a Lobbyist!
Bork Bork Bork
How can you say such things! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:as a bird once said . . . (Score:2)