Slashdot Mirror
EU Commission Declines Patent Debate Restart
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."
Once they're bought, they stay bought.
It's a sad day for those who believe democratic ideals were still governing politicians actions in the EU. A really sad day.
:%s/Open Source/Free Software/g
YTARY!
From TFA:
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.
I'm a big tall mofo.
Because they don't think the parliament will fire them over just this, and that is the only option of sanction the European Parliament has.
The reported reason was that if they do restart, they must produce a new text on which several other Directorate Generals (DG), such as Information Society and Competition, must agree as well. These other DG's would reportedly never support an extreme text such as the one currently on the table in the Council, or even the original Commission proposal from 2002. They would insist on a more balanced approach, which is apparently not desired by DG MARKT - Directorate General for the Internal Market.
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
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
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.
With unhinged comments like that he's never going end up anywhere else than in the populist fringe.
The owls are not what they seem
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. Software embodies algorithms and algorithms are rightly not-patentable as they would limit under law the range of legal human thought.
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.
-- oldthinkers unbellyfeel ingsoc
You are right , No software patents doesn' want software patents and you don't understand either.
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.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
I think there is a misunderstanding over what exactly the European Parliament is. The group has no real political power.
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...
"Can any informed Europeans tell us why the Comission can just ignore what they've been told to do?"
Follow the money.
"Can any informed Europeans tell us why ICANN is so bad"
Follow the money.
"Can any informed Europeans tell us why the US invaded Iraq"
Follow the money.
*this is a recording*
Need Mercedes parts ?
"A honest politician is one who, once being bought, stays bought." -- Mark Twain.
"Because they dislike the EU..."
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'.
For a simple flow chart demonstrating the wonder of modern, simple, transparent government, attend http://europa.eu.int/comm/codecision/stepbystep/di agram_en.htm.
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.
Somebody wants this law so badly they will bend and break any EU rule they can to get this software patent legistaltion through.
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.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
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.