[Sussex] Seen this: Fwd: [Fsfe-uk] EP rejects Software Patent Directive, 648 to 14, 18 abstentions

[John D.]

Geoffrey Teale wrote:
>----------  Forwarded Message  ----------
>
>Subject: [Fsfe-uk] EP rejects Software Patent Directive, 648 to 14, 18 
>abstentions
>Date: Wednesday 06 July 2005 11:46
>From: Blanked for privacy
>To: fsfe-uk at gnu.org
>
>PRESS RELEASE FFII -- [ Europe / economy / ICT ]
>
>=============================================================================
>=== Parliament says No to Software Patents
>=============================================================================
>===
>
>Strasbourg, 6 July 2005 -- The European Parliament today decided by
>a margin of 648 votes to 14, with 18 absentions, to _reject_ the
>directive "on the patentability of computer implemented inventions",
>also known as the software patent directive.
>
>This rejection was the logical answer to the Commission's
>refusal to restart the legislative process in February and the
>Council's unwillingness to take the will of the European Parliament
>and national parliaments into account.  The FFII congratulates the
>European Parliament on its clear "No" to bad legislative proposals and
>procedures.
>
>This is a great victory for those who have campaigned to ensure that
>European innovation and competitiveness is protected from
>monopolisation of software functionalities and business methods. It
>marks the end of an attempt by the European Commission and
>governmental patent officials to impose detrimental and legally
>questionable practises of the European Patent Office (EPO) on the
>member states.  However the questions created by this practise remain
>unsolved.  FFII believes that the Parliament's work, in particular the
>21 cross-party compromise amendments, can provide a good basis on
>which future solutions, both at the national and European level, can
>build.
>
>Jonas Maebe, FFII Board Member, comments on the outcome of today's vote:
>
>   "This result clearly shows that thorough analysis, genuinely concerned
>   citizens and factual information have more impact than free ice-cream,
>   boatloads of hired lobbyists and outsourcing threats. I hope this turn
>   of events can give some people faith again in the European decision
>   making process. I also hope that it will encourage the Council and
>   Commission to emulate the European Parliament to improve transparency
>   and the ability of stakeholders to participate in the decision-making
>   process irrespective of their size."
>
>Hartmut Pilch, president of FFII, explains why FFII supported the
>move for rejection in its voting recommendations:
>
>   In recent days, the big holders of EPO-granted software patents and
>   their MEPs, who had previously been campaigning for the Council's
>   "Common Position", joined the call for rejection of the directive
>   because it became clear that the 21 cross-party amendments
>   championned by Rhoitová, Buzek, Rocard and Duff were very likely to
>   be adopted by the Parliament.  It was well noticeable that support
>   for these amendments or a substantial part thereof was becoming the
>   mainstream opinion in all political groups.  Yet there would not
>   have been much of a point in such a vote.  We rather agree to the
>   assessment of the situation as given by Othmar Karas MEP in the
>   Plenary yesterday: a No was the only logical answer to the
>   unconstructive attitude and legally questionable manuevers of the
>   Commission and Council, by which this so-called Common Position had
>   come about in the first place.
>
>The FFII also wishes to thank all those people who have taken the time
>to contact their representatives either by email, phone or in
>person. We also want to thank the numerous volunteers who have given
>so generously of their time and energy. This is your victory as well
>as the Parliament's.
>
>======================================================================
>Background information and further news
>======================================================================
>
>* 21 cross-party compromise amendments
>   http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309/amends05/komprom0506.en.pdf
>
>* FFII voting recommendations for MEPs at today's plenary vote
>   http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309/amends05/ffiivotlst050706.pdf
>
>* Practise of the European Patent Office
>   http://webshop.ffii.org/
>   http://swpat.ffii.org/patents/
>   http://gauss.ffii.org/
>
>* Karas speech in the plenary yesterday
>   http://wiki.ffii.org/Karas05075En
>
>* Wallstreet Journal reports prominently about Lehne's conflicts of interest
>   http://wiki.ffii.org/WsjLehne050705En
>
>* Stay tuned to our news ticker
>   http://wiki.ffii.org/SwpatcninoEn
Erm, does this mean that I should be now "wearing a smile that can't be 
punched off my face" (does it mean what I think it does)???

regards

John D.