No "Software-Patents" in Europe
w000t
Quote:
Parliament says No to Software Patents
Strasbourg, 6 July 2005 -- The European Parliament today decided by a
large majority (736 members, 680 votes, 645 yes, 14 No, 18
abstentions) 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 reluctance 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 problems created by these practises
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 Roithová, Buzek, Rocard and Duff were very likely to
be adopted by the Parliament. It was well noticeable that support
for all most of these amendments 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 maneuvers 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.
