Posts filed under 'Uncategorized'
Sound Copyright is a campaign operated by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Open Rights Group (ORG). Copyright in sound recordings currently lasts for 50 years. An independent review (the “Gowers review”) commissioned and endorsed by the UK government says it should remain at 50 years. Yet the recording industry continues to demand that this term be extended. But term extension would be an injustice to European musicians and musical culture, and may harm our economy.
A handful of major record labels are trying to break a fifty year-old promise. Musicians and their fans will not be the only victims.
If you agree that copyright term on sound recordings should not be extended past 50 years, please sign this petition.
The EFF and ORG will use your support to lobby in Brussels against term extension. 6268 signatures have been collected so far — please add your own!
March 7th, 2008
Following the Court of Appeal judgement in the Aerotel/Macrossan case of October 2006. the UK IPO (Intellectual Property Office, the body formerly known as The Patent Office) adopted a policy of flatly rejecting patent claims on computer programs. Australian “inventor” Neal Macrossan had sought to patent an automated system for compiling documents required for incorporating a company under UK law. The IPO rejected this as both a business method and a computer program as such, and therefore unpatentable under Article 52 of the European Patent Convention. The ruling placed UK-IPO practice directly at odds with that of the EPO, which has a permissive approach to patent claims on software.
However, the January 2008 High Court judgement in the AstronClinica et al. case led to a partial reversal of this policy. The case concerned patent applications by five companies, which the IPO had already found to include patentable subject matter, including semi-conductor chip design and image quality in laser printers. In each case, the patent application involved a method and a computer program to carry out the method; the IPO had determined that the method itself was patentable, but the program was not, and therefore refused the patent applications. The companies appealed to the High Court, which ruled against the IPO, to the effect that if an invention driven by a programmed computer is patentable, then patent claims on the program are also allowable.
Accordingly, the IPO has revised its guidelines on patent claims involving computer programs.
Nonetheless, the door apparently remains closed on pure software patents, where there is no “technical effect” outside of the software. In a judgement dated 6 February 2008, the High Court upheld the IPO’s rejection of a patent application by tech company Autonomy for a system for searching for files on a computer.
February 25th, 2008
Brussels, 4 May 2007 — Over thirty renowned international speakers
assemble on 15 and 16 May in Brussels’ Metropole Hotel to discuss the
future of the European Patent System. Among the topics being discussed
are the recently published plans of the EU Commission for a new European
patent system, and recent important decisions in the US Supreme Court,
and new data and research from the USA about the impact of the patent
system on the high-tech sector. A wide and interesting array of speakers will attend including Ron Marchant, former Chief Executive, UK Patent Office, who is a keynote
speaker.
FFII President Pieter Hintjens, who launched the EUPACO forum, explains:
“everyone agrees that patents can have a big economic impact. Everyone
agrees that getting the patent system ‘right’ is essential to Europe’s
growth and prosperity. So we’re very happy to see so many important
experts in the patent system stepping forwards to take part in this forum.”
Journalists, and staff of the European institutions, are invited to
attend the conference for free.
Joff Wild, editor of IAM Magazine, usually a critic of the FFII’s
policies, sums up his view of the EUPACO-2 event:
“When you are face-to-face and talking it is much harder to maintain
entrenched positions and to ignore what other people are saying. It is
hugely encouraging to see that representatives from industry, the FFII,
the EPO and national patent offices, and the Commission will be sharing
platforms at this event. The FFII deserves to be congratulated for this
initiative which, hopefully, will get the support it deserves.”
The conference will take place on 15 and 16 May 2007, at the Metropole
Hotel in Brussels. An online registration form and more information can
be found at http://www.eupaco.org/
May 5th, 2007
The press is reporting that the House of Lords have rejected Neal Macrossan’s application to appeal against a ruling that his software “invention” was not patentable in the UK.
The Register reports that:
“In November last year, appeal court judges ruled that this was both a business method and a computer program and was therefore excluded from patentability under Article 52 of the European Patent Convention. His patent application had originally been rejected by the patent office, a decision he had challenged. Macrossan’s invention is an automated system that compiles the necessary documents for incorporating a company in the UK.
In rejecting the case the Lords said it “does not raise an arguable point of law of general public importance”. Macrossan had hoped the Lords would hear his appeal, as the highest court is not bound by any precedents.”
Further information and comment available here at The Register and at Ipkat.
February 8th, 2007
The All Party Parliamentary Internet Group (APIG) releases its report into Digital Rights Management. The inquiry received over 90 written submissions from consumers, Think Tanks, libraries, print media publishers, the film and music industries and lawyers. An oral evidence session was organised at the House of Commons in February when a cross selection of the respondents were invited to give evidence to APIG officers. Among the key points of the report:
A recommendation that the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) bring forward appropriate labelling regulations so that it will become crystal clear to consumers what they will and will not be able to do with digital content that they purchase.
A recommendation that OFCOM publish guidance to make it clear that companies distributing Technical Protection Measures systems in the UK would, if they have features such as those in Sony-BMG’s MediaMax and XCP systems, run a significant risk of being prosecuted for criminal actions.
A recommendation that the Department of Trade and Industry investigate the single-market issues that were raised during the Inquiry, with a view to addressing the issue at the European level.
A recommendation that the government do not legislate to make DRM systems mandatory.
More details from APIG’s website here, and from the BBC here.
June 6th, 2006
Starnberg, Germany (June 06, 2006) — Florian Mueller, the founder of the NoSoftwarePatents.com campaign, has published his book, “No Lobbyists As Such - The War over Software Patents in the European Union”, on the Internet. Over 377 pages, Mueller tells the story of the legislative process that ended in July last year with a landslide vote of the European Parliament against a proposal for a software patent directive. The book is now available on the Internet for download
Released under a Creative Commons license Mueller explained in his blog that he wants “to get [this] book out to a large audience, especially since the next major war over software patents in Europe will officially break out on July 12 at a hearing to be held by the European Commission in Brussels. The same forces who supported the software patent directive we successfully fought against are now trying to achieve everything they wanted the last time, and even more, by means of the European Patent Litigation Agreement (EPLA).”
June 6th, 2006
In a statement today the EU Commission announced it has adopted a proposal for a directive to combat intellectual property offences.
Specifically the directive is intended to be “[…] applied to all types of intellectual
property right infringements. In the directive, all intentional
infringements of an intellectual property right on a commercial scale,
including attempting, aiding and abetting such infringements, are treated
as criminal offences. The minimum sentence is a term of four years’
imprisonment where the infringement is committed under the aegis of a
criminal organisation or carries a serious risk to the health and safety
of individuals. The amount of the fine will have to be at least EUR 100
000 or EUR 300 000 where there is a link with a criminal organisation or
any risk to health and safety. Member States may impose heavier penalties
or fines. “
Full EU commission press release available here.
The Foundation for Information Policy Research (FIPR) has commented on the proposed move and Wikipedia provides further information in addition.
April 27th, 2006
News of an important event in London on Saturday April 7th:
The Open Source Specialist Group (OSSG) gives advance notice of a special visit being made from Brussels by Ciarán O’Riordan of the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) to give a talk about Free Software and threats such as Software Patents. In addition Gareth Bowker will give a short speech about Copyright Laws and Open Source Software. This event will be held on Friday 7th April 2006 from 6.30pm at the British Computer Society (BCS) Central London Offices, First Floor, The Davidson Building, 5 Southampton Street, London WC2E 7HA. To book a place at this event please email your details to mark_elkins@bcs.org
Ckick here for more information
April 1st, 2006
In a speech at the Trans-Atlantic Consumer Dialogue conference in Brussels yesterday Rufus Pollock, Director FFII-UK, elaborated on his vision for future debate surrounding intellectual property policy:
“I believe that where we stand today politically with respect to innovation policy and IP is where we stood with respect to environmental issues 30 or 40 years ago. Just like on innovation policy with environmental issues you see concentrated interests pitted against those of the general public. There also you have growing political engagement as a result of significant external changes. And just like with the environment 40 years ago we are beginning to build a movement to properly represent the public in these issues.
Today when you look at a political party it will have a position on the environment and we even have ‘Green’ parties — albeit generally small ones — specifically focused on those issues. We’ve even got to the stage where in the UK the Conservaties, a right wing party, took out full-page ads to announce its new policy agenda one of the five bullet points was about the environment.
Similarly I think 30 years from now innovation policy will have the same prominence. All political parties will have positions on these kinds of issues, and not buried away somewhere in their manifesto but the kind of things they mention when they take out those full-page ads. There will also be a much, much fuller civil society engagement in these issues.”
Full article available here
March 21st, 2006
With just under two weeks remaining till the official deadline for responses to the EU Community Patent Consultation passes, FFII is urging small and medium enterprises, individuals and stakeholders to prepare their submissions.
In a letter to small and medium enterprises Pieter Hintjens, Director FFII, said:
“The question of software patents affects us all, and we must seize this opportunity to influence future laws. It is not often that we can make a difference, but this is one of those few times. The FFII will be monitoring the consultation process and holding a dialogue with the Commission to represent you.”
Full FFII analysis is available online here
If you have questions please send them to consultation@ffii.org
March 21st, 2006
Previous Posts