<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/plain; charset=utf-8">

#title: Call for Action III

#descr: In September 2003 the European Parliament voted to reaffirm the
exclusion of software from patentability.  Meanwhile, the Commission
and Council have ignored this vote and set new precedents in
undemocratic lawmaking.  The undersigned call on the various players
to do their part in remedying the situation.

#Wce: We are concerned that

#tef: In recent years, the %(tp|European Patent Office|EPO) has, in
contradiction to the letter and spirit of the written law, granted
more than 30,000 patents on rules for computing with conventional data
processing equipment, below termed %(q:software patents).  These
patents are as broad, trivial and damaging as their US counterparts.

#nle: In September 2003 the European Parliament voted to reaffirm the
exclusion of software from patentability by codifying the
%(ep:original interpretation of the law), and to clarify the
terminology of the %(tr:TRIPs treaty) by recourse to the traditional
theory of %(ti:technical invention), as found especially in the German
caselaw from %(DP) to %(FS).  The vote came after 19 months of
deliberation in 3 committees and was based on broad participation and
an extensive research literature.  Yet the Commission and Council have
refused to even discuss the problems addressed by the Parliament.
Instead they have attempted to force the discredited EPO practise
through a second reading in a new parliament, with tighter time
constraints and higher majority requirements.

#uoe: The Council's text %(ct:pretends) to exclude software patents, but in
fact only makes existing exclusions meaningless and prevents any
effective limitation of patentability.  Most of the wordings used
therein do not serve any purpose apart from soothing the consciences
of ministers and parliamentarians.

#WWn: The Council's decisionmaking was dominated by the very civil servants
who run the EPO, and pushed through against the will of national
parliaments.  During the process, both the Council and the Commission
have set troubling new precedents for undemocratic lawmaking in the
EU.

#Fea: For these reasons we call on the responsible legislative players to
act as follows.

#eon: We urge the EU Council to explain, by answering the FFII's %(kv:23
questions), how its claimed %(q:common position) on software patents
of 7th of March 2005 came about.

#ltt: We urge the European Patent Office to immediately stop granting
patents on business methods and data processing rules and to revert to
a %(ee:correct interpretation) of %(ar:Article 52 of the European
Patent Convention), as generally practised at the EPO %(eb:before)
%(vc:1986).

#fWl: We urge the members of Europe's national parliaments to take
legislation on patent matters into their hands.  In the short term,
clear signals must be sent to prevent national patent offices and
patent courts from allowing %(pk:program claims).

#lep: We urge the members of Europe's national parliaments to bring the EU
Council under control.  At the very least, political agreements must
be subject to parliamentary ratification, especially when they contain
last-minute amendments.

#aWa: We urge the members of the European Parliament to %(p5:reaffirm the
Parliament's clear position of September 2003), including
%(pa:everything that is needed to close the loopholes), or, failing
that, to reject the directive entirely.

#Sno: Signatories

#agr: lead signatures

#Wfm: have yet to be collected, see calls of %(LST) for what it should
approximately look like.  If you would like to be displayed as a lead
signator, please contact %(CH).  If you want to help us solliciting
lead signators, please subscribe to the %(cp:project forum).

#rgr: more signatures

#gcr: %(N) persons have so far signed this appeal via the %(ps:FFII
participation system).

# Local Variables: ;
# coding: utf-8 ;
# srcfile: /ul/prg/src/mlht/app/swpat/europarl-cpedu.el ;
# mailto: phm@a2e.de ;
# login: phm ;
# passwd: YYYYY ;
# feature: ffiirc ;
# dok: cpedu0504 ;
# txtlang: xx ;
# End: ;