Revised edition of [OutOfControl0506010En] by hanwen@xs4all.nl
- removed some of the more rabid language.
- reworded to sound more like english
- reorganised it completely. it seems that the english version was originally translated from French (?)
(replace terms in all caps suitably)
"Open Letter for a tight Democratic Control of the Council of the European Union
Dear Members of YOUR PARLIAMENT
Your minister XXX has the responsibility to decide on the Software Patent Directive. This directive determines whether or not the flood gates are opened for software patents. Since Software Patents can stifle a competitive and open information society, this is a crucial issue.
In the first reading of this directive, the Working Group has produced the most extreme text yet for unlimited patentability of software and business methods (2). In spite of requests by three countries to reopen negotiations (3), the Luxembourg Presidency formally approved the reading on the March, 7. Access to the documents was denied until the last minute "due to the sensitive nature of the negotiations and the absence of an overriding public interest" (4).
The position of YOUR COUNTRY is formulated by officials of the Council Working Group on Intellectual Property (Patents). These officials, who should represent national interests, are often selected from the staff of the patent offices, due to the perceived technical nature of the matter. Leaked minutes of the Council Working Group's secret meeting on 27th May and 3rd June (5) show that most patent administrators still promote the extension of software patentability. They misuse their anonymity to further the interests of European and National Patent Offices, in which they play an active role.
*Anonymous administrators with vested interests are already deciding the position of YOUR COUNTRY, away from public scrutiny. When their proposal enters the Council, it will be practically impossible to change. In effect, these officials have decisive power.*
Luxembourg has set a hurried schedule for each country to take a position on the amendments proposed by JURI (The Legal Affairs Comitee of the European Parliament). This will weaken the work of the Parliament, and influence them to vote for amendments that the Council Working Group can agree with.
In light of this schedule, we strongly urge you:
- to deny the Luxembourg Presidency a mandate for discussions on this issue, if the position of YOUR COUNTRY has not been approved by YOUR PARLIAMENT;
- to draft a resolution asking for an extension of 3 to 4 months for the Second Reading of the Council;
- to schedule a discussion in YOUR PARLIAMENT regarding software patentability.
Do not allow the European council to trample democracy and transparency!
The undersigned,
Type your name here"
****************************************************************
annotated original letter.
Open Letter for a tight Democratic Control of the Council of the Banana Union
This is stupid. Implying that the EU is a banana republic makes the rest of the letter harder to believe
"Dear Members of a National Parliament of Europe,
Your minister XXX has the heavy responsibility to open or not the flood gates for software patents in Europe (1). Currently, in the complete secrecy of their dark rooms Darkrooms are for gay nightclubs, and photography labs, anonymous patent administrators of the Council Working Group on Intellectual Property (Patents) are already deciding the position of your country on this issue, without any control from public eyes. When their proposal lays on the table in the Council, it will be practically impossible for it to be changed. These officials represent their national ministries Huh? Ministry doesn't have an official view, that's exactly what these officials are hired to form. Isn't the real problem that they are supposed to represent the interests of the country and/or the parliament but, due to the apparent technicity /not an English word/ of the matter, they are often selected among the staff of their national patent offices. Since, most often, ministers follow their cabinets AFAIK, cabinet is the collection of prime-minister and ministers. Ministry/department is meant instead?, these officials have decisive power.
In the first reading of this directive which one? Name it, the official documents issued by this Working Group have resulted in the most extreme text for unlimited patentability of software and business methods (2), which has been formally approved on last 7th March, the Luxembourg Presidency using an unknown procedure what do you mean unknown: do we writers not know what happened, or was the procedure secret. Are you implying that Luxembourg did something illegal? to ignore the will of three countries which wanted to reopen negotiations (3). This sentence is too long. It is also sends a clouded message: are you trying to say that the problem that the text is too extreme, or that Luxembourg is doing undemocratic actions? Access to those documents was denied until the very last minute "due to the sensitive nature of the negotiations and the absence of an overriding public interest" (4).
The Luxembourg Presidency has proposed a very hurried agenda on which anonymous patent administrators of each country are these the administrators talked about in the 1st paragraph? Then it should say "ministries." Or is this something different? Then it should make this clear. should take position on the amendments proposed by the Legal Affairs Comitee of the European Parliament. This initiative which initiative? the hurried agenda? or the formally approved reading? of the Council will probably why weaken the statement with "probably" result in weakening the transparent work /so, the non-transparent work of the is not weakened?/ of the Parliament, influencing incorrect gerund: "the council" is incluencing the members, not "theinitiative" Members of the European Parliament to vote for amendments on which the Council anonymous patent administrators can agree with.
The leaked minutes of the secret meetings organised last 27th May and 3rd June (5) shows that most anonymous patent administrators still profit from their anonymity to promote the extension of patentability, in the interests of the European and National Patent Offices, in which most of them play an active role. It is not rare to find the same people who are participating in those meetings at the Administration Board of the European Patent Office.
Therefore, in function of the hurried agenda (6) defined by the Presidency, we really urge you:
TODO: which countries have and have not done these points yet?
- to not give the Luxembourg Presidency a mandate for discussions
on this issue if the position of your country has not been approved by your democratic assembly;
- to draft a resolution so as to ask an extension from 3 months to
4 months for the Second Reading of the Council;
- to urgently schedule an agenda with discussions in your
Parliament on this crucial issue so what should be decided by the parliament? for survival of a competitive and open information society.
We would be very happy to see democracy and transparency taking the step over the dictatorship and the darkness of the most powerful body of the European Union. which one is that: the council? The Council WG? The EP?
The undersigned,
Type your name here"
