[ANSOL-geral][Fwd: Re: EU draft IP enforcement directive]

João Miguel Neves joao arroba silvaneves.org
Thu Aug 7 08:31:01 2003

Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-DQgjICqFz01p10EiQnXS"

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Um jornalista norte-americano pediu uma opini=E3o sobre a proposta que
referi h=E1 alguns dias aqui. Penso que a minha resposta pode ser =FAtil
para quem queira perceber o que se passa.
Jo=E3o Miguel Neves <joao arroba silvaneves.org>

Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Description: Mensagem reencaminhada - Re: EU draft IP enforcement
Content-Type: message/rfc822

Subject: Re: EU draft IP enforcement directive
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jo=E3o?= Miguel Neves <joao.neves arroba ansol.org>
To: "Standeford, Dugie" <dstandeford arroba warren-news.com>
In-Reply-To: <C1C977326222D311B9CD00805FC7A8C20129BFD1 arroba EXCHANGE>
References: <C1C977326222D311B9CD00805FC7A8C20129BFD1 arroba EXCHANGE>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-OKKSq35zrLAVq3eZKaXo"
Message-Id: <1060240929.1268.73.camel arroba home.silvaneves.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.4
Date: 07 Aug 2003 08:22:09 +0100

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Good morning,

Sorry for the long answer.

There are several issues with the proposed text. The current proposal
is, unfortunately, just one more step in a trend we've been observing:
applying industrial regulations to the population at large. With
copyright it happened through the development of technology, with the
Internet becoming the most visible effect.

With patents it happened with the weakening of the requirements for
applying for a patent, extending an industrial regulation to the
services sector, affecting contractors and small and medium enterprises.

Privacy, which has been a recognised value in the European Union, is at
risk. Articles 7 and 9 give the right holders access to information like
name, addresses and financial records solely on the basis of alleged
infringement. This can happen before a judge decides on the bases for a
case. Article 9 also gives the right holder access to the investigation
process, against the constitututionally established "justice secrecy"
that exists in most, if not all, EU countries.

Article 20 puts patent infringement (among others) in criminal law. This
changes the burden of investigation and research of patents to the
public judicial system. This reduces the cost of "business" to patent
hoarders (those whose "business" is to get has many patents as possible)
and reduces the ability to settle out of court with cross licensing,
because the accusing part is not the right holder.

The DMCA in the USA restricted distribution of some "circumvention
devices" regarding copyright. EUCD (directive 2001/29/EC) in the EU went
further and prohibited the manufacturing of such devices. Article 21
tries to broaden this logic to cover everything: An "illegal technical
device" is something that "permits the manufacture of goods infringing
industrial property rights" with no exceptions of any kind. If we apply
that reasoning solely to trademarks, then anything used for writing is
such a device, as I can use a pen, a printer, a word processor or a
graphics editing program to create an infringement on a trademark.

The abuse of the term "intelectual property" in the proposal confuses
the dicussion because we are talking of different laws in different
countries (patents, trademark, copyright, databases, personal data,
etc.). It's not possible to understand the real scope of this directive
before seeing the national implementations, and by that time it will be
too late to do anything.

That's hardly the only abuse in language in the proposal. The unproved
connection between counterfeiting and copyright infringement to
terrorism and other unsubstantiated claims are used to promote a piece
of legislation whose main purpose is to instill fear on the population
at large regarding copyright, patents and others. Hardly the way to
promote innovation.

ANSOL, Associa=E7=E3o Nacional para o Software Livre (National Association
for Free Software) which promotes the use of software that allows its
users to use it, study and modify it, redistribute it and publish
modified versions. Regarding specifically this proposal we're contacting
the portuguese members of the european parliament commission that is
working on this and the portuguese media. We are also participating in
an european wide campaign that we hope will raise the awareness on this

A Qua, 2003-08-06 =E0s 20:43, Standeford, Dugie escreveu:=20
> Good morning, Mr. Neves.
> I am a reporter with Washington Internet Daily in Washington, DC.  I was
> given your name by Robin Gross at IP Justice.
> I'm working on a story about the draft IP enforcement directive.  I
> understand that many civil liberties/consumer groups oppose parts of it.
> Can you tell me what your organization's main concerns are with the
> document?  What, if anything, is ANSOL doing to persuade the EU to modify=
> pull back the draft?
> Thanks for any information you can provide.
> Dugie Standeford
> Associate Editor
> Washington Internet Daily
> Warren Communications News
> 2115 Ward Court NW
> Washington, DC 20037
> 202-872-9202 x251


Jo=E3o Miguel Neves <joao.neves arroba ansol.org>

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc

Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)




Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc

Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)