The EU Council had been expected to postpone a crucial decision on the the Computer-Implemented Inventions Directive until the New Year.
But, according to a Council agenda, EU diplomats will decide on Tuesday and Wednesday whether the directive will be included as an 'A-item' in the upcoming Fishery or Environment Council meetings, which will allow it to be passed without discussion or a vote.
Laura Creighton, the vice-president of the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII), is concerned that the EU Council could be contemplating passing the directive without discussion in an unrelated meeting.
"Before today it was possible for generous people to look charitably at this text [the proposed patent directive] as an example of a tragic mistake, not malice," said Creighton in a statement on the FFII Web site. "But not with this last-minute manoeuvring."
"Only the most committed opponent to the democratic process would believe that the proper response to the widespread consensus that there is something profoundly wrong with the Council's text is to race it through with an A-item approval the week before Christmas in a Fisheries Council Meeting. The bad smell coming from Brussels has nothing to do with the fish."
Over the last six months, numerous countries have expressed their concerns about the EU Council proposal. In July, the Dutch parliament passed a resolution calling the government to change the vote of the Netherlands from support to abstention. In October, the German political parties united in their support against patents, in contradiction to the German EU Council vote in May.
In November, the Polish government withdrew its support for the software patent directive, whereas in May it had abstained -- which had been interpreted by some as support for the directive. Later in November, an Austrian politician warned the Austrian Minister of Commerce and Industry that the draft directive on software patents could cause 'lasting damage' to small and medium-sized IT companies.
Supporters of the directive deny that it would allow the widespread patenting of software.
"The proposal specifically excludes the patenting of software per se, but will allow patents for innovative implementations of software within new technical products," John Jolliffe of the Initiative for Software Choice told ZDNet UK.
Talkback
Have you looked at the other items on the agenda with the CII Directive? Out of 16, I found only 1 that had anything to do with fish!
This is how the Council usually operates. Nothing sinister or unusual. Entirely routine. The Council discussed and agreed what its position would be last May.
Unusual no. Sinister yes.
The democratic will of the bulk of the european people is that software patents should not exist. That has been overruled by a so-called "economic majority" of corporate a$$hats. They should be taken out and shot as traitors.
Granting 20 year monopolies to giant megacorps is just stupid. It's absurd to see the EU criticizing microsoft's monopoly, while they hand MS a government-enforced monopoly on a plate
A silly joke
Probbly so the EU members will go "yes" in a bore
And now the truth
WAKE UP PEOPLE WE CAN STILL SAVE THE IT WORLD!
I've commented so many time about the errors of this proposed legislation, the apparent lack of common sense, the perceived lack of a democratic voice, the improper influence of the big business lobby and, in general, a lack of trust and faith in our politicians.
If Anon's comments about the ways of the Council of Ministers is correct, then I'm absolutely appalled.
Of course, this will play into the hands of companies whose sole business will be buying up patents for the sole purpose of sueing for royalties, evidence of which is already showing itself in America. Small and medium businesses will be seriously handicapped and inovation will surely suffer.
Software patents have been available in europe now for many years, and are routinely granted by the european patent office.
This truth is often overlooked by the open source community.
The directive (or, at least, the version which was presented by the commission) is aimed at maintaining this status quo.
My question is this:
If the open source community is so sure that the directive will bring doom, and given that the directive will not actually change anything, why has this doom not already taken place?
I think that the directive must be passed, and passed quickly, if we are to be certain of maintaining the present high standards of the software patent system in europe.