PRESS RELEASE FFII -- [ Europe / economy / ICT ] ========================================================================== 01/07/04: Dutch Parliament forces Minister Brinkhorst to withdraw support for software patents directive ========================================================================== Today, July 1st, the Dutch Parliament has decided to direct Minister Brinkhorst and Secretary of State van Gennip (Economic Affairs) to withdraw the Dutch vote in support of the Council of Ministers' text for the Directive on Software Patents. This is the first time in the history of the EU that such a course of action has been undertaken. /Igår, den 1 juli, instruerade det holländska parlamentet Nederländernas näringsminister, Laurens Jan Brinkhorst, att i ministerrådet dra tillbaka den holländska rösten för ministerrådets förslag till direktiv, som legaliserar mjukvarupatent i Europa. Det här är första gången i EU:s historia som något liknande inträffar./ The idea of allowing patents on software has been strongly criticized among SMEs, scientists and consumer organisations. They inhibit investments in Research and Development and contribute to higher prices. Commentators also fear the rise of a "lawyers paradise" in Europe such as is found in the USA, where programmers are constantly threatened by lawsuits. /Idén att tillåta patent på mjukvara har varit starkt kritiserat bland små och medelstora företag, vetenskapsmän och konsumentorganisationer. Mjukvarupatent förhindrar investeringar inom forskning och utveckling och bidrar till högre priser. Motståndare till detta förutspår ett "juristparadis" i europa i likhet med det man idag finner i USA, där programmerare ständigt hotas av juridiska tråigheter./ This act represents an incisive criticism of the European Council of Ministers' attempts to introduce broad patentability of software. Minister Brinkhorst, acting on behalf of the Netherlands, endorsed the Council's current proposal, which not only reiterated the terms of the Council's strongly criticized first proposal, but went even further, directly rebuffing the clear stance assumed by the EU Parliament, which voted to add numerous amendments which made clear how the category of logical algorithms would be treated. The European Parliament's version asserted that patents would only be allowed for industrial inventions (e.g. washing machines) and would not be made possible for pure software. All these adaptations were removed in the Council of Ministers' controversial version. /Det europeiska parlamentet såg till i sin första läsning att patent endast kan beviljas för uppfinningar med en industriell tillämpning (t ex. tvättmaskiner) och att det inte tilläts för mjukvara. Allt detta var borttaget i ministerrådets kontroversiella version./ Earlier, Brinkhorst described the Council proposal to the Dutch Parliament as a compromise with the EP. In recent legislative debates, Van Gennip was forced to admit that this was incorrect information, and attributed it to "an error in the word processor." /Tidigare beskrev Brinkhorst ministerrådets förslag som en kompromiss mellan ministerådet och EU-parlamentet för det holländska parlamentet. Men i senare debatter blev Van Gennip tvingad att medge att detta inte var riktigt och tillskrev det som "ett fel i ordbehandlaren"./ The Dutch Parliament rejected this explanation and today it rendered an historic and groundbreaking decision, calling upon Minister Brinkhorst and van Gennip to withdraw the Netherlands' supporting vote in the European Council and convert it to an abstention. This measure is possible because at the present moment there is only a "political agreement" and the "formal vote" can only take place after the contested text has been translated into the 20 European languages. An emergency brake move in the procedure such as this has never been exercised before. /Det holländska parlamentet avvisade denna förklaring och tog igår ett historiskt och banbrytande beslut. Ett beslut som uppdrar åt Brinkhorst och van Gennip att dra tillbaka Nederländernas röst för ministerrådets förslag / . . . / Det här tilltaget är möjligt eftersom det för tillfället endast finns en "politisk överenskommelse" och den formella omröstningen först kan ske när förslaget blivit översatt till de 20 europeiska språken. En nödbromsning i processen, liknande denna, har aldrig någonsin vidtagits förr./ With this decision, the Dutch Parliament demonstrates the active interest her public holds in the debate over software patents, and her recognition and appreciation for the adaptations introduced by the European Parliament. Dieter Van Uytvanck, spokesman of FFII Netherlands, stresses the importance of this decision: /Dieter Van Uytvanck, talesman för Holländska FFII, påpekar vikten av detta beslut:/ This political signal reaches much further than just The Netherlands. We hope that other European countries that also have their doubts about the proposal of the Council will also withdraw their support, so that the current proposal no longer has a majority. The historic precedent has been set now. Let this be a lesson to the lawmakers in Brussels: the European citizen watches you closely. It is much better to take this into account from the beginning than to get into trouble later. Reports of earlier debates are available at: * http://kwiki.ffii.org/index.cgi?NlParlDebate0426En * http://kwiki.ffii.org/?NlGovLttrResp0422En ========================================================================== Contact ========================================================================== Wiebe van der Worp wiebe@vrijschrift.org tel. +31 6 28 195 808 Ir. Arend Lammertink: alam@home.nl tel. +31 6 5425 6426 Dieter Van Uytvanck: dieter@vrijschrift.nl tel. +32 499 16 70 10