Mon, 07 Mar 2005
Europe has become a circus
I really don't see why the mass media don't jump on this. Even if you don't uderstand what all the fuss about software patents is about, the amount of abuse going on in the Software Patents discussion is incredible, and of interest to everyone, especially now that people all over Europe have a chance to vote in referenda on a European Consitution; after all, if the system is broken, the People should know.
Let's recap.
- Somewhere 2002. Some subordinate of Frits Bolkestijn proposes a directive "on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions" (commonly known as the "software patents directive").
- September 2003. After adding a number of amendments and ending up with a compromise between those in favor and those against software patents, the parliament votes on the directive, approving the text.
- May 18th, 2004. The European Commission, which functions as a second chamber in European politics (but is much smaller than the Parliament) votes on the directive. In doing so, it removes all of the Parliament's amendments (so that it ends up at the non-compromising position of the pro-patents lobby again) and adds some of its own (that, needless to say, favour the pro-patent people again). Over the next few months, while defending their amendments, they outright lie, telling people that their amendments restrict the patentability of software (which people in the industry have been on record of saying that it is not true.)
- May 2004-November 2004. The Dutch and German national parliaments approve motions instructing their delegations in the European Commission not to support the directive. The German delegation even goes on record as promising they will not support it. When it comes to a vote, the Dutch delegation deliberately seeks loopholes in the motion by their parliament, so that by its letter (but against its spirit) they can vote for it, supporting the directive; and the German delegation manages to get an amendment through that only adds two words, so that they can claim the directive is now no longer dangerous and they support it none the less (which, needless to say, is so incredible that it would be funny if it wasn't sad).
- December 2004-February 2005. Even though the directive already lost its qualified majority since ages, it is repeatedly scheduled on the agenda of several minister meetings, as an A-item, that is, for it to be approved without discussion or without vote. They did this twice on the agricultural and fisheries meeting, and once on a meeting of financial ministers. No, nobody understands the link between agriculture and software patents. Special thanks go out to Poland, for getting the item off of the agenda twice.
- End of February 2005-current. The JURI commission–an organ of the European Parliament responsible for legal affairs–proposes a motion to restart the entire procedure, which would end the directive up at a new first reading; by doing so, the democratic process would get a fair chance, this time (which it didn't really get last time). When they vote on it, the vote is almost unanimously to support it. Yet, the European Council of Ministers (or the Commission, not entirely sure on that one) apparently is able to blatantly ignore the request.
The above is, in one word, incredible. Whether you support Software Patents or oppose them; or even if you don't care at all, doesn't really matter. One should be able to trust their decision-makers to follow procedures to the spirit rather than to the letter. To create good laws, that are supported by the majority of parliament rather than shabby texts written by whoever has the best money. Especially in light of the upcoming (or passed, in some countries) referenda on the European Constitution, it is imperative that we, as European Citizens, can trust our government.
With stunts such as the ones made by the European Commission in the Software Patent dossier, I don't think we can. If the European institutes can't be trusted to follow Democracy, how should I trust them?
Then again, maybe this is how politics work. Maybe this is one of those dossiers where things are especially ugly because it doesn't hit the mass media. Maybe I'm just naive. I dunno. But if that is the case, there should be a way for democracy to be forced upon all parties involved. If an organ of the Parliament votes on an issue, it should be binding, not just a recommendation. Or so.
As I said, the Software Patents issue has grown far, far beyond just Software Patents, to the point that the European instances have become a circus. Or, as some would put it, a Banana Republic. Please help in spreading that as a google ranking.
Note that I didn't do much research on the above list, so some of the details might be inaccurate. The general picture isn't, though.
