European Ministers approve software patents, Parliamentary vote still pending...

[Bill Sconce]

On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 08:52:54 -0500
Ted Roche <tedroche at tedroche.com> wrote:

> At last nights CentraLUG meeting, there was discussion over the status 
> of European software patent rules...
> 
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/07/ec_says_yes_patents/


For more info, there has been good ongoing history and commentary at
    http://www.groklaw.net

More specific to yesterday's news, from FFII,
    http://wiki.ffii.org/Cons050307En
this:

7 March 2005 -- The Council Presidency today declared the software
agreement of 18 May 2004 to have been adopted, in violation of the
procedural rules and in spite of the evident lack of a qualified
majority of member states and the requests of several states to
reopen negotiations.

Report

    * Cyprus submitted a written declaration at the start of the
      Council session
    * Poland, Denmark, Portugal and others (not specified) asked
      for a B item (discussion point)
    * The Luxembourg presidency claimed this was not possible
      due to procedural reasons, and that this would have 
      undermined the whole process -> it would stay on the
      list of A-items
    * Luxembourg then gave a long statement regarding how the
      EP still gets a chance in second reading, the importance
      of avoiding legal uncertainty etc.
    * Denmark said it was disappointed about this, but accepted
      and submitted a written declaration
    * Later on, the list of A items was accepted by the Council 

Conclusion

    * Luxembourg negated the Council's own Rules of Procedure, 
      which state that a B-item (which is at the same time a 
      request to remove an A item) can only be rejected by the
      a majority of the Council, and not just by the Presidency.
      (art 3.8)
    * The objecting countries seem to have forgotten to request
      removal of the A-item from the agenda. Rules 3.1 + 3.7 would
      have given any single country the right to have the A-item
      removed, because the Luxemburg presidency had failed to
      insert it more than 14 days earlier. This is how Poland
      has removed A-items from the Agricultural & Fishery Council
      twice in the past.
    * This is a very sad day for democracy, and casts a very dark
      shadow over the European Constitution, which will give the
      Council even more power.