PCINpact revealed on Feb. 5th 2013 an ongoing renegotiation on Microsoft's « Open Bar »
offer to the French Ministry of Defence. The initial contract has been concluded in 2009 without any call for tender and it seems to have neglected many public procurement principles. April requests the suspension of this renegotiation and transparency about this issue.
April has signed the Free Software Foundation's statement against
restrictions on software installation on computers named "Secure Boot"
(however, it is currently up for grabs whether this technology will live up to its name, or will instead earn the name "Restricted Boot").
This sytem is part of what we call "treacherous computing", whose purpose is to prevent users from controlling their computers for the benefit of a few monopolistic companies. This is one of the dangers threatening Free Software.
On January 15th, 2013, the minister in charge of SMEs,
innovation, and the digital economy, Fleur Pellerin, responded to
a written question by the member of parliament Jean-Jacques
Candelier.
On 22 November 2012, the European Commission organized a workshop, which April attended, on the FRAND licenses and open standards.
During that day, many people spoke out to remind those in attendance of the importance of truly open standards, be it for competition, for data continuity, or to avoid technological confinement. Even if the European Commission has already said that this day would not lead to legislative progress strictly speaking, April is pleased to note that most of the players in the field concur on the need to use open standards.
On Tuesday December 11th, 2012, the European Parliament voted for the regulation
on the unitary patent: Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have eventually accepted
the text despite all legal, economic and political concerns over which we had warned them1.
Only a few days before the debate and vote on the proposed unitary patent on December 10th and 11th, 2012, new information is still coming to reinforce further the project's lack of any viability:
Eva Lichtenberger, a Green/EFA Member of the European Parliament, sent on
Tuesday, Dec 4th 2012 an open letter to all MEPs, warning them of the threat
posed by the unitary patent and asking them to postpone the vote, in order to
have a real debate and ensure the legality of the patent package.
The plenary regarding the unitary patent is looming, with the deadline for
amendements tabled in less than 24 hours, on Wednesday, Dec 5th 2012 at noon.
On Monday, November 26th, 2012, the legal affairs (JURI) Committee of the
European Parliament held an exchange of views with the legal services1 on the
legality of the Cypriot compromise on the unitary patent regulation. Once again, the
illegalities of the project have been made obvious, but nonetheless the European Parliament seems decided to go forward.
April calls for a re-examination of the text and the possibility to amend it, to ensure legal certainty.
1. The video of the exchange and a transcript are available on unitary-patent.eu.
On Monday November 26th, 2012, the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) at 15.45 of the European Parliament holds an exchange of views about unitary patent package in the presence of the legal service of the European Parliament. This is an opportunity for MEPs to question the legality of the last compromise proposed by Cyprus Presidency of the Council, as well as long-standing legal flaws in the Commission's initial proposal.
A few hours before the unitary patent debate in the legal affairs (JURI) committee of the European Parliament, PCInpact published the text of the proposed compromise 1 proposed by the Cypriot Presidency on the project.
The European Parliament just announced an exceptional meeting of the legal affairs (JURI) committee on Monday November 19th, 2012 at 7pm for the only purpose of discussing the unitary patent package. This new unexpected event in the unitary patent saga is a concern. There is an urgent need to get in touch with the MEPs to let them know about the threats of the unitary patent.
We have been informed that the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) of the European Parliament will hold an extraordinary meeting on Monday, November 19th, 2012 at 19.00 with an exchange of views on the state of play with regards to the unitary patent package. Discussions are likely to focus on a compromise found with the Council about a potential solution to the controversial removal of Articles 6 to 8 from the regulation on the unitary patent.
The Unitary Patent is a proposed European regulation that was first published in April 2011. Its aim is to unify patent titles and their jurisdiction between willing Member States, via an enhanced cooperation.
The underlying idea to this project is not a problem in itself. However, the mode of application currently considered are a source of concern for April: most of the project's modes of application would be entrusted to the European Patent Office (EPO), whose excesses towards software patents have long been denounced by April.
Indeed, since its inception, the EPO has been a strong supporter of software patents, even though software patents are prohibited by EPO's founding charter, the Convention on European Patent. To reach this conclusion, the EPO developed an artificial distinction between software "as such", which cannot be patented, and software associated to an invention or a physical support, which may be patented. This way, the EPO granted patents for software that had a "technical effect", even though this wording does not hold any meaning. This induces also many negative consequences, as demonstrated by the software war waged between Apple and Samsung in the Autumn of 2011.
These excesses are dangerous for innovation as a whole and especially for Free Software, as April pointed out in its summary of the software patent situation (in French). Software patents hinder creation and constitute a significant cost for companies. More than anything, software patents put into question the very concept of Free Software by challenging the idea that idea may range freely, i.e. cannot be attributed and only their material implementation can be attributed.
The project is currently being debatted by the Commission of Legal Affairs of the European Parliament. April suggested improvements on the project so that it complies with law and democratic rules.
In 2011 and 2012, European citizens took to the streets to protest against secret negociations of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) that threatened their fundamental freedoms. This led to a massive rejection of the agreement in the European Parliament in last July. The message was clear: no repressive measures without a democratic debate by our elected representatives.
.
On May 2, 2012, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) restated the mode of application of copyright to computer programs, in a very clear SAS vs WPL case. It repeated that a particular claimant cannot prevent other companies from offering other programs with similar features and that everyone can observe, study, test the operation of a program for which one has lawfully acquired the license.
The October agenda of the Legal Affairs (JURI) Committee of the European Parliament has been published. A discussion on the unitary parent is planned for the 11th of October, from 10:45 to 12:00. It is thus the moment to mobilise and to inform MEPs on the threat of the return of software patents, before new decisions are taken on the future of the regulation.
April is pleased with the French prime minister Jean-Marc Ayrault's publication of the circular dated September 19th, 2012 which presents "Orientations and Recommendations relative to the Use of Free Software in French Administration"1.
Despite what was said in July, the issue of the Unitary Patent was not discussed by members of the legal affairs (JURI) Committee of the European Parliament in its September meeting. The next Committee meeting will take place on October 10th and 11th, 2012. Until then, mobilisation needs to continue, especially since new documents just underlined the importance of the improvements wanted by April.
All those companies are asking members of the Legal Affairs (JURI) Committee of the European Parliament to amend the current proposal regarding the unitary patent, in order to ensure innovation and to avoid threatening the businesses of European IT companies. Such a mobilization underline how big the threat of innovation companies is with the unitary patent, especially since the proposal do not offer any safeguard against drifts such as software patents.
