FFII (https://ffii.org/tag/press/page/5/)
Berlin, March 25th 2011 — This week Microsoft sued the retailers Barnes&Noble, Foxconn and Inventec for distributing devices using the Android platform. The Android is a Linux derivate from Google. It is the most recent lawsuit in a battle of dominance on the tablet and smartphone market. “What a desperate sales argument to sue retailers which use a competing platform. It’s ‘Take our platform or get sued’.
Brussels, March 21st 2011 — The European Parliament wants to make software producers liable for defects. Ahead of the vote on the Consumer Rights Directive on Thursday 24 March, a political agreement amongst the groups in the European Parliament would put software and webservices providers liable for damages under the goal of providing consumer protection. “During the software patent debate we underlined that Data processing is no field of technology”, explains FFII president Benjamin Henrion. “The physical world is different from the digital environment”. He continues: “Similar to the software patent directive, it is another piece of legislation that makes software development a much more risky business”.
Brussels, 11 March 2011 — The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) supports asking the European Court of Justice an opinion on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). On Monday 21 March 2011 the European Parliament Legal Affairs Committee may vote on a proposal for such a request. Unbalanced enforcement measures may heighten market entrance risks for innovators, according to the FFII. Startup companies are often confronted with patent minefields. Even a mere allegation of infringement may easily lead to market exclusion.
Brussels, 7 February 2011 — A study commissioned by the European Commission advocates the abolition of the national prosecutor’s discretion whether to prosecute and how to charge the defendant. It also argues in favor of a European criminal court and for the criminalisation of patent infringements. The main question the EU study had to answer is whether EU criminal measures aimed at ensuring the enforcement of intellectual property rights are essential. The EU is only competent to adopt criminal measures if the criminal measures have been proven “essential”. The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) observes that the study fails to prove EU criminal measures aimed at ensuring the enforcement of intellectual property rights are needed.
Brussels, 19 January 2011 — The European Union advances on a super-fast track on the “enhanced cooperation” for unitary patent protection among a coalition of the willing after an envisaged Community Patent has once again failed to reach consensus in the Council, attributed to the linguistic divide. The fast move puts aside democratic scrutiny, questions on legality and European unity. The new Unitary Patent is proposed to put patent granting outside the EU in the hands of EPO. The EPO is controversial for its granting of software patents without a prior legislative authorisation. A Unitary Patent without a link to EU-innovation policy influence might be a toll on innovation and SME interests.
Brussels, 5 January 2011 — The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) requests proof that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement’s criminal measures are essential. The EU can only harmonise criminal measures if approximation of criminal laws and regulations of its Member States proves essential to ensure the effective implementation of a Union policy. The same is true for harmonisation by way of trade agreement. The FFII also requests documents which discuss the proportionality of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement’s criminal measures. The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)’s criminal measures criminalise ordinary companies and individuals.
Brussels, 16 December 2010 – The European Commission adopted a communication “Towards interoperability for European public services”, introducing the second incarnation of the European Interoperability Framework (EIF) and the European Interoperability Strategy (EIS) [1]. This week the Commission also published fresh Horizontal Guidelines [2] which bloc-exempt patent cartels from competition enforcement. “The European Interoperability Framework is a legend. It’s hard, indeed, to make impact that compares with the first EIF. Unfortunately the lobby watered European interoperability enforcement down.
Berlin, Nov 18th 2010 — India has just adopted an open standards preference policy. In contrast, the directorates for Internal Market and Trade recently hindered an adoption of the European Interoperability Framework (EIF) 2.0 during the European Commission’s inter-service consultations. The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) and other observers expect a watered down version of the EIF 2.0 to be released later this year which falls short to enforce Open Standards. “With its slow pace in delivering effective interoperability policies Europe falls behind emerging IT-superpowers as India”, warns FFII Vice-President Rene Mages. “Openness of web standards has been a key to the rapid growth of the world wide web.
Brussels, 11 November 2010 — The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) criminalises ordinary companies and individuals, according to the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII). In an open letter to the European Parliament, the FFII urges the Parliament to obtain the opinion of the Court of Justice as to whether ACTA is compatible with the EU Treaties. In its letter, the FFII points out ACTA’s criminal measures will bring three major changes compared with the 1994 World Trade Organization TRIPS agreement. First, ACTA is not limited to distribution of copyrighted works, but includes unauthorised use. Second, ACTA removes the scale element from the definition of the crime.
Brussels, 25 October 2010 — The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is not in line with present EU laws, according to a Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) analysis. Previously, the European Commission has often stated that ACTA would remain fully in line with existing EU legislation. Health groups have pointed out that ACTA will hamper access to essential medicine in developing countries. FFII’s analysis focusses on the impact ACTA will have on European SMEs in the ICT field, and on diffusion of green technology, needed to fight climate change. The FFII concludes that patents have to be excluded from ACTA’s civil enforcement section.