Fwd: swpat reply from Liz Lynne MEP (Lib Dem)

----- Forwarded message from Liz Lynne MEP <lizlynne-CVW/MsmY5bNaa/[email protected]> -----

From: "Liz Lynne MEP" <lizlynne-CVW/MsmY5bNaa/[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Software Patents: EU Council plans to scrap parliamentary vote 
without discussion
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 15:08:52 +0100
Message-ID: <EKEIJJIGHHMAAGALJLBGAEBGCAAA.lizlynne-CVW/MsmY5bNaa/[email protected]>
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Return-path: <lizlynne-CVW/MsmY5bNaa/[email protected]>
Importance: Normal


Liberal Democrat - West Midlands Region

55, Ely Street
Stratford-upon-Avon
CV37 6LN
Tel: 01789 266354
Fax: 01789 268848

Dear Henrion,

Thank you for contacting me concerning the proposed EU Directive on the
patentability of computer-implemented inventions. We addressed this 
issue in the Liberal Democrat IT policy paper "Making IT Work" which was 
adopted at our Spring Conference in 2003. This made it clear that we 
would "support continued widespread innovation in software by resisting 
the wider application of patents in this area."   The LibDems are in 
favour of increased legal certainty in the EU; a balance needs to be 
struck between the needs of small business on the one hand, to protect 
their inventions - and big business, on the other, from patenting 
everything to the exclusion of competitors.  This has guided our 
approach to the legislation during its passage through the European 
Parliament.

The European Parliament voted its first reading on the proposal in 
September 2003 where amendments were adopted to strictly limit patents 
to new inventions only.  The Parliament's position would harmonise 
current practice in the European Patents Office, and ensure that patents 
in the field of computer engineering would be issued on the same basis 
in all EU Member States.  Specifically, the UK Liberal Democrats 
supported an amendment to the definition, so that "In order to be 
patentable, a computer-implemented invention must be susceptible of 
industrial application and new and involve an inventive step.  In order 
to involve an inventive step, a computer-implemented invention must make 
a technical contribution".

More recently, the Council of Ministers adopted its common position on 
18 May 2004.  This is the text of the legislation as Government 
Ministers wish to see it adopted.  The Council has specifically excluded 
a computer program, as such, from constituting a patentable invention. 
It has also accepted the Parliament's amendment (above) as the Condition 
of Patentablity.

When the text comes back to the European Parliament for its second 
reading, possibly by the end of 2004, it will then be open to further 
amendment. As this legislation falls under the co-decision procedure, 
the European Parliament has equal powers to the Council of Ministers. 
The Council will therefore not be able to ignore the wishes of the 
European Parliament, and if an agreement is not reached at the second 
reading the directive will go in to a conciliation process between the 
Parliament, Council and Commission.

Rest assured that Liberal Democrats will continue to fight for a fair
outcome on this issue.

Yours sincerely,



Liz Lynne MEP


----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
Benjamin Henrion <[email protected]>
http://bh.udev.org