@Catherine: But they supported Written Declaration 12, and overwhelmingly for transparency in March http://keionline.org/node/801
So do not assume that the battle is lost just because MEPs voted for the Dark Side in the most recent vote. They do not vote consistently, it depends who's lobbying them most. For the Gallo report, they were heavily lobbied by Big IP, and the opposition didn't get organized until a few days before the vote. The lesson is to keep lobbying MEPs.
The article is a little unfair. There was opposition to the DEA when it was originally voted on -- just nowhere near enough. Unfortunately, that situation has not changed (or has changed for the worse). The only party to oppose it at the time, the Lib Dems is part of the governing coalition, which officially supports it. So the Lib Dems in the government cannot advance party policy; this makes the number of MPs able to speak out against the DEA even smaller than before.
Julian Huppert is a new MP (since the 2010 election). He is also a Lib Dem backbencher (i.e. not part of the government) so can say what he likes without the burden of "collective responsibility" that falls on government ministers. Currently the best way to get change in government policy on DEA is to ensure that Lib Dem backbenchers articulate party policy on it, and get them to influence the Lib Dems in the government to move the government policy towards opposition to the DEA.
wh: Your analysis is totally wrong, showing a fundamental misunderstanding of the compatible inks market. When you buy compatible ink cartridges, you know that that is what you are getting. Compatible ink manufacturers do NOT try to pretend they are anything other than exactly that: ink in cartridges that are *compatible* with a particular printer. It is NOT they equivalent of selling their own formula in empty Coke bottles: they are packaged differently, with the name of the ink manufacturer on the carton, and probably the name of the printer type(s) they are intended to work with in small(ish) print. They DO NOT PRETEND that they are selling ink made by HP, or Canon, or whatever. They generally use their own ink formulae, which for any compatibles manufacturer is most likely to be the same for all cartridges, regardless of printer brand they are intended to work with. Certainly one can argue that the printout quality is not going to be so good as with genuine inks, but you get what you pay for, and there is NO ATTEMPT TO MISLEAD.
It's not just procedural issues: TalkTalk and BT are also claiming that the DEAct is incompatible with EU law. That *would* make it invalid if a judge were to agree.
Actually conservatives don't really advocate free markets and open competition, they advocate whatever is in the interests of business and the wealthy. Often, but not always, that happens to be free markets.
"First to patent" (actually called First to File) does not mean prior art isn't considered. What it means is that if two people both apply for a patent on a similar invention, and no prior art is found to invalidate it, then the one who gets to the patent office first gets the patent. If there is prior art, then neither of them get the patent.
First to File actually makes it easier to invalidate bad patents, because prior art only needs to date from before when the patent was filed, not the earlier date of the claimed invention.
But the obviousness of the (abstract) process of detecting late-running trains bears no relationship to the cost or ubiquity of the hardware that is used to implement it. The patent is on the abstract process, which can be devised and documented with or without any implementation in hardware. Therefore, your argument is irrelevant.
So far the only part fo European Parliament that has capitulated is the team that was negotiating with the European Council. The package still has to be voted on in plenary. It is unusual for the European Parliament to vote something down in 3rd Reading, but it has happened. It ain't over until the fat lady sings.
PaulT: I suspect that the market players concerned (IFPI, Amazon, Play) are acting unlawfully if you are prevented from buying digital files from them when you're in Spain. The EU is (supposed to be) a single market, and forbids any market discrimination based on where a consumer lives within the EU. perhaps not helpful in the short term, but sooner or later they will have to come to terms with not only the realities of the internet, but also the law.
"the PTO runs fully off of the fees from the patent applicants, not tax dollars."
surely that's part of the problem: relying on fees from applicants means that it has a perverse incentive to approve as many applications as quickly as possible.
"Anybody 22 years old without at least a few pictures like that on a social site would be too weird a member of his generation to elect."
What?!?!? Wanting dignity, and wanting to keep your private life private, should be regarded as "weird"? I'm a little worried about comments like that. The suggestion that young people who don't want to make exhibits of themselves are weird and should "get with the program" is actually a new and pernicious form of conformity, where you have to be an extravert and exhibitionist to play a part in society. As a natural introvert and non-showoff I find this disturbing.
The law being debated next week is the "telecoms package" in which "three-strikes" was rejected last November --- that was the first reading, this is the second reading. Yes, the one voted on yesterday is a separate law.
If it were about *governments* explicitly regulating DVD disks and players so that DVDs purchased in one country would not be playable on players sold in another country, it would undoubtedly be classed as unlawful trade restraint under WTO rules, and stopped. But since it's a private body (DVD-CCA) doing it, there is apparently nothing stopping it (AFAIK (IANAL) the WTO has no control over actions by private bodies... altho' a case could perhaps be made that DMCA-like laws banning the bypassing of region codes mean that governments are effectively promoting such trade restraints).
Apparently the DVD-CCA wanted to have separate regions within the EU, but were slapped down because the EU is a single market, so such trade restraints are forbidden within it. That's what a free market is supposed to be about --- anyone can buy things from anywhere. Wierd Harold seems to have a warped view of how markets should work: his view is essentially corporatist, as he apparently believes that businesses should be allowed to conspire to distort markets to their benefit at the expense of legitimate consumers. That is not how a free market is supposed to work. Every well-run capitalist economy has laws preventing companies from doing exactly that within its market. And so it should be the same globally. If the cheapest legtitimate DVDs are sold in Thailand, then consumers in Europe should not be artificially prevented from buying them in the Thai market and playing them in legitinately purchased equipment in their homes. It's as simple as that. Unfortunately ther is not enough international law to prevent businesses (as opposed to nations) from restraining trade against the public interest.
Not that surprising, but has to pass thru plenary also
The legal affairs committee, or JURI, nigh invariably takes the pro-rightsholder position on issues related to intellectual property (not surprisingly, as so many are, or were, IP lawyers, often working for Big Content and other big rightsholders). Therefore, this vote isn't too surprising. However, the next stage is not the Council, but the plenary session of the European Parliament (i.e. all MEPs), which is usually about 2 months after the committee vote. And MEPs as a whole tend to be much more sceptical than the legal eagles of excessive and/or intrusive IP protection.
It's not legally binding. Also it's by a parliamentary committee that usually bows to rights-holders' interests. There's hope --- Amendment 138 (banning 3-strikes) wasn't in the original Telecoms package as voted on by the same committee, it had to be added in the plenary vote.
On the post: EU Parliament Members Not At All Happy About ACTA
http://keionline.org/node/801
So do not assume that the battle is lost just because MEPs voted for the Dark Side in the most recent vote. They do not vote consistently, it depends who's lobbying them most. For the Gallo report, they were heavily lobbied by Big IP, and the opposition didn't get organized until a few days before the vote. The lesson is to keep lobbying MEPs.
On the post: EU Parliament Members Not At All Happy About ACTA
The European Parliament has rejected a treaty before
On the post: UK MPs Questioning Digital Economy Act: IP Address Does Not Identify Individual
Julian Huppert is a new MP (since the 2010 election). He is also a Lib Dem backbencher (i.e. not part of the government) so can say what he likes without the burden of "collective responsibility" that falls on government ministers. Currently the best way to get change in government policy on DEA is to ensure that Lib Dem backbenchers articulate party policy on it, and get them to influence the Lib Dems in the government to move the government policy towards opposition to the DEA.
On the post: Lexmark, HP Using Patent Law To Try To Block Replacement Ink Cartridges From The Market
Re: Probably a minority viewpoint
On the post: UK ISPs Already Taking The Digital Economy Act To Court
EU law
On the post: Experts Draft Document Critical Of ACTA: Signatures Wanted
On the post: Boston Transit Authority Sued For Patent Infringement... For Letting You Know Your Train Is Running Late
Just to be clear about what "first to file" means
First to File actually makes it easier to invalidate bad patents, because prior art only needs to date from before when the patent was filed, not the earlier date of the claimed invention.
On the post: Boston Transit Authority Sued For Patent Infringement... For Letting You Know Your Train Is Running Late
Re: Re: Obviousness
On the post: EU Parliament Pressured By France, Removes Clause That Bans Kicking People Off The Internet
On the post: Norwegian ISP Fights Back Against Pirate Bay Ban
EU is a single market
On the post: RIAA Wastes Little Time Trying To Extend Interpretation Of Usenet.com Victory
It's "flout" not "flaunt"
On the post: How Patents Are Harming Small Companies Too
Patent offices *should* be publicly funded
surely that's part of the problem: relying on fees from applicants means that it has a perverse incentive to approve as many applications as quickly as possible.
On the post: The 8,000 Year Copyright?
"forever minus a day" is still "forever"
On the post: Political Candidate Drops Out Of Race Due To Racy Facebook Photos
don't call private people "weird"
What?!?!? Wanting dignity, and wanting to keep your private life private, should be regarded as "weird"? I'm a little worried about comments like that. The suggestion that young people who don't want to make exhibits of themselves are weird and should "get with the program" is actually a new and pernicious form of conformity, where you have to be an extravert and exhibitionist to play a part in society. As a natural introvert and non-showoff I find this disturbing.
On the post: European Parliament Still Debating Three Strikes Laws
also it's a committee vote next week
On the post: European Parliament Still Debating Three Strikes Laws
On the post: Obama's Gift To British Prime Minister Rendered Useless By DRM
Trade restraint
Apparently the DVD-CCA wanted to have separate regions within the EU, but were slapped down because the EU is a single market, so such trade restraints are forbidden within it. That's what a free market is supposed to be about --- anyone can buy things from anywhere. Wierd Harold seems to have a warped view of how markets should work: his view is essentially corporatist, as he apparently believes that businesses should be allowed to conspire to distort markets to their benefit at the expense of legitimate consumers. That is not how a free market is supposed to work. Every well-run capitalist economy has laws preventing companies from doing exactly that within its market. And so it should be the same globally. If the cheapest legtitimate DVDs are sold in Thailand, then consumers in Europe should not be artificially prevented from buying them in the Thai market and playing them in legitinately purchased equipment in their homes. It's as simple as that. Unfortunately ther is not enough international law to prevent businesses (as opposed to nations) from restraining trade against the public interest.
On the post: EU Committee Ignores All The Research; Approves Copyright Extension
Not that surprising, but has to pass thru plenary also
On the post: EU Court Says Simply Taking Someone's Photo Can Violate Their Civil Rights
Point of Information
On the post: EU Proposal Would Outright Ban BitTorrent Sites, Make ISPs Copyright Cops & Use 3 Strikes
It's an opinion only...
Next >>