EU Commissie wil rechtspraak uitbesteden

[Cees Binkhorst]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Het lijkt me dat de mensen die dit pushen met onmiddellijke ingang uit de
EU-burelen moet worden gegooid.
Misschien een punt voor 4 juni a.s.: je owrdt alleen verkozen als je deze
mensen eruit gooit?

Groet / Cees

Via ffii.org
Brussels, 12 May 2009 -- The European Commission is pushing for software
patents via a centralised trusted patent court that would be created
with the United Patent Litigation System (UPLS), an international treaty
that would remove national courts. This court system would be shielded
against any review by the European Court of Justice (ECJ). Thus patent
judges would have the last word on software patents.

At the next Competitiveness meeting of May 28-29, the Council of
Ministers will request a legal opinion to the ECJ about potential
conflicts of the UPLS with the EU treaties. The current draft mentions
that the ultimate power to interpret patent law will rest with
hand-picked patent judges.

Hartmut Pilch, founder of the Foundation for a Free Information
Infrastructure (FFII) predicted this already in 2007: "I don't think EU
joining European Patent Convention (EPC) would automatically mean that
ECJ can intervene on substantive patent law questions. If there is a ECJ
above the European Patent Judiciary (EPJ), then probably only for very
special questions relating to areas outside patent law, such as EU
treaties, and it would not be accessible to the litigating parties but
only to the EPJ itself."

Benjamin Henrion, President of the FFII and leader of its litigation
working group, says: "A central patent court forbidding any petition
right for review to the ECJ means the patent court has the last word
over software patents. The Agreement is drafted in a way to avoid the
ECJ intervention on substantive patent law."

Brian Kahin, senior fellow of the Computer & Communications Industry
Association, says: "Given the U.S. experience with the Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit and the many areas where the Supreme Court has
recently stepped in to provide balance, it is clear that the European
Court of Justice needs to be able to oversee the evolution of patent
law. Otherwise, there is constant danger that a self-interested patent
community will successfully press to expand the scope, volume, and power
of the patent system."

The UPLS carries the risk that specialized patent courts will have the
last word for important questions such as limits of patentability. This
is typically what happens in Germany where the Senates of the Federal
Patent Court should refer basic questions to the Supreme Court but do
not do this.

Benjamin Henrion concludes: "This specialized patent court will be
shielded against external intervention and won't be an EU institution.
Those patent judges want to have the last word over European patent
law."

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********