Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for March, 2012

All agree with Karel de Gucht

ACTA is a project under the Global Europe Strategy which attracts quite some controversy. I don’t mind if I add to that controversy because the agreement is both flawed in content and process. EU-Commissioner Karel De Gucht told during the September 8 2010 plenary debate
“What we are aiming at is simply setting an international standard in IPR enforcement that is reasonable, balanced and effective, and thus goes beyond the current WTO rules on IPR: the TRIPS agreement. This is the ultimate objective, on which I am sure we all agree.”
His staffer Rupert Schlegelmilch recently argued during the European Parliament workshop (1st March 2010) ACTA does  not aim to set a new standard.
60.   Stresses that European IPR policy towards developing countries should  not go beyond TRIPs Agreement obligations, but that it should instead  encourage the use of TRIPs flexibilities;
6.  Deplores the calculated choice of the parties not to negotiate  through well-established international bodies, such as WIPO and WTO,  which have established frameworks for public information and  consultation;
As you can see we all agree.

Read Full Post »

Sound great, the LXDE flavour of Linux Mint, the lightweight desktop environment.

Read Full Post »

Commissioner de Gucht appreciates social networks:

…in the end the vote [on SOPA] had not been held, following a hostile campaign by social networks and the loss of White House support.

and social media also spoiled De Gucht’s ACTA project:

…, the intense media campaign which was unleashed in Europe, instigated largely by the social networks, had since led a number of Union Heads of State or Government to decide to delay signature or ratification of the agreement by their national parliaments. He added that the campaign had also had a considerable influence on Members of the European Parliament and, following recent contacts with various political groups, he now felt it would be difficult to muster a majority in favour of ACTA within the EP.

Read Full Post »

Erik stumbled upon this, the Commissioners deliberation about ACTA.

The PRESIDENT thanked Mr DE GUCHT, Ms REDING, Ms KROES and Mr BARNIER for their comments. As time was short because of the imminent arrival of H.E. Mr Demetris Christofias, President of the Republic of Cyprus, he decided the debate on ACTA would be continued at a future meeting of the Commission. Nevertheless, he noted that all Members agreed on the principle of referring the matter to the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding the agreement’s compatibility with the treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. There was also agreement on the mandate to be given to Mr DE GUCHT to explore with the other institutions the possibility of joint action with regard to the Court of Justice.

Do you see the trick? The Commissioner De Gucht attempts to lead the ECJ Court cases of the member states. I wouldn’t trust De Gucht and the Trade directorate a second given their past stewardship of the dossier. But you never know how Parliament and Council arrange themselves.

[the President Barroso] therefore felt that the Court of Justice of the European Union should be asked to confirm the Commission’s position in this matter, namely that ACTA was consistent and compatible with the Treaties and with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. He suggested that that day’s discussion should consider that point, but also the question of when would be an appropriate time to refer the matter to the Court, and the possibility of consulting Parliament and the Council with a view to adopting a common approach in this matter.

The PRESIDENT felt in addition that the discussion should also look at the lessons to be learned from this experience and how the Commission could best anticipate and deal with such situations in the future. Although the Commission had provided the necessary technical assistance and information
throughout the negotiations and the conclusion of ACTA — thus ensuring that the process was completely transparent — it now found itself the focus of criticism for every possible negative aspect of the agreement.

He referred in this connection to the deafening silence from other interested parties — industry and creative artists in general — who would benefit from ACTA. He expressed regret that some groups and organisations were today completely absent from the public debate on an international agreement which was broadly to their advantage, when they had been able in the past to take part in campaigns to defend their interests vis-à-vis the Commission.

Finally, the PRESIDENT expressed the hope that the discussion would also touch upon the more general question of the Commission’s relations with the other institutions and the Member States, when the Commission was left with the task of defending single-handedly the final outcome of negotiations which they had all taken part in and supported.

Barnier wants to change the Commission’s communication policy:

Mr BARNIER was also of the opinion that the key role of social networks in public debate in Europe forced the Commission to think carefully about adapting some of its means of communication and that Members should discuss the matter as soon possible.

Read Full Post »

It is interesting how Cyber-security enters the defense agenda:

11:30-13:00 Session II: Shifting ‘smart defence’ from slogan to reality
The notion of Smart Defence has caught on quickly, no doubt because it offers a welcome solution to the intractable problems of capability shortcomings and defence cutbacks on both sides of the Atlantic. But what in practical terms does smart defence constitute, and how should it be benchmarked? Should NATO planners be creating a matrix that gives an at-a-glance guide to each member states’ capabilities in areas ranging from heavy airlift to tactical troop transport, UAVs to helicopters and battlefield communications to cyber-security? Above all, will smart defence be the making of a new eve in transatlantic defence cooperation with NATO, or the breaking of it?

Nice pattern “be the making …or the breaking of it”. Strange that the pitch includes a breaking scenario.

Read Full Post »

Impact Assessment for ACTA

Let’s not forget item 14 of the European Parliament resolution of 18 Dec 2008, quote:

14. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to negotiate ACTA under conditions of the utmost transparency towards EU citizens, especially with regard to the definitions of the terms “counterfeiting” and “piracy” and the criminal sanction measures foreseen; takes the view that the social impact of the agreement as well as the impact on civil liberties must be assessed; supports the establishment of a task force to examine the implementation of the agreement, by promoting this subject in dialogue between the European Union and third countries and as part of cooperation measures with those countries;

More than 3 years later the European Commission still has not complied with the Parliament resolution. For impact assessments the Commission provides a guideline COM(2010)573.

Read Full Post »

Commissioner Almunia has been a bit quite on the interoperability front, this changes now:

The European Commission has opened a formal investigation to assess whether The MathWorks Inc., a U.S.-based software company, has distorted competition in the market for the design of commercial control systems by preventing competitors from achieving interoperability with its products. The Commission will investigate whether by allegedly refusing to provide a competitor with end-user licences and interoperability information, the company has breached EU antitrust rules that prohibit the abuse of a dominant position. The opening of proceedings means that the Commission will examine the case as a matter of priority. It does not prejudge the outcome of the investigation.

The investigation follows a complaint alleging that MathWorks had refused to provide a competitor with end-user software licences and accompanying interoperability information for its flagship products “Simulink” and “MATLAB”, thereby preventing it from lawfully reverse-engineering in order to achieve interoperability with these two products.

Read Full Post »

Seltsame Metaphern im Bundestag, ein Abgeordneter der Opposition ist kritisch zur Rohstoffstrategie:

Oliver Krischer (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN):
Herr Minister, Ihre Ausführungen zur Plastiktüte und zur Staatspädagogik, aber auch zur Deutschen Rohstoffagentur haben gezeigt: Es ist ein lyrisches Programm. Es ist ein Programm ohne konkrete Maßnahmen. In der Tat: Es gibt ein Kapitel über Maßnahmen. Aber darin stehen keine Maßnahmen. Auch dort findet sich letztendlich wieder Lyrik.

Das Wort “Maßnahmen” kontakariert in der Tat auf jeder Zunge Schöngeistiges. Dabei ist Dichtkunst für Rohstoffe in anderen Kulturkreisen nichts ungewöhnliches. Li Zhaoxing, ehemals Aussenminister Chinas, zum Beispiel veröffentliche ein Gedicht “Fröhliches Fest für das Tangshan-Ölfeld”.

Und die Suche nach dem “rechten Maß” ist in der klassischen deutschen Literatur viel diskutiert. Fragt sich, woher es kommt, dass wir, wenn wir Maß nehmen, danach zur Tat schreiten. Da hat sich wohl etwas in die deutsche Behördensprache geschneidert.

Read Full Post »

Christiane Schulzki-Haddouti writes in Futurezone about alleged fears that the UN would take over the internet. With the UN she means ITU, the cartel-like UN organisation for international telecommunication companies, which still breathes the spirit of the times when telecommunication was a public utility service. She refers to an op-ed by Robert M McDowell in the Wallstreet Journal:

On Feb. 27, a diplomatic process will begin in Geneva that could result in a new treaty giving the United Nations unprecedented powers over the Internet.

Just consider the recent attempt with the SOPA laws to annex the Internet as a property of the United States. The position of McDowell is good old cyber-libertarianism:

A top-down, centralized, international regulatory overlay is antithetical to the architecture of the Net, which is a global network of networks without borders. No government, let alone an intergovernmental body, can make engineering and economic decisions in lightning-fast Internet time.

Still for certain functions you rely on neutral govermental players. Privacy and libel, contract law, protection of property, law enforcement etc. Non-intervention is a deliberate choice as is intervention.

Pro-regulation forces are, thus far, much more energized and organized than those who favor the multi-stakeholder approach.

I don’t know why anyone would still favour multi-stakeholderism. In Brussels multi-stakeholderism makes citizens feel alienated and public servants appear disloyal to their people.

Read Full Post »

Rottification of ACTA

Today the ACTA workshop turned out to be a catastrophy for ACTA proponents. Not because issues raised by MEP or participants were very tough, they weren’t. A toxic mix of clear cut academics speakers Geist/Geiger and then Sander and the Maastricht study butchering the agreement. We witness a slow “rottification” of ACTA. That’s my observation. Not because I want this, but I know how many other corps would appear once you go further into the details or really make a brutal case. The supporting lobby is completely in the hiding. I am listening to the third panel where it is tried to put some boring positive spin on it. I just heard that Schlegelmilch said ACTA “does not impose a new standards”, contrary what the upbeat Commission claimed all the time.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.