Duff calls for overhaul of EU patents in wake of EU software crisis

4.55.08pm BST (GMT +0100) Wed 6th Jul 2005

Following the defeat of the Computer-Implemented Inventions Directive in the Parliament today, Liberal Democrat Euro-MP Andrew DUFF has warned of the dangers of inaction. Mr DUFF, who played a leading part in the mounting of Parliament's opposition to the draft law, made the following statement:

"We can be satisfied though not complacent at the outcome of this legislative battle. It is good that a bad piece of draft law is now dead, but the Parliament's rejection of the Council's draft law at second reading should only be welcomed if action is now taken to sort out the mess that surrounds the question of patents in the European Union.

"At present the single market suffers from 25 different national patent systems which is costly and long-winded for firms and inventors. EU harmonisation of patent law is needed so that enterprises can have a one-stop shop and a single language for filing for patents across the EU. The European Court of Justice needs to be able to develop its own case law in patents.

"In the light of the defeat of the sector-specific legislation, Mr Barroso's Commission must take action and give impetus to the general 'Community Patents Directive'.

"With respect to the computer industry, our aim throughout was to stop the spread of patentability to pure software. A majority of MEPs realised the danger that the proposed CII Directive risked stifling innovation and adding substantially to the costs of software development. Less innovation would mean higher prices for consumers, and a defeat for Europe's global competitivity."

Mr DUFF represents the East of England which enjoys Europe's largest cluster of the software industry. He added:

"The drafting of the law we were invited to pass was shoddy. There was a real danger that it could have opened the door to a further spread of patents towards computer programs. While software code can be protected by copyright in any case, it is important that the spread of patents does not impede the growth of open source development or the interoperability of systems. What Europe needs is a clear, consistent regulatory framework with enforceable remedies. The patent regime must exclude software as such, algorithms and business methods while allowing patents for genuine inventions with commercial application.

"Unless we get more legal clarity and consistency, European patentability will continue to be governed by a muddle of different national laws, some trivial patenting by the (non-EU) European Patents Office, and by decisions of the WTO under the 1994 TRIPs agreement.

"I am happy to have worked with the Parliament's rapporteur Michel Rocard (Socialist), Jerzy Buzek (European People's Party) and others to have halted this potentially damaging piece of legislation.

"I am only sorry that although we had a simple majority of MEPs on our side, we had not achieved the absolute majority (367 votes) that is needed to amend the draft law at second reading. It was clear that the quality of the CII Directive could only have been improved through substantive negotiations between Council, Commission and Parliament in the formal conciliation process that would have preceded the third reading. In the end there was a lack of political will to carry on the fight. Parliament's withdrawal of support for this Bill in these circumstances does not mean that the problems the legislation was first introduced to address have gone away.

"Lastly, I must commend the vigorous and intelligent lobbying that has been brought to bear on MEPs from both sides of the divided industry. Without effective lobbying the real and serious issues involved in this legislation would never have been exposed. It has been impossible to please everyone - but certainly the interests of SMEs have been assisted by the Parliament's rearguard action. The effort must however continue to ensure that US-style patent laws do not spread by infection into the European single market."

ENDS/...