McCreevy: rejection of software patents motivated by anti-globalism, anti-americanism
In an Interview, published on the same day of the second reading in the European Parliament, commissioner Charles McCreevy shows what he thinks about the opposition to software patents. This goes far beyond normal politic rhetorics.
The interview is published here.
Some quotes from this interview:
A row over software patents is linked to bitter opposition over EU economic liberalisation and to broader anti-free market sentiment, the European Commissioner for the Internal Market has said.
It might seem strange that extension of state-granted monopolies is portrayed here as an example of "EU economic liberlisation" and "free market".
|"The theme, or the background music, to both of these particular directives you could see as part of, anti-globalisation, anti-Americanism, anti-big business protests --- in lots of senses, anti-the opening up of markets," he told this website.|
Companies like !MySQL, RedHat, Sun and thousands of others hardly match the anti-attributes claimed by Mr. McCreevy. Anti-globalist rhetoric is nowadays more frequently heard from the pro-patent lobby, which has been claiming that it needs patents to protect Europe from the Yellow Peril, see e.g. Sennheiser or Langen PR. The latter labelled the software patent critics as "lackeys of Asia and America".
|The commissioner will not allow the European Parliament to rewrite the CII --- amendments will be voted on this Wednesday.| |"What I've said all along is we're not going to allow a situation to develop whereby with amendments and changes we end up doing exactly the opposite of what this particular directive set out to do. That I have made clear," he said.| |"I have also made clear is that if the parliament was to reject the directive then I would not be putting another proposal on the table. That remains my position."|
To sum it up: This directive is not about "harmonisation and clarification" but about codifying unlimited patentability, according to doctrines developped by the European Patent Office in conjunction with this directive project in the late 1990s. If that aim, as outlined by the Commission and Council, is not achieved, the Commission prefers to have no "harmonisation and clarification" at all.