Proposed directive on criminal measures aimed at ensuring the enforcement of intellectual property rights: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Revision as of 20:04, 19 March 2016 edit Edcolins (talk \| contribs) Administrators 52,501 edits m →‎References: removing hidden comment and replacing reflist template ← Previous edit		Revision as of 20:08, 6 January 2018 edit undo InternetArchiveBot (talk \| contribs) Bots, Pending changes reviewers 5,260,169 edits Rescuing 3 sources and tagging 0 as dead. #IABot (v1.6.1) (Balon Greyjoy) Next edit →
Line 30: The criticism voiced by [[Electronic Frontier Foundation\|EFF]],<ref name="eff.org">https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/005174.php</ref> [[Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure\|FFII]],<ref name="action.ffii.org">http://action.ffii.org/ipred2/FFII_Analysis?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=introduction.pdf</ref> Law Society of England and Wales,<ref name="lawsociety.org.uk">http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/secure/file/157008/e:/teamsite-deployed/documents//templatedata/Internet%20Documents/Non-government%20proposals/Documents/ipcriminalsanctions310806.pdf</ref> the Dutch Parliament,<ref>http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=354&res=1024_ff&print=0</ref> and others includes: The original proposal did not explain the terms it was using. The definitions section (Article 1) was only added in the subsequent readings.<ref>{{cite web \|url=http://www.ip.mpg.de/shared/data/pdf/directive_of_the_european_parliament_and_of_the_council_on_criminal_measures_aimed_at_ensuring_the_enforcement_of_intellectual_property_rights.pdf \|title=Archived copy \|accessdate=2007-04-24 \|deadurl=yes \|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20061222010703/http://www.ip.mpg.de/shared/data/pdf/directive_of_the_european_parliament_and_of_the_council_on_criminal_measures_aimed_at_ensuring_the_enforcement_of_intellectual_property_rights.pdf \|archivedate=2006-12-22 \|df= }}</ref> The scope of the Directive is too wide (Article 2). The draft directive still applies to a broader range of intellectual property infringements than commercial piracy and counterfeiting. As a result, it is far broader than the current international standard for criminal IP enforcement — the 1994 TRIPs agreement.<ref>http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/27-trips_01_e.htm</ref> Patents have recently been taken out of the scope but many other IP rights have not. Some of the latter are poorly suited to criminal regulation (such as database rights or conditional access to pay TV regimes).<ref name="action.ffii.org"/> The inclusion of aiding, abetting or inciting (Article 3) puts businesses at unnecessary risk of criminal liability.<ref name="lawsociety.org.uk"/> Line 50: * [http://ec.europa.eu/prelex/detail_dossier_real.cfm?CL=en&DosId=193131 Proposal for a EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND COUNCIL DIRECTIVE on criminal measures aimed at ensuring the enforcement of intellectual property rights] * Comments from [[patent attorney]]s: ** [http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20070802194053/http://www.ipjur.com/2005/07/new-proposal-for-european-parliament.php3 Comment on Axel H. Horns' blog on Intellectual property law] * Comments from other [[lobbying\|lobbyist]]s and [[think tank]]s: [https://web.archive.org/web/20060705162442/http://wiki.ffii.de/IpredNlParl060629En Dutch Parliament says No to European criminal law against IP violations] at the [[Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure\|FFII]] [http://wiki.ffii.org/Ipred2En Directive on criminal measures and intellectual property rights] at the [[Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure\|FFII]] ** [http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/ipred2/ipred2.html IPRED2's effects on software freedom, and what we can do] by [[Free Software Foundation Europe]]