Post on 29-Nov-2014
description
To Lisbon orto prison?
Jonas MaebeFoundation for a Free Information Infrastructure
With thanks to Ante Wessels 6 December 2006
IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements
(COD 2005/0127)
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
IPRED2:General overview
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Think of the children
• Counterfeit and copyright piracy goods:
• Produced with child labour
• Endanger public safety/health
• Fund organised crime and terrorists
• Destabilise economy and governments
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
IP infringer = criminal
• Criminalise all intentional IPR infringements on a commercial scale
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
All IPRs• Directive applies to all kinds of “intellectual
property”
• Patents
• Copyright
• Trademarks
• Sui generis rights of database makers
• ...
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Not all IPRs are equal• Patent infringement: regular business practice
• Trademark confusion
• EC: the economic impact of the “sui generis” right on database production is unproven
• Plant variety rights: cross-pollination
• ...
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Intentional
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Intentional
• Basic principle of criminal law: everyone is supposed to know the law (“Sorry, I didn’t know killing was illegal.”)
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Intentional
• Basic principle of criminal law: everyone is supposed to know the law (“Sorry, I didn’t know killing was illegal.”)
• Intentional: in criminal law, may mean “consciously, not accidentally” (“I wrote this patent-infringing program accidentally while sleeping.”)
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Commercial scale
• Some proposed definitions: “direct or indirect economic advantage”
• May even apply to private persons (advantage: paying less for a product)
• Needed condition: intent to earn a profit
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Trademark infringement
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/5169520.stm
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Trademark infringement
“We are a small company based in north Wales - these [lawsuit] costs would have been
nothing to Burger King but they probably would have cost us our business.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/5169520.stm
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Trademark infringement
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2006/2355.html
v.
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Database infringement
v.
http://www.ivir.nl/publications/hugenholtz/fordham2001.html#verwijzing12
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Database infringement
v.
http://www.ivir.nl/publications/hugenholtz/fordham2001.html#verwijzing28
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Copyright infringement
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=a5gfABLl6v3E
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Copyright infringement“… serious threat to national economies and
governments.”
“… increasingly linked to organised crime.”
“… lucrative activities in the same way as other large-scale criminal activities such as
drug trafficking.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=a5gfABLl6v3E
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Other problems
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Other problems• Include private agents in criminal
investigations
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Other problems• Include private agents in criminal
investigations
• Allow governments to start investigation without a prior report
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Other problems• Include private agents in criminal
investigations
• Allow governments to start investigation without a prior report
• Regulate also abetting, aiding, organising, ...
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Other problems• Include private agents in criminal
investigations
• Allow governments to start investigation without a prior report
• Regulate also abetting, aiding, organising, ...
• No provisions against abuse (but is TRIPs requirement!)
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Think of the IP holders?
• Many negative effects for companies in IP-intensive sectors
• Not many active industry proponents
• Max Planck Institute for IP: “risk that …freedom of market actors to engage in business is curtailed beyond proportion”
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Think of the IP holders?
• Many negative effects for companies in IP-intensive sectors
• Not many active industry proponents
• Max Planck Institute for IP: “risk that …freedom of market actors to engage in business is curtailed beyond proportion”
NOt
exactly
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Main advocate: EC
• Preamble: emotional arguments (organised crime, child labour), no reasoned studies
• Dutch Minister: Frattini mentioned copying a Ferrari, but shouldn't Ferrari solve that itself?
• Massive opposition from most industries until patents taken out
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Legal basis: ECJ C-176/03
€
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Competence extension?
• Here:
• No arguments about trade distortion
• Only lays down “at least maximum fine of €X or Y years in prison”
• Proposal even increases fragmentation
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Law Society
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Law Society“clearly goes beyond the scope of the
ruling in Commission v Council”
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Law Society“clearly goes beyond the scope of the
ruling in Commission v Council”
“It could also lead to moves by certain companies to re-locate outside the EU”
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Law Society“clearly goes beyond the scope of the
ruling in Commission v Council”
“It could also lead to moves by certain companies to re-locate outside the EU”
“difficult to see how litigation will be avoided if the proposal is pursued in its present form”
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Law Society“clearly goes beyond the scope of the
ruling in Commission v Council”
“It could also lead to moves by certain companies to re-locate outside the EU”
“difficult to see how litigation will be avoided if the proposal is pursued in its present form”
“Could this be used unfairly by bigger companies to bully smaller companies or individuals? ”
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Law Society“clearly goes beyond the scope of the
ruling in Commission v Council”
“It could also lead to moves by certain companies to re-locate outside the EU”
“difficult to see how litigation will be avoided if the proposal is pursued in its present form”
“Could this be used unfairly by bigger companies to bully smaller companies or individuals? ”
“we question whether an across-the-board criminalisation of commercial scale IP infringements throughout the EU is actually in the public interest
and whether it serves justice effectively.”
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Political process
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
The previous episode
• IPRED1: harsh civil sanctions/means
• Anton Piller orders: private agents can search premises
• Mareva injunctions: freeze/confiscate assets for 30 days before hearing accused party
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Parliament: ITRE• Advisory Committee
• Result (Hammerstein report):
• Scope limited to copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting
• Privatisation of criminal investigation removed
• No investigations without prior complaint
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Parliament: ITRE (2)
• But:
• Definition of counterfeiting still includes regular business conflicts
• Copyright piracy not defined at all
• Some specific penalties still included (contrary to ECJ judgement)
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Parliament: LIBE• Advisory Committee
• Draft report (Wieland)
• Less attention for civil liberties than ITRE
• Removes “intentional” condition
• Criminalises “facilitating”
• Vote: 11 December
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
LIBE: our concerns
• AM 21 (Wieland): scope (open + everything)
• AM 2 (Wieland): -intentional, +facilitating
• AM 51 (Guardans): aiding/abetting/...
• AM 59/66 (Newton-Dunn): “serious crime”
• AM 60 (Newton-Dunn): specific fines
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Parliament: JURI• Responsible Committee
• Draft report (Zingaretti)
• Wide scope, keeps state initiative, worsens privatising investigations, no abuse prevention, remains ECJ incompatible
• Will be improved by rapporteur
• Amendments discussion (+vote?): 20 December
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Industry
• General consensus (except big pharma?) that patents should be excluded
• Few signs of who is actively supporting this directive (music/movie publishing industry?)
• Fairly silent overall after Commission indicated that taking out patents is ok
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
What have we done
• http://action.ffii.org/ipred2
• General analysis and amendment proposals
• Analysis of available tabled amendments
• Research into civil conflicts wrongfully criminalised by the proposal
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
What needs to be fixed?
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
What needs to be fixed?• Scope: ITRE + “in so far rights are harmonised”
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
What needs to be fixed?• Scope: ITRE + “in so far rights are harmonised”
• Infringements: unmodified emulation
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
What needs to be fixed?• Scope: ITRE + “in so far rights are harmonised”
• Infringements: unmodified emulation
• Infr. commercial scale: ITRE com. scale + “loss”
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
What needs to be fixed?• Scope: ITRE + “in so far rights are harmonised”
• Infringements: unmodified emulation
• Infr. commercial scale: ITRE com. scale + “loss”
• Private agents: ITRE ok
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
What needs to be fixed?• Scope: ITRE + “in so far rights are harmonised”
• Infringements: unmodified emulation
• Infr. commercial scale: ITRE com. scale + “loss”
• Private agents: ITRE ok
• Police initiative: ITRE ok
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
What needs to be fixed?• Scope: ITRE + “in so far rights are harmonised”
• Infringements: unmodified emulation
• Infr. commercial scale: ITRE com. scale + “loss”
• Private agents: ITRE ok
• Police initiative: ITRE ok
• Provisions against abuse: to be added
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Conclusion
• All fixes lead to implementation of TRIPs
• “Max Planck Institute” and “Law Society of England and Wales” extremely critical
• Main reason for directive seems competence extension
• Rejection?
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Information, analysis, mailing list
http://action.ffii.org/ipred2
6 December 2006IPRED2: criminalisation of intellectual property infringements(COD 2005/0127)
Starbucks v. STARPREYA
http://www.juicecaster.com/juicecast.php?id=6459