The IPKat has received, from Simon Gentry of the Campaign for Creativity, the following statement, issued yesterday:
A RERUN OF THE SOFTWARE PATENT DEBATE WILL DAMAGE EUROPE’S INNOVATORS
The move by a small minority of MEPs to restart the legislative process on the Computer Implemented Directive (commonly misnamed the “Software patents” directive), will create further confusion, cost and uncertainty for Europe’s most innovative small and medium sized companies.
Supporters of the Directive believe the proposed Motion in the European Parliament which is primarily based on ‘discontinuity’, lacks sufficient grounds to validate restarting a legislative process which has been going on for five years now.
Simon Gentry of the Campaign for Creativity said the move by opposition to delay the Directive further, begins to make a mockery of the legislative process.
“Given that the facts surrounding the Directive have remained the same throughout the process there is no case for repeating the whole process. From the outset, the Directive sought to clarify the existing laws on patentability. It is obvious that the current patenting regime creates a positive legal framework which is supportive of innovative IT companies. The IT sector is thriving. Even Open Source is thriving in the current regime. Those who want to abolish patentability for CI inventions need to prove that the current system is not working. After five years they have failed to do that. Restarting the debate will not alter that fact. Europe’s creative and innovative industries need a stable and effective legal environment in which to thrive. This attempt to drag the debate on for another three years will do the opposite".The IPKat agrees that the present state of affairs -- judged by the benefits it has achieved -- works pretty well in practice, whatever anyone says about the theory. Also, when it comes to any form of legal reform, the burden of proving that it is needed falls on whoever wants to change the status quo. However, no-one ever died of a debate. If there had been more and better-informed discussion of the CI issue in the first place, it might not be finding itself used as a lobbyists' football now.
Do current IP laws harness our capacity for creativity or do they put it in shackles?
Another campaign for creativity here
More on creativity here and here
The Six Myths of Creativity here