IPRED2 on the DROIPEN table

(Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar)

The Second Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive (IPRED2)
is now going through the Justice and Home Affairs route. On 4 June, it
passed it’s first port of call at the Council’s Working Group on Substantive
Criminal Law (DROIPEN) – the first step on the road to the decision of EU’s
Council of Ministers.

DROIPEN’s job is to prepare the Council’s first reading on the
directive. The national government representatives might come up with a
proposal that all Member States agree on, or else they will identify
issues that the Ministers of Justice will have to vote on.

According to information kindly shared by some Member States
representatives following DROIPEN’s work, the state of play in general
is as follows.

Many delegations feel they need more information in order to prepare
this legislation properly. There is a general reluctance towards this
directive because of the competence issue, so the Council wants to wait for
the ECJ ship pollution verdict before moving on.

Some delegations have expressed views the directive is the wrong tool to
solve the problem and they don’t see criminal sanctions as a way
forward. Further, since criminal sanctions are already in place in many
countries there is no need to rush.

Still time should be used to prepare negotiations, but for now, the only
thing that could be said to have been decided is not to take any action
in any direction.

It is now up to the Portuguese Presidency to negotiate what to do next.

One question on the table is if DROIPEN should approach the Article 36
Committee (CATS) to have an expert opinion on some issues before
involving COREPER 2 (Committee of the Permanent Representatives).

The general forecast is that there will be no Council decision before
late fall, and it is likely that issues not resolved in COREPER2 will
end up in JHA Council votes with a North-South dividing outcome.

Meanwhile, outside of Brussels, Member States are working to prepare
their positions on IPRED2. The United Kingdom’s Intellectual Property
Office (IPO) is currently collecting comments from British citizens and
companies on the directive.

A comprehensive policy paper was submitted by a coalition from
FFII/EFF/EBLIDA/BEUC to the UK IPO. The policy is available to be passed on
to the Justice Ministry in your own country.

For general interest AIPPI has already in 2002 compiled information on
criminal law sanctions with regard to the infringement of intellectual
property rights. This might give you a starting point in addressing the
issue at the national level or comparing the situation with other relevant
countries from Europe.

Movement on IPRED2 in Brussels and Beyond (4.06.2007)
http://www.copycrime.eu/blog/movement-ipred2-brussels-and-beyond

Backroom Changes May Be Coming for IPRED2 (16.05.2007)
http://www.copycrime.eu/blog/backroom-changes-may-be-coming-ipred2

FFII/EFF/EBLIDA/BEUC coalition report on the proposal as amended in
Strasbourg by the European Parliament at its first reading on Wednesday, 25
April, 2007 (25.04.2007)
http://action.ffii.org/ipred2/Report_on_EP_vote

EDRI-gram: IPRED2 voted in first reading by the European Parliament
(25.04.2007)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5.8/ipred2

AIPPI report: “Question Q169 – Criminal law sanctions with regard to the
infringement of intellectual property rights”
http://www.aippi.org/reports/q169/gr_q169_index.htm

(Thanks to Erik Josefsson – Electronic Frontier Foundation)