About this site

Printer-friendly versionPDF version

On April 13th 2011, the European Commission has proposed a “regulation implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection”, that has now to be voted by the European Parliament and the Council of European Union.

This regulation is the last step in a series of attempts – that have failed for about forty years – to set up a common patent valid in all Member States of the European Union (EU).

Despite the mandatory auto-congratulating communication from the Commission, the proposal is quite disappointing with regard to the major challenge posed: designing a patent system that would fulfil expectations, namely to efficiently foster innovation in Europe.

This site is an April's – French advocacy association devoted to promote and protect Free/Libre Software – initiative to bring an expertise to the European Parliament in order to get over these drawbacks by improving the regulation and to actually build a democratic innovation policy in Europe. It provides raw materials and tools to any citizen who wants to take part in this process.

You are encouraged to contact Members of the European Parliament to warn them about these issues and ask them to file written questions to the Commission and the Council.

unitary patent presentation thumbnailWatch this video for a complete overview.

Syndicate content

Last content

Ten Written questions to the Commission and the Council

We have identified some serious drawbacks in the initial proposal of the Commission for a regulation on the unitary patent, that are still present in the compromise reached between the Council and the rapporteurs for the European Parliament, and has been voted without any change by the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI). Moreover, we have provided a thorough analysing raising issues about the legality of the legal basis of this regulation. But these issues were never addressed by the negotiators of the EU institutions.

The plenary vote of the European Parliament has been postponed, officially until the Council has found an agreement about the seat of the central division of the Unified Patent Court, which is supposed to have exclusive competence over litigations concerning unitary patents. Members of the European Parliament MEPs) are urged the take advantage of this delay to officially raise the major issues surrounding the regulation on the unitary patent. The following questions could be asked by any MEP though written questions to the Commission and the Council.

How to contact Members of the European Parliament about the unitary patent

The European Union is rushing1 to impose, with as less discussion as possible, a unitary patent, despite the risk that this project could introduce software patents in Europe by giving away a lot of powers to the democratically uncontrolled extra-EU European Patent Office (EPO), and despite all warnings that the legal basis of the regulation on the unitary patent is likely to not comply with EU Treaties. In such a situation, only a massive citizen rally could prevent the unitary patent to end up as a stillborn project, in the detriment of the EU innovation policy. In order to inform Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), here are some guidelines and concrete suggestions to act by contacting them.

Update: The following advices were given before the vote in the responsible Committee on December 20th, 2011. Nevertheless, they are still accurate, since the same amendments are likely to be filed again for the plenary vote, planned for February 14th, 2012 (the date is only indicative for now). The numbering of amendments will be updated accordingly. Moreover, the shadow rapporteurs listed below are still important to be contacted, since they are still responsible for their respective political group. But any MEP can be contacted now.

Update 2: The plenary vote of the European Parliament has been postponed, officially until the Council has found an agreement about the seat of the central division of the Unified Patent Court, which is expected before end of June 2012. Citizens are urged the take advantage of this delay by contacting MEP, in order for them to file written questions that would leave no options for the Commission and the Council to adress issues we've raised. We have prepared such questions. They could be filed by any MEP, but the political impact would be stronger if they were carried by a member of the three largest groups of the European Parliament: right-wing conservatives from EPP, socialists from S&D, or liberals from ALDE. As soon as a new date is chosen for the plenary vote, it will be time to contact again MEPs and ask them to file our amendments.

  • 1. On November 21st, the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) has had a discussion where some Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have argued for the creation of a jurisdiction of exception with regard to patent litigations, while some others, following our own arguments, have warned against legal issues raised by the regulation. And on November 22nd, JURI has voted a mandate for rapporteurs to negotiate with the Council and the Commission, on the explicit requirement to not change anything at all in the architecture of the project. On November 23rd, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) has voted its report for an opinion, ignoring amendments that would have fixed the problems raised by this project. The Council is about to agree on December 5th about a unified and specialised patent jurisdiction, which is foreseen to be launched during a auto-congratulating ceremony on December 22nd, two days after JURI has adopted his report and 2 months before the European Parliament should has given its position in plenary, which is therefore seen just as a formality.

Members of European Parliament ask Santa Claus for a unitary patent

Brussels, Tuesday December 20th, 2011. Press release.

Members of the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) of the European Parliament have given a rubber stamp1 on an agreement, negotiated behind close doors2 with the Council, about the introduction of a unitary patent and a unified patent jurisdiction. Unfortunately, today's vote has failed to address major legal issues surrounding this project, which are likely to make the regulation voided by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Moreover, the architecture of the unitary patent as voted today betrays the withdrawal from European Union (EU) legislators in deciding about EU policy on innovation for the profit of the European Patent Office, a self-governed non-EU agency, which is notably known to favour software patents against the letter and the spirit of European Patent Law.

Amendments in JURI committee

Update: results of December 20 vote

Our voting recommendations are attached

All amendments filed by members of the committee on Legal Affairs (JURI), they are opened to comment by registered users on this website.

Available amendments:

Our voting recommandations are shown as follows:

  • +++: essential amendment, the regulation would be illegal if not voted.
  • ++: important amendment to be voted.
  • +: amendment that can be voted.
  • -: amendment that should be rejected.
  • --: amendment that is important to reject.
  • ---: dangerous amendment that has to be rejected.

After the vote of December 20th, results are shown as follows:

  • Amendment voted
  • Amendment rejected, fallen or withdrawn

Unitary patent: an undone “done deal”

On December 1st 2011, the Committee on Legal affairs of the European Parliament has published a press release welcoming with pride that negotiations about the unitary patent have succeeded in reaching a « final agreement » between the Council of the European Union and rapporteurs of the European Parliament. However, issues already raised by April, including questions on the legality of the adopted solution1, are not solved yet. Concerns about powers left to the European Patent Office, which is well-known for its attempts to legalise software patents2, have neither been addressed.

Update: the compromised agreement has been leaked and confirms our analysis that none of the serious issues with regard to the legal basis of the regulation have been addressed and that request from the patent microcosm to get the European Court of Justice as far away as possible from substantive patent law has been rejected.

Unitary Patent: vote by European Parliament ITRE Committee

On November 23rd, 2011 the ITRE (Industry, Research and Energy) Committee of the European Parliament has given its opinion on the unitary patent, by voting in favour of the reports1 on the creation of a unitary patent and on the unified jurisdiction. The vote was characterised by a lack of enthusiasm and a blind conformity with the rapporteur's position, Alajos Mészáros. It should however be recalled that the ITRE committee was giving a mere opinion, and that it is the JURI committee that is responsible for this matter. On November 22nd 2011, the JURI committee decided to give a mandate to the rapporteurs for negotiations behind closed doors.

Unitary Patent: the debate will go on in secret

On November 22nd, 2011, the Legal Affairs Committee of the European Parliament voted for a mandate, allowing the rapporteurs on the proposal for a unitary patent to pursue negotiations with the Commission and the Council behind closed doors, without any involvement from the rest of the Members of Parliament or any reporting to citizens.

European Parliament not fooled by hearing of the patent microcosm

On Tuesday October 11st 2011, the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) of the European Parliament held a hearing on the unitary patent regulation and the associated agreement on a unified patent court. Although people heard on this occasion, who were all closely tied to the “patent microcosm”, have had the opportunity to expose their views on the project, some Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have pointed out the major issue at stake: the degree of autonomy the European Union (EU) wants to leave to the European Patent Office (EPO).

Amendments in ITRE committee

All amendments filed by members of the committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) are opened to comment by registered users on this website.

Available amendments:

Our voting recommandations are shown as follows:

  • +++: essential amendment, the regulation would be illegal if not voted.
  • ++: important amendment to be voted.
  • +: amendment that can be voted.
  • -: amendment that should be rejected.
  • --: amendment that is important to be rejected.
  • ---: dangerous amendment that has be rejected.

After the vote of November 23rd, results are shown as follows:

  • Amendment voted
  • Amendment rejected, fallen or withdrawn

Unitary patent and software patents: a case study

The war between Apple & Samsung provides us with the opportunity to show why substantive patent law with exclusion of software patents should be included in the regulation on the unitary patent.