/Users/andrea/_magisterarbeit/korpus/clean/testkorpus/34/file12.html NN ----------------------------------------- : for IN FFII NP editors NNS Open JJ letter NN to TO the DT EU NP . SENT Council NP , , we PP have VHP a DT problem NN deutsch NP fran NP ais NNS espa NP ol NN Council NP decision NN Patent NP news NN Note NN . SENT the DT original JJ letter NN which WDT was VBD on IN this DT page NN can MD still RB be VB found VVN here RB . SENT Although IN I PP do VVP not RB think VV that WDT anything NN I PP wrote VVD there EX was VBD fundamentally RB wrong JJ , , the DT criticism NN on IN the DT proposed VVN European NP Constitution NP had VHD in IN fact NN little JJ to TO do VV with IN what WP happened VVD in IN the DT Council NP session NN of IN 7 CD March NP 2005 CD . SENT Although IN the DT Constitution NP does VVZ not RB address VV the DT problems NNS which WDT arose VVD there RB , , it PP would MD not RB have VH made VVN things NNS worse RBR either RB . SENT Additionally RB , , although IN it PP was VBD clear JJ we PP had VHD the DT rules NNS on IN our PP$ side NN , , they PP found VVD ways NNS around IN them PP anyway RB . SENT Our PP$ primary JJ need NN is VBZ a DT change NN of IN attitude NN at IN the DT Council NP , , and CC that's NNS completely RB independent JJ from IN any DT treaty NN or CC Constitution NP . SENT 7 CD March NP 2005 CD This DT morning NN , , the DT Council NP Presidency NP rubberstamped VVD the DT illegal JJ patenting VVG practice NN of IN the DT European NP Patent NP Office NP by IN adopting VVG a DT proposal NN without IN vote NN and CC without IN a DT qualified JJ majority NN of IN member NN states NNS , , so RB as RB not RB to TO create VV a DT precedent NN which WDT might MD have VH a DT consequence NN of IN creating VVG future JJ delays NNS in IN other JJ processes NNS . SENT Jonas NP Maebe NP , , Belgian JJ computer NN scientist NN and CC board NN member NN of IN FFII NP , , explains VVZ in IN an DT open JJ letter NN how WRB the DT experience NN with IN the DT software NN patent NN directive NN has VHZ proven VVN the DT EU NP Council NP to TO be VB democratically RB unaccountable JJ , , which WDT does VVZ everything NN but CC bring VV Europe NP closer RBR to TO the DT people NNS . SENT Dear NP Legislators NNS of IN the DT European NP Union NP , , I'm NP not RB against IN Europe NP , , nor CC against IN the DT concept NN of IN the DT EU NP . SENT On IN the DT contrary NN , , I PP very RB much RB enjoy VV several JJ of IN the DT benefits NNS that IN the DT EU NP has VHZ brought VVN us PP and CC I PP think VVP that DT close JJ cooperation NN between IN member NN states NNS can MD help VV everyone NN . SENT That DT said VVD , , I PP would MD like VV to TO say VV a DT few JJ things NNS about IN democracy NN in IN Europe NP as IN I PP experienced VVD it PP until IN now RB , , in IN particular JJ the DT lack NN of IN it PP at IN the DT level NN of IN the DT Council NP of IN Ministers NPS . SENT I PP have VHP now RB been VBN involved VVN for IN almost RB two CD years NNS in IN the DT discussion NN and CC political JJ process NN surrounding VVG the DT software NN patents NNS debate NN . SENT I PP was VBD not RB involved VVN from IN the DT start NN , , but CC I PP did VVD spend VV several JJ weeks NNS in IN the DT European NP Parliament NP and CC have VHP been VBN in IN contact NN with IN several JJ parliamentarians NNS , , civil JJ servants NNS and CC representatives NNS of IN the DT European NP Patent NP Office NP . SENT I PP even RB spent VVD a DT night NN in IN the DT European NP Parliament NP in IN Strasbourg NP , , helping VVG to TO prepare VV the DT FFII NP voting NN list NN for IN the DT legendary JJ 24 CD September NP 2003 CD EP NN vote NN . SENT Overall RB , , it PP has VHZ been VBN a DT very RB educational JJ two CD years NNS . SENT As IN you PP are VBP undoubtedly RB aware JJ , , the DT EU NP Council NP of IN Ministers NP adopted VVD its PP$ Common JJ Position NN on IN the DT software NN patents NNS directive NN on IN 7 CD March NP 2005 CD . SENT You PP can MD find VV the DT Foundation NP for IN a DT Free NP Information NP Infrastructure's NP account NN of IN what WP happened VVD here RB . SENT In IN what WP follows VVZ , , I PP would MD like VV to TO explain VV in IN more JJR detail NN what WP happened VVD exactly RB in IN the DT background NN , , and CC why WRB I PP am VBP so RB upset VVN . SENT It PP has VHZ little RB to TO do VV with IN software NN patents NNS , , unfortunately RB . SENT The DT Council NP session NN of IN 7 CD March NP 2005 CD An DT MEP NN who WP saw VVD our PP$ press NN release NN noted VVD that IN it PP certainly RB appears VVZ that IN the DT Council NP presidency NN took VVD some DT procedural JJ shortcuts NNS . SENT That DT is VBZ an DT extremely RB diplomatic JJ way NN to TO put VV it PP . SENT The DT Council NP Presidency NP spoke VVD in IN name NN of IN the DT entire JJ Council NP pluralis NN majestatis NN as IN it PP were VBD and CC reversed VVN voting NN requirements NNS . SENT The DT rules NNS state NN that IN an DT A NP item NN formal JJ point NN shall MD be VB taken VVN off RP the DT agenda NN if IN a DT member NN state NN so IN requests NNS or CC if IN it PP might MD lead VV to TO further JJR discussions NNS , , unless IN the DT Council NP decides VVZ otherwise RB . SENT When WRB Denmark NP asked VVD for IN that DT , , the DT Presidency NP simply RB announced VVD it PP did VVD not RB want VV to TO take VV it PP off RP , , instead RB of IN asking VVG whether IN there EX was VBD a DT majority NN against IN taking VVG it PP off RP . SENT Therefore RB , , unless IN the DT Council NP decides VVZ otherwise RB became VVD if IN a DT majority NN of IN the DT Council NP wants VVZ to TO go VV against IN the DT Presidency's NP will MD , , while IN not RB even RB a DT vote NN has VHZ been VBN called VVN . SENT This DT might MD seem VV like IN splitting JJ hairs NNS , , but CC in IN the DT Council NP where WRB every DT sign NN of IN opposition NN is VBZ presented VVN to TO us PP as IN something NN which WDT foreshadows VVZ the DT end NN of IN EU NP decision NN making VVG as IN we PP know VVP it PP , , this DT is VBZ a DT difference NN between IN night NN and CC day NN . SENT Some DT more JJR interesting JJ points NNS . SENT The DT request NN for IN a DT B NP item NN discussion NN point NN was VBD supported VVN by IN Poland NP , , Portugal NP , , the DT Netherlands NPS and CC Denmark NP . SENT Losing VVG the DT support NN of IN even RB one CD of IN the DT first JJ three CD of IN those DT countries NNS was VBD enough JJ to TO be VB left VVN with IN a DT text NN no RB longer RBR supported VVN by IN a DT qualified JJ majority NN . SENT Asking VVG for IN renewed JJ discussions NNS means VVZ that IN they PP are VBP not RB happy JJ with IN the DT current JJ text NN , , otherwise RB they PP wouldn't VVD do VV so RB . SENT Unilateral JJ declarations NNS with IN concerns NNS of IN no DT less JJR than IN 8 CD countries NNS 7 CD of IN which WDT officially RB voted VVD in IN favour NN of IN the DT text NN are VBP attached VVN to TO the DT text NN of IN the DT Common JJ Position NN . SENT Especially RB the DT Polish JJ one NN is VBZ very RB harsh JJ , , and CC basically RB states VVZ we PP recognise VV a DT political JJ agreement NN has VHZ been VBN reached VVN and CC do VVP not RB dare VV to TO attack VV it PP , , but CC the DT text NN from IN 18 CD May NP is VBZ our PP$ worst JJS nightmare NN . SENT You PP can MD read VV it PP at IN http NN . SENT register VV . SENT consilium NN . SENT eu NP . SENT int NP pdf NN en IN 04 CD st NP 16 CD st NP 16120 CD ad NN 02 CD . SENT en IN 04 CD . SENT pdf NP This NP has VHZ nothing NN to TO do VV with IN software NN patents NNS . SENT There EX was VBD simply RB no DT qualified JJ majority NN possibly RB not RB even RB a DT simple JJ majority NN in IN the DT Council NP for IN this DT text NN . SENT It PP was VBD purely RB due JJ to TO diplomatic JJ inertia NN and CC fear NN of IN doing VVG something NN against IN whatever WDT is VBZ customary JJ that IN it PP slipped VVD through RP . SENT As IN Karl NP Friedrich NP Lenz NP , , professor NN in IN European JJ law NN , , writes VVZ , , the DT Council NP is VBZ simply RB too RB important JJ to TO be VB ruled VVN on IN the DT basis NN of IN unwritten JJ rules NNS , , especially RB if IN they PP are VBP invented VVN on IN the DT fly NN . SENT National JJ Parliaments NNS The DT Council's NP great JJ power NN is VBZ justified VVN by IN the DT fact NN that IN it PP acts VVZ with IN a DT mandate NN of IN the DT various JJ national JJ parliaments NNS . SENT The DT problem NN with IN this DT is VBZ that IN this DT directive NN has VHZ shown VVN that IN various JJ governments NNS simply RB do VVP not RB care VV about IN what WP the DT national JJ parliaments NNS say VVP let's NNS not RB even RB mention VV the DT European JJ Parliament NP . SENT Before IN the DT political JJ agreement NN of IN May NP 2004 CD was VBD reached VVN The DT Dutch JJ national JJ parliament NN was VBD misinformed VVN about IN the DT directive NN . SENT Minister NP Brinkhorst NP told VVD the DT Dutch NP Parliament NP in IN April NP 2004 CD that IN there EX was VBD a DT compromise NN between IN the DT Council NP and CC the DT European NP Parliament NP , , so RB that IN the DT political JJ agreement NN in IN the DT Council NP was VBD a DT formal JJ non JJ issue NN . SENT One PP could MD argue VV that IN the DT Dutch NP Parliament NP should MD have VH verified VVN whether IN or CC not RB this DT is VBZ true JJ , , but CC as IN Mr NP Rocard NP would MD put VV it PP , , that WDT was VBD quite RB an DT inelegancy NN . SENT Consequently RB , , in IN July NP 2004 CD , , the DT Dutch NP Parliament NP adopted VVD a DT motion NN in IN which WDT it PP stated VVD that IN it PP had VHD been VBN misinformed VVN , , and CC called VVD upon IN the DT government NN to TO from IN then RB on IN withhold VV its PP$ support NN for IN the DT Council NP text NN . SENT The DT Dutch JJ government NN promised VVD to TO execute VV this DT motion NN , , but CC reinterpreted VVD it PP as IN meaning VVG only RB if IN it PP ever RB becomes VVZ a DT B NP item NN again RB and CC it PP is VBZ voted VVN upon RP , , then RB we PP will MD change VV our PP$ vote NN into IN an DT abstention NN . SENT Given VVN all PDT the DT panic NN reactions NNS we PP saw VVD the DT last JJ few JJ months NNS about IN the DT possibility NN of IN this DT ever RB becoming VVG a DT B NP item NN again RB , , this DT amounted VVD to TO saying VVG Nice NP motion NN , , but CC no DT cigar NN . SENT At IN the DT May NP 2004 CD Council NP session NN As IN you PP undoubtedly RB know VVP , , a DT political JJ agreement NN has VHZ not RB an DT ounce NN of IN legal JJ value NN in IN any DT way NN . SENT As IN the DT name NN implies VVZ , , it's NNS purely RB political JJ . SENT Given VVN that IN in IN this DT case NN there EX were VBD three CD last JJ minute NN amendments NNS introduced VVN by IN the DT Commission NP and CC one CD last JJ minute NN compromise NN by IN the DT German JJ delegation NN and CC the DT Commission NP , , it PP is VBZ fair JJ to TO say VV that IN not RB a DT single JJ parliament NN has VHZ had VHN the DT chance NN to TO decide VV about IN the DT final JJ text NN that WDT was VBD adopted VVN on IN 18 CD May NP 2004 CD . SENT And CC due JJ to TO everything NN that WDT happened VVD later RBR , , they PP didn't VVD have VH any DT chance NN later RBR on IN either RB . SENT Before IN those DT amendment NN were VBD introduced VVN , , the DT majority NN of IN the DT Council NP members NNS were VBD against IN the DT text NN . SENT After IN those DT compromises NNS which WDT did VVD not RB change VV anything NN to TO the DT substance NN of IN the DT text NN , , a DT 10 CD minute NN break NN was VBD held VVN in IN which WDT everyone NN was VBD scrambling VVG to TO call VV national JJ experts NNS to TO judge VV those DT texts NNS . SENT Several JJ delegations NNS failed VVD to TO reach VV anyone NN and CC as IN such JJ did VVD not RB really RB know VV what WP to TO do VV . SENT Many DT simply RB followed VVN Germany NP , , since IN they PP had VHD been VBN sort NN of IN coordinating VVG the DT opposition NN in IN the DT Council NP before RB . SENT However RB , , Germany NP seemed VVD to TO be VB in IN bed NN with IN the DT Commission NP now RB , , being JJ content NN with IN the DT sole JJ addition NN of IN the DT word NN new JJ in IN the DT definition NN of IN technical JJ contribution NN . SENT After IN Denmark NP was VBD persuaded VVN to TO be VB 80 CD happy JJ by IN the DT Council NP Presidency NP , , the DT Presidency NP even RB didn't VVD ask VV Poland NP anymore RB because IN their PP$ vote NN was VBD no DT longer RB needed VVN . SENT If IN you PP have VHP not RB yet RB seen VVN the DT Denmark NP Ireland NP dialogue NN , , you PP can MD find VV it PP at IN the DT link NN below IN this DT paragraph NN . SENT It's NP only RB 45 CD seconds NNS long JJ , , and CC if IN it PP weren't NN about IN a DT decision NN as IN important JJ as IN this DT one NN it PP would MD even RB be VB quite RB funny JJ . SENT Windows NNS media NNS version NN Quicktime NP mpeg NN 4 CD version NN The DT fact NN that IN such JJ last JJ minute NN amendments NNS can MD be VB inserted VVN at IN the DT session NN where WRB a DT political JJ agreement NN is VBZ reached VVN combined VVN with IN the DT refusal NN of IN reopening VVG discussions NNS political JJ agreements NNS afterwards RB , , means VVZ that IN national JJ Parliaments NNS are VBP being VBG denied VVD their PP$ right NN , , and CC indeed RB duty NN , , to TO keep VV their PP$ governments NNS in IN check NN . SENT The DT European NP Parliament NP It PP seems VVZ to TO many JJ now RB that IN the DT only JJ way NN out IN now RB is VBZ a DT massive JJ rejection NN by IN the DT European NP Parliament NP in IN second JJ reading NN , , but CC I PP would MD not RB consider VV that IN a DT victory NN for IN the DT EP NN . SENT It's NNS giving VVG up RP against IN the DT Commission NP and CC Council NP who WP seem VVP to TO be VB determined VVN to TO do VV whatever WDT they PP like VVP , , unless IN the DT EP NN simply RB stops VVZ the DT whole JJ procedure NN by IN destroying VVG the DT directive NN project NN . SENT The DT EP NN then RB merely RB acts VVZ as IN an DT emergency NN brake NN in IN the DT current JJ situation NN . SENT Their PP$ first JJ reading NN is VBZ merely RB advice NN to TO the DT Council NP , , and CC the DT second JJ reading NN is VBZ handicapped VVN by IN majority NN of IN its PP$ component NN members NNS requirements NNS . SENT Additionally RB , , the DT Commission NP can MD still RB basically RB nullify VV the DT EP JJ position NN in IN the DT Council's NP first JJ and CC second JJ readings NNS by IN disagreeing VVG with IN amendments NNS , , which WDT require VVP the DT Council NP to TO act VV by IN unanimity NN rather RB than IN by IN qualified JJ majority NN on IN those DT points NNS . SENT It PP must MD be VB noted VVN however RB that IN if IN a DT directive NN goes VVZ into IN Conciliation NN , , then RB the DT EP NN may MD be VB able JJ to TO assert VV itself PP after IN all DT . SENT If IN it PP approved VVD a DT similar JJ set NN of IN strong JJ amendments NNS twice RB before RB in IN first JJ and CC second JJ reading NN , , that WDT may MD give VV them PP a DT strong JJ negotiation NN position NN against IN the DT Council NP and CC Commission NP . SENT The DT absolute JJ majority NN requirement NN in IN second JJ reading NN makes VVZ this DT difficult JJ to TO achieve VV , , but CC on IN the DT other JJ hand NN strengthens VVZ the DT signal NN if IN it PP is VBZ actually RB achieved VVN . SENT Conclusion NN I PP am VBP sorry JJ to TO be VB so RB pessimistic JJ and CC to TO dump VV this DT on IN you PP , , even RB though RB many JJ of IN you PP personally RB have VHP no DT fault NN in IN all PDT this DT . SENT However RB , , I'm NP becoming VVG tired JJ . SENT We PP got VVD almost RB unanimous JJ support NN in IN the DT European NP Parliament's NP Legal NP Affairs NPS Committee NP to TO restart VV the DT directive NN . SENT This DT request NN was VBD confirmed VVN by IN unanimity NN in IN the DT Conference NN of IN Presidents NNS and CC an DT overwhelming JJ majority NN in IN plenary JJ The NP Commission NP declined VVD and CC until IN today NN has VHZ not RB been VBN able JJ to TO produce VV any DT explanation NN as RB to TO why WRB except IN for IN we PP want VVP the DT procedure NN to TO continue VV We PP managed VVD to TO secure VV a DT generous JJ blocking VVG minority NN in IN the DT Council NP Spain NP , , Austria NP , , Belgium NP , , Italy NP , , Portugal NP , , Denmark NP , , Poland NP , , Hungary NP , , Latvia NP , , The DT Netherlands NP This DT position NN was VBD confirmed VVN by IN the DT German JJ , , Dutch JJ , , Spanish JJ and CC Danish JJ national JJ parliaments NNS The DT Council NP presidency NN takes VVZ some DT shortcuts NNS and CC shoves VVZ it PP through RP as IN a DT non JJ discussion NN item NN , , so RB as RB not RB to TO create VV a DT precedent NN which WDT might MD have VH a DT consequence NN of IN creating VVG future JJ delays NNS in IN other JJ processes NNS Because IN democratic JJ ways NNS fail VVP over RP and CC over RP again RB , , the DT situation NN has VHZ now RB become VVN so RB bad JJ that IN some DT people NNS even RB set VVD up RP a DT web NN page NN where WRB you PP can MD pledge NN money NN to TO bribe VV the DT Council NP , , because IN that's NNS the DT only JJ way NN they PP see VVP that's NNS left VVN to TO get VV anything NN done VVN at IN all DT . SENT It PP may MD seem VV like IN a DT joke NN , , but CC after IN everything NN I've NP experienced VVD the DT past JJ one NN and CC a DT half NN year NN since IN the DT directive NN was VBD passed VVN from IN Parliament NP to TO Council NP , , it PP would MD not RB surprise VV me PP in IN the DT least JJS if IN they're NN half NN serious JJ . SENT I PP would MD like VV to TO conclude VV with IN an DT overview NN of IN events NNS which WDT I PP consider VVP particularly RB regretful JJ . SENT The DT Council NP text NN approved VVD by IN the DT Council NP on IN 7 CD March NP 2005 CD was VBD primarily RB written VVN by IN the DT same JJ people NNS who WP sit VVP on IN the DT Administrative NP Council NP of IN the DT European NP Patent NP Office NP , , although IN one CD of IN the DT goals NNS of IN the DT directive NN is VBZ supposedly RB to TO keep VV the DT EPO NP at IN bay NN . SENT The DT Commission NP and CC Germany NP introduced VVD a DT misleading JJ amendment NN at IN the DT Council NP session NN of IN 18 CD May NP 2004 CD which WDT confused VVD many JJ delegations NNS , , and CC caused VVD the DT orders NNS given VVN by IN many JJ national JJ parliaments NNS to TO be VB nullified VVN . SENT A DT precedent NN stating VVG that IN political JJ agreements NNS can MD not RB be VB modified VVN for IN procedural JJ and CC institutional JJ reasons NNS has VHZ been VBN set VVN by IN the DT Council NP , , which WDT means VVZ that IN national JJ Parliaments NNS are VBP denied VVN the DT possibility NN to TO act VV when WRB they PP are VBP convinced VVN their PP$ government NN has VHZ not RB acted VVN according VVG to TO their PP$ wishes NNS at IN a DT Council NP session NN where WRB such JJ an DT agreement NN is VBZ reached VVN . SENT How WRB on IN Earth NN am VBP I PP expected VVN to TO still RB believe VV in IN this DT farce NN . SENT I PP really RB do VVP want VV to TO believe VV . SENT Just RB give VV me PP chance NN to TO do VV so RB . SENT . SENT . SENT Sincerely RB yours NNS , , Jonas NP Maebe NP jmaebe NN at IN ffii NNS . SENT org NP FFII NP Board NP Member NP Research NP Assistant NP in IN Computer NP Science NP , , Ghent NP University NP , , Belgium NP Help NN Changes NP SiteMap NP FFII NP Donate NP for IN FFII NP editors NNS