[Fsfe-ie] Some help with understanding the directive document?

Ciaran O'Riordan ciaran at fsfe.org
Fri Aug 26 21:37:07 CEST 2005

For the letter, I'm analysing the text of the IPRED2 directive but I'm
having a problem:  There are two sets of articles, so which one do we
comment on?  or do we comment on both?


It's a 15 page document.  On page 5 starts the "Directive of the european
parliament and of the council", and on page 12 starts the "Council framework

The latter looks to be ok, the punishments are limited to crimes carried out
"under the aegis of a criminal organisation, withing the meaning of the
Framework Decission .... on the fight against organised crime, or where
theycarry a health or safety risk".  (The "...." is in the document, it's
not my own, I presume that will be replaced by the documents own number when
it gets one.)

The first set of articles are wretched.  Article 3:

 "Member States shall ensure that all intentional infringements of an
  intellectual property right on a commercial scale, and attempting, aiding
  or abetting and inciting such infringements, are treated as criminal

...so aiding commercial copyright breaches - e.g. publishing software that
can be used to copy music, could be criminal.  Copying music could be
"commercial scale" even without any sale taking place because the music
industry will claim that every copy is like robbing 25 euro.

So do we comment on both and who are we talking to.  My understanding is
that this directive process requires unanimity in the Council and the
parliament's role is purely advisory.  But I'm not sure if that applies to
the two directives here or just the first.  Any help appreciated.

Ciarán O'Riordan,                               |  Support FSFE's work against
http://www.compsoc.com/~coriordan/              | software patents by becoming
                                                |    a Fellow: http://fsfe.org

More information about the FSFE-IE mailing list