Against the snow in Romania

In Romania, they were hit very hard by the recent cold weather that suddenly swept in over most of southern Europe, allegedly from Siberia. People died, not as many as in Ukraine, but nevertheless people in the European Union are dying from cold in 2012. In an interesting charity campaign, several large Romanian telecommunications operators decided to extend preferential deals to their customers in areas heavily affected by snow. Large provider Orange, owned by France Telecom, gave 200 free minutes on their networks and 10 minutes outside of their networks to clients in heavily affected areas. Cosmote, another big provider, followed suit. Suddenly, telecommunications providers in Romania were sending help-packages, food, clothes, to affected areas, mostly in the countryside. I didn’t track down the exact offer from Vodafone, the third large provider (they’re not listed in order of size in this blogpost, and I didn’t look up their exact market shares), but allegedly they made one similar to Orange.

I find it interesting that the telecommunications providers are the ones to step in to provide catastrophe help in Romania in terms of food packages, but notice perhaps more that the aid offer they provided initially actually locks their customers in snow-affected, rural areas of Romania in to their own networks. Since in Europe we don’t have any regulation which would make it mandatory for large infrastructure providers to keep their activities on the infrastructure separate from the activities they do with respect to service provision, it’s not like Vodafone and Orange and Cosmote can cooperate to give the best possible services to everyone in Romania at every given time. Instead, if you’re on competing networks, or competing infrastructures even though the infrastructures technically follow the same standards and are perfectly interoperable with each other, and you’re also on the countryside stuck under two meters of snow, you’ll simply have to make short phone calls.

Recently in Spain….

Prices on telecommunications in Spain lower, vertical integration higher

Telefónica is launching a social platform for youngsters called Tuenti. After a brief period of service injustice, the end user terms of Tuenti now permit users to engage in services like streaming, but still prohibit ”large-scale file-sharing” (but without specifically mentioning peer-to-peer protocols as the targets of this fair use policy). While telecommunications prices in Spain are decreasing there is still a rather worrying tendency in particular mobile connection offers to go for vertically integrated service models: the service provider provides not only access to infrastructure and actual transmission of communications, but also to the specific services through which transmission is made (in this case the social platform). These contemporary examples of lock-in should have been a concern of the European Commission when they were looking at net neutrality legislation – maybe this is (yet another) good time for them to re-evaluate their decision to wait and see? The ITRE committee in the parliament expressed as much last year in November. Chile and the Netherlands already have net neutrality legislations and now appears to be a good time for other member states to follow.

Access to pharmaceuticals takes on a new dimension…

The financial crisis in Spain has hit many parts of the Spanish public sector. Already in the middle of February, large pharmaceutical providers advertised that they might stop supplying the public health care in specific districts with more medicines as a result of large public debts and inability to pay old bills. Now, the pharmaceutical companies have decided to put an ultimatum: either the bills are paid, or the supplies are cut. In light of this, it’s quite encouraging to know that the Spanish government of last year made a regulatory change that makes obligatory the prescription of generic drugs by doctors when generic alternatives are available. Similar laws are in place in the Netherlands and Sweden (among others?), while the regulatory framework in for instance Belgium still leaves it up to the discretion of the doctor to choose whether to prescribe a brand or generic (normally the substance will be the same, and the difference is in whether the pharmacy supplies the patient with a specific brand name product, or any product the active ingredient of which is equivalent to that of the brand name product).

German content industry ask the government to sign ACTA ”without delay”

  The 2011-created German content alliance  (Deutshe Content Allianz) who gather public and private broadcasters, collecting societies and representatives of the music and film industry in Germany stated  on Friday that the German government should sign ACTA ”without delay” and should ”consider a future-oriented reform of the copyright”. According to Jürgen Doetz from the German association of the private broadcasters and telemedia VPRT  ”now everyone is convinced that all the provisions aimed at containing rights infringement in ACTA are already in accordance with the German protection level”. The German content alliance was backed up by a statement from tbe representative body of the German public officers of the criminal police BDK  who blamed the anti-ACTA protesters for their hypocrite claiming, since ACTA would in fact not be related with any kind of censorship nor freedom of speech circumcision. However BDK representative recognises that ACTA is ”not transparent, badly written and not detailed enough on certain points”.

 These pro-ACTA positions in Germany come after the government decided just before the important anti-ACTA protests a week ago to block its signature until the European Parliament has dealt first with the agreement, see my previous blog.

Meanwhile, the list of other EU Member States who are freezing ACTA’s approval  is getting longer: currently Germany, Holland, Estonia, Cyprus have not signed yet. Bulgaria, Poland, Slovakia, The Czech Republic, Romania and Latvia have suspended their ratification process;  Slovenia,  Austria, (in French but significant picture from the Austrian Minister for Home Affairs holding a Stop-ACTA sign)  and Malta  give signs with more or less intensity that they could do so as well.

 - Apple vs Motorola update in Germany and in the EU

 Apple has recently gained territory in its patent war against Motorola, and maybe future other infringers. In Germany, Apple won a battle at the Regional court of Munich, which decided  that several Motorola Mobility Inc. (MMI) smartphones infringed Apple’s image patent on the ”slide-to-unlock”, where you slide your finger on the touch screen in a way to unlock a device. Motorola is likely to appeal, but in the meantime the injunction from the Munich court against MMI is permanent, and can be enforced by Apple against a bond (insurance that Motorola would obtain if it is not considered as infringer further in the procedure). According to Florian Mueller  this could be a real threat to Android providers and Google, who recently acquired MMI and look at the German’s market as a juicy target. Secondly Apple made a clear offensive by launching a former complain  to the European Commission, again against MMI, on the ground that the latter would refuse to license its essential UMTS technologies under fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. We saw two weeks ago that the European Commission launched an investigation against Samsung on Apple’s request for the same issue. Still according to Florian Mueller, Apple’s action against Motorola and Samsung for not respecting the FRAND terms seems to be legitimate and aims at avoiding anti-competitive behaviours. Let see what the European Commission decides, but we could also blame more generally the different courts and competition authorities in Europe to make such crazy patent war possible, based sometimes on invalid or trivial- like patents.

 

 

 

 

 

Report from FOSDEM

Me discovering FOSDEM

Two weeks ago I went for the first time to the FOSDEM, the annual Free and Open Software Developer’s European Meeting hold in Brussels.

During one afternoon, I discovered a vibrant environment, gathering 5,000 people surfing between hundreds of different presentations dedicated to free software, where creativity of some individuals expressed in a particular project was shared with the audience, debated, and opened to possible contribution of new individuals. Besides the technical aspect of (free) software engineering I am not familiar with, I enjoyed watching free software developers defending their baby while still in the same time giving it to the community to help it grow! I attended one presentation of a developer presenting an online sheet music platform that enables you to edit your music and share it for free (as for a speech and a beer!), it is called MuseScore. Musescore is under GPL. I perceived the utility of the software since I have been into music somehow and simply attending this meeting made me realised how greatly free software can accelerate the diffusion and improvement of an invention. After some quick exchange of words, they were talking about adding this, or improving that function. The developer finally said” those who want to contribute to the software are welcomed!” Even if my IT knowledge would be, let say…Insufficient to apply for the job, some others did and I just loved that!

 On a legal aspect of the Free software issue I could see the presentation of the End Software Patent organisation. They militate to exclude software from patentability, claim for the EU to stay away of the temptation to give existence to software patent via court decisions and closely follow the interpretation of the judges when they come to decide what is patentable and what is not. There were concerned about the influence of patent lawyers from software patent owners on the courts decisions for their benefit, in particular in some court assessments in the US and in the UK , which recognise software patent and justify it by the need to follow the decisions from ”others” (experts from the European Patent Office- who is no jurisdiction-, or lower courts) in order to avoid controversy… Avoid controversy. What an arbitrary criteria! A higher court basically says: ”I decided this because others decided it so”. This seems to be a kind of negation of the independence and impartiality of the law. I am amazed this argumentation even appears in official case law documents. I have never seen something similar. Of course, Higher courts do sometimes follow experts and lower courts decisions but they always need to legally justify this by explaining why it was correct to do so. Then they talked about the future, possible unitary EU patent and the creation of the EU patent court. The project does not exclude software from patents and it gives substantial new legal powers to the European Patent Office, that is already delivering many software patents, see the concerns of Richrad Stallman. When End Software Patent warns against a kind of current risk of arbitrary ”expertisation” of patent law interpretation, to the benefit of software patent owners, we could be rather sceptical of the motivation behind such initiative.

Domestic studies of ACTA

Some EU member states, such as Germany, said that they don’t want to make any decision on ACTA, pushing the political pressure towards the European Parliament, awaiting their approval.

The Belgian and Croatian government are taking a whole different stance, conducting their own impact study and holding a public debate.

Belgian minister Vande Lanotte said the following: “Only when the impact study is ready and the parliament has studied the content, can a debate about the controversial ACTA agreement take place. For the legislation in Belgium as well as on a European level”

The Croatian government stated it welcomes a public debate for all interested citizens.