EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

04.30.09

The Illusion of Transparency at the European Parliament/Commission (on Microsoft)

Posted in Antitrust, Europe, Microsoft at 4:30 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Money for mortgage

Summary: How does it feel to be left out of the public arena while Microsoft perverts it?

ACCORDING to The Register, after long and repeated procrastination Microsoft has finally responded to antitrust charges. For background:

The original complaint was made by Norwegian browser maker Opera. It accused Microsoft of leveraging its desktop monopoly to distribute the browser and of ignoring web standards. Because of its large market share web developers were encouraged to optimise their sites for IE – to the disadvantage of other browser makers which did follow web standards.

In another news report, it is made publicly known right now that transparency in the EU is seriously deficient. It’s specifically about access to documents.

Being refused access to documents was “by far” the most common allegation made by citizens to the EU Ombudsman last year, revealed a report presented yesterday (27 April).

We have personal and very bitter experience with that, so we’ll present the latest from last week. For the first part of the story, see this long post. It’s about Microsoft attacking Free open source software through European panels. We are still waiting for the Commission to mail us the documents we asked for. It’s taking weeks if not months already and it’s a violation of the regulations.

OpenPGP: *Parts of the message have NOT been signed or encrypted*

Dear Mr Schestowitz,

We acknowledge receipt of your message.

Yours sincerely,

[anon]

—–Original Message—–
From: Roy Schestowitz
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 5:47 PM
To [anon]
Cc: s at schestowitz.com; [anon] (INFSO); [anon] (INFSO)
Subject: Re: Gestdem 2009/1562 FW: Document access application purpusant to Article 6 EC/1049/2001 (A/617056)

********* *BEGIN ENCRYPTED or SIGNED PART* *********

“Draft input to all WG prepared by the Commission” means the documents
the chairs of the working groups or participants received from the
Commission to guide the work in a particular group.


Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Freelance journalist at http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

OpenPGP: *Parts of the message have NOT been signed or encrypted*

Dear Mr. Schestowitz,

Thank you for your e-mail of the 20th of March registered on 23rd of March applying for a copy of documents in accordance with Regulation (EC) N° 1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents.

Your application will be dealt with within the prescribed delays. You have requested access to the documents as follows:

“I hereby request electronic access to all documents related to the Towards the European Software Strategy process in the posession of the EU-Commission, in particular access to the following documents:
* the list of participants in the industry expert group
* the list of WGs, WGs sleaders and observing Commission officials
* draft contributions of all industry Working groups on a the European Software Strategy
* draft input to all WG prepared by the Commission
* the participant list of the related meeting on January 20th in Brussels
* all submissions from industry to the ESS consultation under the applicable provisions of regulation 1049/2001 which grant me a right of access to all documents mentioned above.”

However, we are unable to identify the documents refereed to in the fourth item “draft input to all WG prepared by the Commission” and the sixth item “all submissions from industry to the ESS consultation”. Please could you clarify your request so that we may continue to process it.

Yours sincerely,

[anon]

—–Original Message—–
From: [anon]
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 9:27 AM
To INFSO /D
Subject: Gestdem 2009/1562 FW: Document access application purpusant to Article 6 EC/1049/2001

Bonjour,

En tant que correspondant du réseau accès aux documents, je me permets de vous adresser la demande ci-dessous relative à l’accès au document suivant: “GESTDEM 2009/1562″ all documents related to the Towards the European Software Strategy

Cette demande est introduite dans le cadre du règlement 1049/2001 qui impose un délai impératif de réponse endéans les 15 jours ouvrables soit le 20/04/2009.

Elle a été enregistrée dans ADONIS sous le N° A/09/612974. Je vous saurais gré, par conséquent, de bien vouloir préparer un projet de réponse conformément aux procédures décrites dans le guide ci-dessous, et de l’enregistrer dans ADONIS en lien avec la fiche arrivée ainsi que de faire parvenir une copie du projet de réponse signé à la boîte fonctionnelle INFSO ADONIS

Pour de plus amples détails, vous pouvez consulter notre site reprenant le guide pour le personnel, à l’adresse: http://intra.infso.cec.eu.int/S1/dm_new/docs/special_issues/accesdoc/house_rules_dginfso_04_08.pdf

Je reste à votre entière disposition pour toute information complémentaire.

Bien à vous.

[anon]

—–Original Message—–
From: [anon] (INFSO)
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 5:19 PM
To: INFSO ADONIS
Subject: FW: Document access application purpusant to Article 6 EC/1049/2001

Please registrer in GESTDEM.

[anon]

—–Original Message—–
From: Roy Schestowitz
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 5:15 PM
To [anon] (INFSO)
Subject: Document access application purpusant to Article 6 EC/1049/2001

********* *BEGIN ENCRYPTED or SIGNED PART* *********

As a reply, please answer the following

1. If you intent that

> > The document you are referring to is not a European Commission document, but a document that are made by Zuck and many others from industry.

is a negative reply upon my 1049/2001 request of access to the document
please consider the specific provisions of the regulation that guide
your obligation in the formal processing of an application under
1049/2001. For instance you have the formal obligation to “inform the
applicant of his or her right to make a confirmatory application in
accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article.” and the statement above is
not in line with the formalities under 1049/2001.

If your statement was such a negative official reply, please regard this
mail as a request for a confirmatory application under 1049/2001 for
access to European Software Strategy documents. The origination of the
document is irrelevant. You have to state reasons for access refusal. I
inform you about the substance of Art 4.4 “As regards third-party
documents, the institution shall consult the third party with a view to
assessing whether an exception in paragraph 1 or 2 is applicable, unless
it is clear that the document shall or shall not be disclosed.”

If you regard it as just an informal preliminary communication please
just process the following clarified primary application.

2. I hereby request electronic access to all documents related to the
Towards the European Software Strategy process in the possession of the
EU-Commission, in particular access to the following documents:
* the list of participants in the industry expert group
* the list of WGs, WGs leaders and observing Commission officials
* draft contributions of all industry Working groups on a the European
Software Strategy
* draft input to all WG prepared by the Commission
* the participant list of the related meeting on January 20^th in Brussels
* all submissions from industry to the ESS consultation under the
applicable provisions of regulation 1049/2001 which grant me a right of
access to all documents mentioned above.”

I appreciate your kind assistance. If you feel that you are unable to
process my request yourself it is your obligation to forward it to the
competent person in the Commission.

********** *END ENCRYPTED or SIGNED PART* **********

Still waiting. It has been over a month and it has been very time consuming. Why can’t the document just be handed over immediately?

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

A Single Comment

  1. The Mad Hatter said,

    April 30, 2009 at 3:13 pm

    Gravatar

    Roy,

    Don’t be silly. You know it’s “Government by the Corporation, for the Corporation.” The peons who think they are citizens don’t count.

What Else is New


  1. Links 22/3/2019: Libinput 1.13 RC2 and Facebook's Latest Security Scandal

    Links for the day



  2. Why the UK Intellectual Property Office (UK-IPO) Cannot Ignore Judges, Whereas the EPO Can (and Does)

    The European Patent Convention (EPC) ceased to matter, judges' interpretation of it no longer matters either; the EPO exploits this to grant hundreds of thousands of dodgy software patents, then trumpet "growth"



  3. The European Patent Office Needs to Put Lives Before Profits

    Patents that pertain to health have always posed an ethical dilemma; the EPO apparently tackled this dilemma by altogether ignoring the rights and needs of patients (in favour of large corporations that benefit financially from poor people's mortality)



  4. “Criminal Organisation”

    Brazil's ex-President, Temer, is arrested (like other former presidents of Brazil); will the EPO's ex-President Battistelli ever be arrested (now that he lacks diplomatic immunity and hides at CEIPI)?



  5. Links 21/3/2019: Wayland 1.17.0, Samba 4.10.0, OpenShot 2.4.4 and Zorin Beta

    Links for the day



  6. Team UPC (Unitary Patent) is a Headless Chicken

    Team UPC's propaganda about the Unified Patent Court (UPC) has become so ridiculous that the pertinent firms do not wish to be identified



  7. António Campinos Makes Up Claims About Patent Quality, Only to be Rebutted by Examiners, Union (Anyone But the 'Puff Pieces' Industry)

    Battistelli's propagandistic style and self-serving 'studies' carry on; the notion of patent quality has been totally discarded and is nowadays lied about as facts get 'manufactured', then disseminated internally and externally



  8. Links 20/3/2019: Google Announces ‘Stadia’, Tails 3.13

    Links for the day



  9. CEN and CENELEC Agreement With the EPO Shows That It's Definitely the European Commission's 'Department'

    With headlines such as “EPO to collaborate on raising SEP awareness” it is clear to see that the Office lacks impartiality and the European Commission cannot pretend that the EPO is “dafür bin ich nicht zuständig” or “da kenne ich mich nicht aus”



  10. Decisions Made Inside the European Patent Organisation (EPO) Lack Credibility Because Examiners and Judges Lack Independence

    The lawless, merciless, Mafia-like culture left by Battistelli continues to haunt judges and examiners; how can one ever trust the Office (or the Organisation at large) to deliver true justice in adherence or compliance with the EPC?



  11. Team UPC Buries Its Credibility Deeper in the Grave

    The three Frenchmen at the top do not mention the UPC anymore; but those who promote it for a living (because they gambled on leveraging it for litigation galore) aren't giving up and in the process they perpetuate falsehoods



  12. The EPO Has Sadly Taken a Side and It's the Patent Trolls' Side

    Abandoning the whole rationale behind patents, the Office now led for almost a year by António Campinos prioritises neither science nor technology; it's all about granting as many patents (European monopolies) as possible for legal activity (applications, litigation and so on)



  13. Where the USPTO Stands on the Subject of Abstract Software Patents

    Not much is changing as we approach Easter and software patents are still fool's gold in the United States, no matter if they get granted or not



  14. Links 19/3/2019: Jetson/JetBot, Linux 5.0.3, Kodi Foundation Joins The Linux Foundation, and Firefox 66

    Links for the day



  15. Links 18/3/2019: Solus 4, Linux 5.1 RC1, Mesa 18.3.5, OSI Individual Member Election Won by Microsoft

    Links for the day



  16. Microsoft and Its Patent Trolls Continue Their Patent War, Including the War on Linux

    Microsoft is still preying on GNU/Linux using patents, notably software patents; it wants billions of dollars served on a silver platter in spite of claims that it reached a “truce” by joining the Open Invention Network and joining the LOT Network



  17. Director Iancu Generally Viewed as a Lapdog of Patent Trolls

    As Director of the Office, Mr. Iancu, a Trump appointee, not only fails to curb patent trolls; he actively defends them and he lowers barriers in order to better equip them with bogus patents that courts would reject (if the targets of extortion could afford a day in court)



  18. Links 17/3/2019: Google Console and IBM-Red Hat Merger Delay?

    Links for the day



  19. To Team UPC the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Has Become a Joke and the European Patent Office (EPO) Never Mentions It Anymore

    The EPO's frantic rally to the very bottom of patent quality may be celebrated by obedient media and patent law firms; to people who actually produce innovative things, however, this should be a worrisome trend and thankfully courts are getting in the way of this nefarious agenda; one of these courts is the FCC in Germany



  20. Links 16/3/2019: Knoppix Release and SUSE Independence

    Links for the day



  21. Stopping António Campinos and His Software Patents Agenda (Not Legal in Europe) Would Require Independent Courts

    Software patents continue to be granted (new tricks, loopholes and buzzwords) and judges who can put an end to that are being actively assaulted by those who aren't supposed to have any authority whatsoever over them (for decisions to be impartially delivered)



  22. The Linux Foundation Needs to Speak Out Against Microsoft's Ongoing (Continued) Patent Shakedown of OEMs That Ship Linux

    Zemlin actively thanks Microsoft while taking Microsoft money; he meanwhile ignores how Microsoft viciously attacks Linux using patents, revealing the degree to which his foundation, the “Linux Foundation” (not about Linux anymore, better described as Zemlin’s PAC), has been compromised



  23. Links 15/3/2019: Linux 5.0.2, Sublime Text 3.2

    Links for the day



  24. The EPO and the USPTO Are Granting Fake Patents on Software, Knowing That Courts Would Reject These

    Office management encourages applicants to send over patent applications that are laughable while depriving examiners the freedom and the time they need to reject these; it means that loads of bogus patents are being granted, enshrined as weapons that trolls can use to extort small companies outside the courtroom



  25. CommunityBridge is a Cynical Microsoft-Funded Effort to Show Zemlin Works for 'Community', Not Microsoft

    After disbanding community participation in the Board (but there are Microsoft staff on the Board now) the "Linux Foundation" (or Zemlin PAC) continues to take Microsoft money and polishes or launders that as "community"



  26. Links 14/3/2019: GNOME 3.32 and Mesa 19.0.0 Released

    Links for the day



  27. EPO 'Results' Are, As Usual, Not Measured Correctly

    The supranational monopoly, a monopoly-granting authority, is being used by António Campinos to grant an insane amount of monopolies whose merit is dubious and whose impact on Europe will be a net negative



  28. Good News Everyone! UPC Ready to Go... in 2015!

    Benoît Battistelli is no longer in Office and his fantasy (patent lawyers' fantasy) is as elusive as ever; Team UPC is trying to associate opposition to UPC with the far right (AfD) once again



  29. Links 13/3/2019: Plasma 5.15.3,Chrome 73 and Many LF Press Releases

    Links for the day



  30. In the Age of Trumpism EFF Needs to Repeatedly Remind Director Iancu That He is Not a Judge and He Cannot Ignore the Courts

    The nonchalance and carelessness seen in Iancu's decision to just cherry-pick decisions/outcomes (basically ignoring caselaw) concerns technologists, who rightly view him as a 'mole' of the litigation 'industry' (which he came from)


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts