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

06.05.09

After 3 Months, Europe Lets Microsoft-Influenced EU Panel be Seen

Posted in Europe, Free/Libre Software, Law, Microsoft at 6:56 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

THIS is the last part in a series that explores Microsoft’s invasion into EU panels and the Commission’s unwillingness to obey transparency rules. It was never supposed to take so long and we were just about to complain at the ombudsman. To list previous posts chronologically (for context):

Finally we have copies of the documents (sent at the 90th minute as I was going to mail the ombudsman on Monday):

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.

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.”

We are unable to identify the documents referred to in the 6th item “all submissions from industry to the ESS consultation”, as we notified you previously (see our emails dated 15th April 2009, 8th May 2009 and 27th of May 2009).

We enclose a copy of the documents requested in first five items which we hope will meet your needs. I would draw your attention to the fact that they can in no way be reproduced or disseminated for commercial purposes unless we have first been consulted.

The documents included are for:
* the list of participants in the industry expert group
“list of participants in the industry expert group.pdf”

* the list of WGs, WGs sleaders and observing Commission officials
“Working Groups.pdf”

* the participant list of the related meeting on January 20th in Brussels
“Participants list 20th of January.pdf”

* draft input to all WG prepared by the Commission
“Moderator for the European Software Strategy Working Group SMEs Reduction of Fragmentation – D104400.tif”
– Note that the e-mail is a model for all the e-mails send to the moderators

Please note that the following documents have been drawn up by independent experts and do not necessarily represent the European Commission’s views and can in no way be reproduced or disseminated for commercial purposes unless we have first been consulted.

* draft contributions of all industry Working groups on a the European Software Strategy
“WG1_Future_Internet.pdf”
“WG2_Technology and Business Trends in the Software Industry.pdf”
“WG 3 – IPR, Standards, and Interoperability.zip”
“WG4_Public Procurement – Financing Software Innovation.pdf”
“WG5_SMEs-Reduction of Fragmentation.pdf”
“WG6_Skills.pdf”
“WG7_OSS.pdf”

* draft input to all WG prepared by the Commission
“Software_Strategy_Issues_Paper.pdf”

Yours sincerely,

[Anonymised]

—–Original Message—–
From: [Anonymised]
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 4:48 PM
To: [Anonymised]
Cc: [Anonymised]
Subject: RE: FW: Gestdem 2009/1562 FW: Document access application purpusant to Article 6 EC/1049/2001 (D/122791)

Dear Mr. Schestowitz,

Thank you for confirming, on 22nd May 2009, your application of the 20th March 2009 registered on 23rd 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.

We are processing your application; however, as we notified you previously (see our emails dated 15th April 2009 and 8th May 2009) we are unable to identify the documents referred to in the 6th item “all submissions from industry to the ESS consultation”. Please could you clarify your request so that we may continue to process this item. You clarified item 4 on your list but not item 6.

If you wish to receive the items that we have identified before sending any clarification of item 6 please inform us and we will dispatch them.

For the procedure to be followed when applying for access to documents, please refer to “Access to European Commission Documents – A Citizen’s Guide”

http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/access_documents/docs/guide_citoyen/en.pdf

Yours sincerely,

[Anonymised]

These documents are not “disseminated for commercial purposes” but only to inform people about a process which was rigged by Microsoft and its EU lobbyists. The links at the top provide extensive background and evidence. See the presence of Jonathan Zuck (ACT) for example. How about IDC, BSA, CompTIA and others who are in Microsoft’s pocket? The lists of companies are very telling. In some cases, Microsoft employees have more presence than any other company, despite being an American company in these EU panels.

Here are the files:

There is no reason why documents that instruct on pubic policy should not be accessible to the affected public.

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

5 Comments

  1. The Mad Hatter said,

    June 6, 2009 at 11:19 am

    Gravatar

    Heh. I can see I have some interesting reading this afternoon.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Next I shall ask them for more documents, including written contributions of the different participants. What they are giving us are the final papers, not the history of the whole editing process.

    They also made a mockery of our request, the Zuck contribution is not even in there. I was advised by peers to go to the Ombudsman immediately and file a complaint.

    Why does the Commission continue to hide documents published by Wikileaks?

  2. The Mad Hatter said,

    June 6, 2009 at 7:35 pm

    Gravatar

    They are probably hoping you won’t notice.

  3. orbit said,

    June 9, 2009 at 7:30 am

    Gravatar

    “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.”

    Why does the Commission is not publishing the ACT paper?

    Are they trying to protect lobbyists?

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    I’ve asked for these again and I’ll be filing a complaint this week.

    “Ombudsman report highlights EU’s lack of transparency”
    http://www.euractiv.com/en/pa/ombudsman-report-highlights-eu-lack-transparency/article-181794?Ref=RSS

What Else is New


  1. Dutch Court Rules Against SUEPO (in a Reversal), But EPO Management Would Have Ignored the Ruling Even If SUEPO Won (Updated)

    SUEPO loses a case against EPO management, but the EPO's overzealous management was going to ignore the ruling anyway



  2. New Paper Provides Evidence of Sinking Patent Quality at the EPO, Refuting the Liar in Chief Battistelli

    In spite of Battistelli's claims (lies) about patent quality under his watch, reality suggests that so-called 'production' is simply rushed issuance of invalid patents (one step away from rubberstamping, in order to meet unreasonable, imposed-from-the-top targets)



  3. Battistelli Locks EPO Staff Union Out of Social Conference So That He Can Lie About the Union and the Social Climate

    The attacks on staff of the EPO carry on, with brainwash sessions meticulously scheduled to ensure that Administrative Council delegates are just their master's voice, or the voice of the person whom they are in principle supposed to oversee



  4. Unprecedented Levels of UPC Lobbying by Big Business Europe (Multinationals) and Their Patent Law Firms

    A quick look at some of the latest deception which is intended to bamboozle European politicians and have them play along with the unitary [sic] patent for private interests of the super-rich



  5. Links 29/9/2016: Russia Moving to FOSS, New Nmap and PostgreSQL Releases

    Links for the day



  6. Team UPC is Interjecting Itself Into the Media Ahead of Tomorrow's Lobbying Push Against the European Council and Against European Interests

    A quick look at the growing bulk of UPC lobbying (by the legal firms which stand to benefit from it) ahead of tomorrow's European Council meeting which is expected to discuss a unitary patent system



  7. IP Kat is Lobbying Heavily for the UPC, Courtesy of Team UPC

    When does an IP (or patent) blog become little more than an aggregation of interest groups and self-serving patent law firms, whose agenda overlaps that of Team Battistelli?



  8. Leaked: Conclusions of the Secretive EPO Board 28 Meeting (8th of September 2016)

    The agenda and outcome of the secretive meeting of the Board of the Administrative Council of the EPO



  9. Letter From the Dutch Institute of Patent Attorneys (Nederlandse Orde van Octrooigemachtigden) to the Administrative Council of the EPO

    The Netherlands Institute of Patent Attorneys, a group representing a large number of Dutch patent practitioners, is against Benoît Battistelli and his horrible behaviour at the European Patent Office (EPO)



  10. EPO's Board 28 Notes Battistelli's “Three Current Investigations/Disciplinary Proceedings Involving SUEPO Members in The Hague."

    The attack on SUEPO (EPO staff representatives) at The Hague appears to have been silently expanded to a third person, showing an obvious increase in Battistelli's attacks on truth-tellers



  11. Links 28/9/2016: Alpine Linux 3.4.4, Endless OS 3.0

    Links for the day



  12. Cementing Autocracy: The European Patent Office Against Democracy, Against Media, and Against the Rule of Law

    The European Patent Office (EPO) actively undermines democracy in Europe, it undermines the freedom of the press (by paying it for puff pieces), and it undermines the rule of law by giving one single tyrant total power in Eponia and immunity from outside Eponia (even when he breaks his own rules)



  13. Links 28/9/2016: New Red Hat Offices, Fedora 25 'Frozen'

    Links for the day



  14. Team Battistelli Intensifies the Attack on the Boards of Appeal Again

    The lawless state of the EPO, where the rule of law is basically reducible to Battistelli's ego and insecurities, is again demonstrated with an escalation and perhaps another fake 'trial' in the making (after guilt repeatedly fails to be established)



  15. After the EPO Paid the Financial Times to Produce Propaganda the Newspaper Continues to Produce UPC Puff Pieces, Just Ahead of EU Council Meeting

    How the media, including the Financial Times, has been used (and even paid!) by the EPO in exchange for self-serving (to the EPO) messages and articles



  16. Beware the Patent Law Firms Insinuating That Software Patents Are Back Because of McRO

    By repeatedly claiming (and then generalising) that CAFC accepted a software patent the patent microcosm (meta-industry) hopes to convince us that we should continue to pursue software patents in the US, i.e. pay them a lot more money for something of little/no value



  17. The US Supreme Court Might Soon Tighten Patent Scope in the United States Even Further, the USPTO Produces Patent Maximalism Propaganda

    A struggle brewing between the patent 'industry' (profiting from irrational saturation) and the highest US court, as well as the Government Accountability Office (GAO)



  18. Patent Trolling a Growing Problem in East Asia (Software Patents Also), Whereas in the US the Problem Goes Away Along With Software Patents

    A look at two contrasting stories, one in Asia where patent litigation and hype are on the rise (same in Europe due to the EPO) and another in the US where a lot of patents face growing uncertainty and a high invalidation rate



  19. The EPO's Continued Push for Software Patents, Marginalisation of Appeals (Reassessment), and Deviation From the EPC

    A roundup of new developments at the EPO, where things further exacerbate and patent quality continues its downward spiral



  20. The Battistelli Effect: “We Will be Gradually Forced to File Our Patent Applications Outside the EPO in the Interests of Our Clients”

    While the EPO dusts off old files and grants in haste without quality control (won't be sustainable for more than a couple more years) the applicants are moving away as trust in the EPO erodes rapidly and profoundly



  21. Links 27/9/2016: Lenovo Layoffs, OPNFV Third Software Release

    Links for the day



  22. The Moral Depravity of the European Patent Office Under Battistelli

    The European Patent Office (EPO) comes under heavy criticism from its very own employees, who also seem to recognise that lobbying for the UPC is a very bad idea which discredits the European Patent Organisation



  23. Links 26/9/2016: Linux 4.8 RC8, SuperTux 0.5

    Links for the day



  24. What Insiders Are Saying About the Sad State of the European Patent Office (EPO)

    Anonymous claims made by people who are intimately familiar with the European Patent Office (from the inside) shed light on how bad things have become



  25. The EPO Does Not Want Skilled (and 'Expensive') Staff, Layoffs a Growing Concern

    A somewhat pessimistic look (albeit increasingly realistic look) at the European Patent Office, where unions are under fire for raising legitimate concerns about the direction taken by the management since a largely French team was put in charge



  26. Patents Roundup: Accenture Software Patents, Patent Troll Against Apple, Willful Infringements, and Apple Against a Software Patent

    A quick look at various new articles of interest (about software patents) and what can be deduced from them, especially now that software patents are the primary barrier to Free/Libre Open Source software adoption



  27. Software Patents Propped Up by Patent Law Firms That Are Lying, Further Assisted by Rogue Elements Like David Kappos and Randall Rader (Revolving Doors)

    The sheer dishonesty of the patent microcosm (seeking to bring back software patents by misleading the public) and those who are helping this microcosm change the system from the inside, owing to intimate connections from their dubious days inside government



  28. Links 25/9/2016: Linux 4.7.5, 4.4.22; LXQt 0.11

    Links for the day



  29. Patent Quality and Patent Scope the Unspeakable Taboo at the EPO, as Both Are Guillotined by Benoît Battistelli for the Sake of Money

    The gradual destruction of the European Patent Office (EPO), which was once unanimously regarded as the world's best, by a neo-liberal autocrat from France, Benoît Battistelli



  30. Bristows LLP's Hatred/Disdain of UK/EU Democracy Demonstrated; Says “Not Only Will the Pressure for UK Ratification of the UPC Agreement Continue, But a Decision is Wanted Within Weeks.”

    Without even consulting the British public or the European public (both of whom would be severely harmed by the UPC), the flag bearers of the UPC continue to bamboozle and then pressure politicians, public servants and nontechnical representatives


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