Differences between revisions 2 and 4 (spanning 2 versions)

Factsheet

the directive does not make any distinction between piracy and ambiguous infringements of "intellectual property" rights
decent people can be treated as organised criminals
the legal means to combat piracy and counterfeiting are already available
beyond clear cases of piracy and counterfeiting civil sanctions are sufficient
contestable and weak rights gain great threath potential
desired freedom to act in the market is inhibited
the directive adopts a general concept of "intellectual property", it breaks the age-old "numerus clausus" (closed system) principle of "intellectual property", and "absolute rights" ("iura in rem") in general: until now, the principle is freedom of information (and imitation) unless there is an explicit statute preventing that
criminal law must be precise and may not contain open concepts - the legality principle ("lex certa" and "lex scripta") is violated
right-holders may assist the police with the investigation, help to draw conclusions, this threatens the neutrality of police investigation
criminal investigation authorities should not be able to act on their own initiative without a prior complaint of the rights owner, licensing arrangements are not published, the rights owner has the fundamental right to dispose of his rights as he desires
the directive can be abused
the proposal is not essential, the Community lacks competence

-  ⇤ ← Revision 2 as of 2006-08-26 14:54:13 → 
  Size: 850
  Editor: ip43-37-166-62
  Comment:
+   ← Revision 4 as of 2006-08-26 15:21:57 → ⇥
  Size: 1650
  Editor: ip43-37-166-62
  Comment:
-Deletions are marked like this.
+Additions are marked like this.
 Line 13:
- * the proposal has an open end: all existing and future "IP-rights" are covered, it is a carte blanche
+ * the directive adopts a general concept of "intellectual property", it breaks the age-old "numerus clausus" (closed system) principle of "intellectual property", and "absolute rights" ("iura in rem") in general: until now, the principle is freedom of information (and imitation) unless there is an explicit statute preventing that
 * criminal law must be precise and may not contain open concepts - the legality principle ("lex certa" and "lex scripta") is violated
 * right-holders may assist the police with the investigation, help to draw conclusions, this threatens the neutrality of police investigation
 * criminal investigation authorities should not be able to act on their own initiative without a prior complaint of the rights owner, licensing arrangements are not published, the rights owner has the fundamental right to dispose of his rights as he desires
 * the directive can be abused