Size: 1719
Comment:
|
Size: 1806
Comment:
|
Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
Line 12: | Line 12: |
* the directive harmonises the enforcement of substantive law that is not harmonised |
Factsheet
2005/0127 (COD)
Amended proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on criminal measures aimed at ensuring the enforcement of intellectual property rights
- 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, the desired freedom to act in the market is inhibited
- the directive harmonises the enforcement of substantive law that is not harmonised
- 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
- carefully balanced national procedural law systems are distorted
- 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