Tim Jackson

This page outlines the timeline of correspondence between myself and my MEP’s on the proposed European Directive on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions. You can follow the inline links to read the letters themselves.

Timeline

• 2 Jun 2003 – Initial e-mail sent to all Eastern region MEPs
  I send a lengthy e-mail to all my MEP’s requesting their attention to the software patent debate and discussing the key issues.
  • 3 Jun 2003 – Response from Andrew Duff
    Andrew Duff responds with an encouraging e-mail.
  • 3 Jun 2003 – Response from Eryl McNally
    Eryl McNally responds by saying that Richard Howitt is the first point of contact for Norfolk, Sussex and Essex, and she has passed my letter on to him.
  • 3 Jun 2003 – Response from Bashir Khanbhai
    Bashir Khanbhai responds with an e-mail which is interesting and lengthy, although the bottom line seems to be that Mr. Khanbhai supports software patents. The mail is also very similar to that previously sent by Malcolm Harbour MEP to another constituent concerned about software patents.
    • 3 Jun 2003 – Response by me to Bashir Khanbhai
      I respond to Mr. Khanbhai, stating that I feel that there are some inconsistencies with his response.
      • 5 Jun 2003 – Response from Bashir Khanbhai
        Mr. Khanbhai somewhat brushes me off in his response of 5 June, promising to pass my concerns onto pro-patent lobbyist Malcolm Harbour MEP.
        • 8 Jun 2003 – Response by me to Bashir Khanbhai
          I respond to Mr. Khanbhai, pointing out (amongst other things) that Malcolm Harbour is a patent advocate and that his assertions about the consequences of the Directive do not add up.
  • 5 Jun 2003 – Response on behalf of Jeffrey Titford
    A UK Independence Party colleague of Mr. Titford responds in a fairly insubstantial way but encouragingly insofar as it appears Mr. Titford will not be voting for the proposed Directive.
  • 6 Jun 2003 – Response from Robert Sturdy (page 1/page 2)
    Robert Sturdy replies with the now-familiar Standard Line from the Conservatives; that is, Malcolm Harbour/Arlene McCarthy’s simplistic and either naive or intentionally misleading stance on patents.
  • 10 July 2003 – Response from Geoffrey van Orden
    Mr. van Orden replies at long last – though unfortunately also peddles the McCarthy/Harbour/Conservative “standard line”.
    • 18 August 2003 – Response by me to Geoffrey van Orden
      I follow up the above letter from Mr. van Orden (Conservative).
• 26 Jun 2003 – Second e-mail sent to all Eastern Region MEPs
  I send a lengthy e-mail to all my MEP’s pointing out the fact that the plenary hearing on software patents is being rushed through and planned for Monday next week (this has since been postponed until 1st September). I plead with my MEPs to see sense and vote against allowing software patenting.
  • Response from Eryl McNally
    Credit to Ms. McNally for responding quickly – although she again seems to be washing her hands of half the Eastern Region, which seems rather inappropriate considering that they are the people who voted her in.
• 18 August 2003 – Third e-mail to Richard Howitt
  Having received no response at all from Richard Howitt (Labour), I follow up with an e-mail emphasising the problems and raising the issue of the latest software patent granted to Amazon.
• 18 August 2003 – Third e-mail to Christopher Beazley
  As above, I follow up with Christopher Beazley (Conservative).
• 15 September 2003 – Fax to Arlene McCarthy
  I send a fax to Arlene McCarthy, responding to her extraordinary and cowardly press release (scroll down for it) which resorts to name-calling, accusing people like me of being “bullies” and “liars”! (There is a comprehensive FFII deconstruction)
• 21 October 2003 – Letter to Simon Burns MP
  I sent a letter to my local MP Simon Burns asking for his help in ensuring that the UK’s interest is accurately represented at the Council of Ministers.
  • 23 October 2003 – Reply from Simon Burns
    A ‘holding’ reply from Simon Burns, promising to pass it on to the relevant Minister
  • 13 November 2003 – Reply from Simon Burns
    A further reply from Simon Burns, enclosing a form reply from Lord Sainsburywhich completely ignores the content of my letter and goes right back to discussing software patents at a high level.