In the first week of October the European Commission will publish a proposal for a Council Framework Decision on the protection of personal data exchanged by courts and police under the Third Pillar in EU Member States. Statewatch published a draft version earlier this week.

The framework decision will allow the EU to move forward with plans for full cross-border access to police databases under the "principle of availability". The Council has become increasingly eager for a proposal to be agreed, calling in July for the Commission to present proposals by October at the latest.

The proposal would create a similar regime to the existing 1995 Data Protection Directive, which applies to First Pillar (single market) legislation. It would ensure data is processed for specific purposes for a

The European Commission has finally launched its proposal for a directive on data retention. During a press conference today (21 September 2005), commissioner Frattini underlined how important it was that data retention would be decided in the first pillar, by Commission and Parliament and not by the ministers of Justice in the third pillar. Frattini was confident the proposal would be adopted by the European Parliament before the end of the year. But the happy information feeling didn't last until the end of the conference. When asked by a journalist why the Commission did not include failed call attempts, Frattini said that was indeed an omission, and would be one of the first updates to the list. Failed attempts are important, Frattini said, because law enforcement needs very complete

Microsoft has launched a second appeal case against the anti-trust decision by the European Commission in March 2004. On 10 August 2005 Microsoft filed a new complaint at the European Court of Justice (First Instance) in Luxembourg, asking for annulment of the decision to open up the Windows source code enough to create interoperability and allow open source vendors to distribute Windows source code.

"We are taking this step so the court can begin its review now of this issue, given its far-reaching implications for the protection of our intellectual property rights around the world," said Microsoft spokesman Tom Brookes. The hearing won't begin until 2006.

In December 2004, the Court of First Instance entirely dismissed Microsoft's first legal objections to the sanctions and ruled that the Commission's decision does not "cause serious and irreparable damage" to Microsoft. In March and again in June 2005, the Commission rejected a proposed license scheme because Microsoft did not agree to license the protocols for use in open-source products.

The general German industry association (BDI) and the two telecommunication associations (BITKOM and VATM) have jointly published a strong position paper against the European proposals for mandatory data retention.

The German industry calls on both the European Commission and the ministers of Justice and Home Affairs to provide a solid and adequate impact assessment, since "LEAs have demonstrated neither the concrete need for a data retention regime nor the alleged lack of effectiveness of the current practice."

"Industry would like to point out that the European Union is confronted with a crisis of acceptance and a loss of confidence because politicians are too often unable to explain the purpose and benefits of European activities to citizens and industry."

The industry mentions 5 more specific demands on both Commission and Council:

The European Commission has finally produced its draft directive on data retention. According to the Commission, all fixed and mobile telephony traffic and location data from all private and legal persons should be stored for 1 year. Data about communications 'using solely the internet protocol' should be stored for 6 months. The Commission does not provide any argument about the usefulness and necessity of data retention, but considers the directive to be proportionate if providers are reimbursed for 'demonstrated additional costs'. The last compromise achieved by the ministers of Justice and Home Affairs (the JHA Council) to create a two-step approach, starting with telephony data and introducing internet data retention at a later stage, is completely ignored by the Commission.

The Commission claims it seeks a balance between law enforcement, human rights and competition aspects by defining the purpose, limiting the categories and time period. The purpose is derived from Article 15 of the E-Privacy directive of 2002 and is actually larger than what the JHA Council proposed. The Commission includes the prevention of criminal offences and safeguarding national security, defence and public security besides the JHA purpose of the investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences.

The European Commission wants to create 1 European internet rights clearing house for internet content providers. An in-depth study into the current collective management of copyrights shows that a company that wishes to start an online music business has to seek clearance with 25 national copyright management organisations and has to sell no less than 4.75 million copies of a single song to just recover the cost of the necessary licenses.

The Commission quotes an example from Edima, the organisation representing online music providers. "The direct cost of negotiating one single licence amounts to 9.500 euro (which comprises 20 internal man hours, external legal advice and travel expenses). As mechanical rights and public performance rights in most Member States require separate clearance, the overall cost of the two requisite licences per Member State would amount to almost 19.000 euro. As clearance is required in all 25 EU territories, the cost of obtaining the necessary 50 copyright licenses would amount to 475.000 euro. On the basis that a profit of 0.10 euro can be achieved per download, the online music provider would have to sell 4.75 million downloads merely to recover the cost associated with obtaining the requisite copyright licenses." (p47-48)

On 12 July 2005 the European Commission launched a new proposal for a directive and framework decision on the penal enforcement of intellectual property rights. The Commission proposes to penalise any infringements. According to Franco Frattini, the Commissioner for Justice, "the new measures proposed by the Commission form the criminal law front to the fight against counterfeiting and piracy in Europe." Though officially aimed against criminal organisations, the proposed measures applies to all types of infringements of intellectual property rights. "All intentional infringements of an intellectual property right on a commercial scale, and attempting, aiding or abetting and inciting such infringements are treated as criminal offences."

Member states must at least punish such offences with four years' imprisonment "if the offence involves a criminal organisation or if it jeopardises public health and safety." The applicable fine must be at least EUR 100.000 to EUR 300.000 for cases involving criminal organisations or posing a risk to public health and safety. The proposal allows Member States to apply tougher penalties.