News 

The formative directive in question, which sets the framework for the granting or denial of patents for 'computer-implemented inventions', has already had a fraught passage through the various bureaux at the EU since controversy erupted over how it deals with the patenting of software.

During its drawn-out baptism, battle lines have been drawn between the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers, and public and industry opinion has polarised between the two.

The Parliament wants to ensure clauses and amendments are built into the directive that make it difficult to patent 'pure' software. It suggests that software to control a new kind of mechanical arm would be patentable, for example, but that software that simply represents data - say accounting software that you feed in numbers which are processed and output - is not. The Council of Ministers approaches the subject with a broader brush, arguing that placing unnecessary restrictions and guidance on patent approval only complicates procedure and makes Europe a less competitive place to do business.

So far, the European Parliament's conservative draft was squashed by the Council's subsequent interpretation which was then voted on and adopted as a common position. However, following hard campaigning by those opposing the Council position, and with the accession of numerous new members to the EU, the Council's draft no longer held a majority, and an EU legal committee recommended the directive be restarted.

Yet this request was not granted and any conciliations to opponents can only come in a second reading.

Tomorrow's vote sees MEPs voting in a second reading to decide the European Parliament's position on a set of 21 amendments to the Council draft that would appease many opponents. At

Many large IT companies see the amendments as unnecessary and are petitioning MEPs to oppose such changes. Carl-Henric Svanberg, President and CEO of Ericsson, said: 'It is incredibly important that we get a favourable legal framework because this will direct our work going forward in R&D. If we are not able to patent our computer implemented inventions, the digital technology industry, and also Europe as a region, will have difficulty staying competitive.'

Others hint at an overburdened patent system leaving the industry no choice but to take their investment elsewhere. 'Europe has been at the forefront of advances in digital technology. We need to continue to innovate or we will lose customers and market share. This is only possible if we can reward innovation and secure our investment in R&D,' warned Gerard Kleisterlee, President and CEO of Philips.

MEPs will also be receiving missives of a quite different perspective from the Confederation of European Associations of Small and Medium Enterprises CEA-PME, which claims to represent the interest of more than half a million small businesses across Europe. It has mounted a letter-writing campaign to lobby MEPs to adopt the proposed 21 amendments or otherwise reject the directive. Its position is also supported by other bodies such as the European Liberal Youth (LYMEC) and the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure.

'If we want to preserve a competitive, innovative and successful European IT sector - vital to achieving the Lisbon Agenda goals it is essential that the Council's common position be amended. We believe the set of twenty-one compromise amendments being put forward by MEPs from all political groups is what is needed to achieve this goal and to avoid the worst-case scenario of a US-style software patent system. As it stands, the current text of the directive will impose software and business process patents across the EU,' said Rufus Pollock, Director of the FFII (UK).

These opponents worry that the legal minefield of developing new software within a liberal patenting system will result in many small business simply deciding the risk is too great to even start.

But to have the amendments they want voted in they need an absolute majority of 367 votes tomorrow.