Archive for the ‘European Union’ Category

How to boost co-operation between Nato and EU – Gulf Times

By Ian Bond and Luigi Scazzieri/London

Russias invasion of Ukraine in February was a watershed moment for European security. But relations between Nato and the European Union (EU) remain marred by mutual suspicion, institutional rivalry, and a lack of effective co-operation. The two organisations must set aside their differences and work together.Russia once again poses a long-term threat to European security. At the same time, the economic spillover from the war in Ukraine will intensify security challenges along Europes southern flank. And, as the current crisis involving Taiwan has shown, Chinas increasing assertiveness will loom progressively larger in Americas strategic thinking.The key European security challenge in the coming years will be to strengthen deterrence against Russia while retaining the ability to tackle other threats. When it comes to deterring Russia, Nato is clearly the indispensable organisation, because there is no viable alternative to its integrated command structure. The Ukraine war has reinvigorated Natos core mission of standing up to Russia and defending its members territory if deterrence fails. Under new defence plans, Natos rapid response force will increase from 40,000 to 300,000 troops. And Finland and Sweden will soon become members.Natos deterrent power is underpinned by the US forces stationed in Europe which have increased by around 20,000 since Russia invaded Ukraine, to over 100,000 and by Americas nuclear arsenal. But Europeans cannot expect the US to continue shouldering the bulk of their defence forever. Even before Donald Trumps presidency, US complaints about unfair burden-sharing were growing louder and more frequent. Americas increased focus on Asia means that the US contribution to Europes defence is likely to shrink over time. And Europeans cannot rule out the possibility that Trump or someone in his isolationist America First mould will become president in 2025 and walk away from the US commitment to Nato.So, Europeans have little choice but to contribute more to their own defence. Since the Ukraine conflict began, EU countries have announced an extra 200bn ($203bn) in military expenditure. But many countries could find implementing these commitments politically difficult given the economic downturn and competing budget demands.Moreover, the impact of the additional defence expenditure depends on an overall plan for determining the weapons systems, logistics, and munitions needed. But European defence spending remains uncoordinated, with little intergovernmental co-operation. According to the European Defence Agency, joint research and development is currently only 6% of total EU defence R&D, and joint procurement accounts for just 11% of total equipment orders.The EU has a key role to play in strengthening European security in a manner that complements Natos efforts. For starters, the Union needs to help member states manage the economic consequences of the war in Ukraine thereby helping to sustain a political consensus for sanctions against Russia.The EU can also help to prepare European armies better for conflict. The plan to establish a 5,000-strong rapid reaction force would push member states armed forces to co-operate more closely, contributing to their overall ability to deter threats. And the EU is better placed than Nato to confront security challenges such as disinformation and election interference, because it is through the Union that member states regulate the technology platforms through which misinformation spreads.But the EUs greatest potential contribution to European security lies in its ability to foster higher defence spending by member states. The EUs fiscal rules can encourage this by excluding defence investment from budget deficit limits, in the same way that investment in the green and digital transformations has been excluded since the start of the pandemic. Moreover, the Union can devise incentives to promote joint procurement and deeper co-operation among national military forces.Recent proposals from the European Commission, particularly a value-added tax exemption for joint defence procurement, could yield significant progress on defence spending, co-ordination, and efforts to strengthen European military capabilities. But European countries lack a truly collaborative mindset when it comes to developing, acquiring, and operating defence capabilities. Developing such an approach will require stronger political direction from national leaders.The EU and other Nato members should ensure that their national defence markets are as open to one another as possible, to ensure economies of scale. The EUs attempts to improve military capabilities should be guided by the principle of maximising effectiveness and should not unnecessarily damage long-standing relationships between EU defence firms and their non-EU partners.For its part, the US should continue to signal strong support for a greater EU role in European security and defence, particularly in developing the blocs military capabilities. At the same time, US policymakers can influence the elaboration of EU initiatives in ways that avoid duplication and strengthen European security.Russian President Vladimir Putins war of aggression against Ukraine has shown that defending European values and interests is a matter of life and death. Europe can no longer afford to treat quasi-theological arguments over EU and Nato primacy as more important than its own security. Project Syndicate* Ian Bond is Director of Foreign Policy at the Centre for European Reform. Luigi Scazzieri is a senior research fellow at the Centre for European Reform.

See original here:
How to boost co-operation between Nato and EU - Gulf Times

European Software Patentability: Cutting Through The Noise – Patent – European Union – Mondaq

24 August 2022

Kilburn & Strode

To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

We're taking you on a journey through the history ofsoftware patents in Europe, through the lens of pop culture. Byzooming out and looking at the big picture of what the EPO hastaught us over the years, we'll be building up a clear visionon what you need to do to improve the success of your softwarepatents at the EPO. At each step along the way through history,we're stopping to see a case where the EPO redefined the lawin a way that is still applied today.

In Part I to Part IV of our journey, we've seen the EPOset out the foundational principles of how software patents aredealt with in Europe. Next, we'll build upon Part V:Cheating your way to the finish line to discover how the EPOreally cares about the purpose of your invention.

Our story now takes us to 2006, the year Silicon Valley darlingsFacebook, Twitter and YouTube were born (do you remember lifebefore them?), but we're not here to talk about them.Instead, we want to take you back to think PINK in2006.We're not talking about the American singer, eventhough her 2006 album I'm not dead was somewhatof a comeback for her. We're also not here to talk aboutSteve Martin's appalling resurrection of Peter Sellers'classic 60s film the Pink Panther. In fact, are we even allowed tomention a film that scores less than 25% on Rotten Tomatoes?We're also not even talking about Millennial Pink remember that? Well that term wasn't even coined for another8 years. No, we're here to get technical and talk about pinknoise.

What's pink noise you ask? And why was it significant in2006? Let's start with the second of those two questionsfirst.

In 2006, the EPO issued the Infineon decision, which dealt withthe question of the patentability of simulations the sameissue dealt with in the 2021 Enlarged Board of Appeal decision(G1/19). The case comes from the issue that when you'resimulating a technical process then arguably nothing technical ishappening as it is all the hypothetical simulation of reality.However, the result of a simulation is that you can make betterdrugs, improve performance of engines and better understand theimpact of a chemical process. So, at the time there weresuggestions that even though the simulation itself might not betechnical or produce a further technical effect, the fact that thesimulation takes place positively impacts something that is thendone in the real world. In other words, there is a resultanttechnical advantage to the simulation.

In the Infineon decision the EPO agreed. The EPO concluded thatsoftware inventions must have a technical purpose. The purpose ofthe simulation mattered. For example, according to the EPO,software for controlling a braking system is technical, whilstsimulating a financial transaction is not.

So let's go back to the first question what ispink noise? Pink noise, or 1/f noise, is a signal or process with afrequency spectrum such that the power spectral density isinversely proportional to the frequency of the signal. Still withme? Well, even if you're not, what was significant in theInfineon case was that the invention related to simulation of anelectronic circuit in relation to 1/f, or pink, noise. It was foundthat simulating test circuits, instead of testing on real circuits,significantly reduced the number of circuits that needed to beproduced, tested and ultimately wasted. Since the simulation was ofan electronic circuit it was deemed to have a technical purpose.Therefore it was not excluded from patentability under the EPC.

The Infineon case therefore taught us more about what Vicomfirst laid out back in 1986 that inventions were notexcluded if they are technical. Furthermore, as thesimulation was purely software, we then saw the application of theIBM case's further technical effect. Inparticular, the software, which was loaded onto a computer,provided for improved automatic simulation and evaluation ofnoise-affected circuits. It is nice seeing the law convergingin this way to a logical result.

In practice, the result of Infineon is that inventions in fieldswhere there is arguably not a technical purpose for the inventioncan be very difficult to protect at the EPO. Spoiler alert this general principle has now been confirmed at the highest levelin the 2021 Enlarged Board of Appeal decision (G1/19). Sadly,examiners can quickly point at the related section of theEPO's Guidelines to kill off a case early. Hence, care needsto be taken when drafting to ensure the invention is framed with aclear technical purpose, not simply with technical advantagesassociated with the software-implemented process.

The content of this article is intended to provide a generalguide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be soughtabout your specific circumstances.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Intellectual Property from European Union

Marks & Clerk

I hope you will excuse this slightly unusual 'M&C Reacts' post. Whilst this is a forum usually reserved for my colleagues and I to share our IP related insights, I am also grateful for an opportunity to talk ...

Marks & Clerk

In Europe, inventions that utilise distributed ledger technology will generally fall under the heading of "computer-implemented inventions (CIIs).

Keltie LLP

The EUIPO recently published new guidance on the classification of trade mark applications for non-fungible tokens (NFTs). This guidance is helpful as we are seeing many filings in this area; however, further clarification may be needed.

Read more:
European Software Patentability: Cutting Through The Noise - Patent - European Union - Mondaq

EU will never recognise illegal annexation of Crimea – EU NEIGHBOURS east – euneighbourseast.eu

The European Unionwill never recognise the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by the Russian Federation, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen yesterday told theonline Summit of theCrimea Platform.

She said the annexation of Crimea in 2014marked the beginning of Putins deplorable attempt to deny Ukraine its freedom, and thatCrimea hassince then been used,not only as a Russian military base, but also as a testing ground for the brutal methods Russia is now applying across the other occupied parts of Ukraine.

We are deeply concerned about the human rights violations in the Crimean peninsula. The disappearances, the torture, the killings. The persecution of Crimean Tartars. The intimidation and incarceration of journalists, lawyers and human rights defenders,the European Commission President said, adding,the European Union will continue to stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes.

Addressing the same meeting, European Council President Charles Michel saidRussia hadsince February been usingCrimea as a strategic springboard to invade other parts of Ukraine from the south and to attack Ukraine with indiscriminate missile strikes. Russia is also using the peninsula as a transit point to deport Ukrainian citizens to infamous filtration camps, where acts of torture and abuse have been reported, he added.

The EU is right by your side in these dramatic times, and we will stay there for as long as it takes. I call on all countries around the world to clearly condemn Russias illegal actions. Ukraines full territorial integrity, within its internationally recognised borders, must be restored. Crimea is Ukraine,said Michel.

Find out more

Ursula von der Leyen speech

Charles Michel speech

Go here to read the rest:
EU will never recognise illegal annexation of Crimea - EU NEIGHBOURS east - euneighbourseast.eu

Will the EU pull the plug on tourist visas for Russians? – DW (English)

Six months on from the start of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, should Russians be barred from vacationing in the EU? Lawmakers from Germany's conservative opposition certainly think so. In an interview with German tabloid Bild on Monday, Andrea Lindholz, of the Bavarian Christian Social Union (CSU), called for Russians to stop receiving holiday visas.However, Chancellor Olaf Scholz and members of his governing three-party coalitionhave so far rejected a universal ban on Russians tourists.

Some other EU governments have also been hesitant to back such a measure. The European Commission expects a visa ban would raise legal and humanitarian issues, especially for Russian dissidents.

Yet EU member states, primarily in the east, have nevertheless moved ahead and restricted visa access for Russians,and in some cases suspended short-term tourist visas. They are now urging other member states to follow suit and implement an EU-wide travel ban for Russian holidaymakers a request also made by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Russian vacationers already face hurdles when visiting the bloc, as Russian aircraft are banned from entering EU airspaceand vice versa. Over the past six months, many have therefore traveled to nearby EU states like Finland, the Baltic states and Poland. Some EU states have already taken, or are currently contemplating, moves to end theseinflows of Russians.

Speaking to Estonian radio on Monday, Foreign Minister Urmas Reinsalu reiterated that "we must dramatically raise the cost for these aggressions before winter." The Estonian lawmaker called for a total boycott of Russian energy imports, further sanctions against certain Russian individualsand an EU-wide travel ban for ordinary Russians.

Estonia has already ceased issuing visas and residency permits to Russian nationals. As of last week, Russians may only enter the country if they possess a valid visa and currently reside in the country, or have relatives living there.

Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelenskyy (left) and Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Reinsalu met in Kiyv earlier this month

Latvian authorities also favor an EU-wide ban on Russian tourists. Presently, Russians may only enter the country to attend the funeral of aclose relative.

Lithuania has largely stopped issuing visas to Russian nationals. Authorities support extending these restrictions to all EU states. Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis said this step is necessary because Russians can currently obtain a visa from any EU consulate and enter the bloc through member states bordering Russia.

Finland shares the longest land border with Russia out of all EU states. Russians arrive at it daily to get short-term EU visas. Finish authorities now want to limit the number of visas issued to tourists, even though Finnish law does not technically permit such a restriction, as Foreign Minister Pekka Haavisto recently said.

Instead, Finland plans to shorten the opening hours of visa offices starting in September,to substantially reduce the number of travel permits issued. Conversely, Finland aims to make it easier for Russians to enter the country for important reasons, such as work or family gatherings.

Shortly after Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Czech authorities stopped issuing visas to Russian and then Belarusian nationals. The country also supportslooking into an EU-wide decision on the matter. As it currently holds the rotating presidencyofthe Council of the European Union,the Czech Republic has the prerogative to put the topic at the top of the agenda at the upcoming EU summit later this month.

Will Russians, seen here near St. Petersburg, still be able to enjoy the EU's beaches in the near future?

The Polish government also wants the entire bloc to suspend tourist visas for Russian visitors. Authorities are expected to move ahead with national regulations in the coming weeks.

Denmark intends to limit visas for Russian at thenational level, yet also favors a coordinatedEU-wide approach. Integration Minister Kaare Dybvad Bek recently praised Estonia's suggestion for universal restrictions as "sensible." Presently, if just one EU state grants a Schengen visa to Russian visitors, theycan travel freely through the rest of bloc.

Dutch authorities stopped issuing short-term visas to Russians in April after Russia expelled several Dutch embassy workers. It nevertheless grants exceptions in urgent cases. Short-term visas can be obtained in case of "pressing humanitariangrounds." Long-term visas are excluded from the ban.

This article was originally published in German.

Correction, August 24, 2022: An earlier version of this article misspelled the name ofKaare Dybvad Bek. DW apologizes for the error.

Originally posted here:
Will the EU pull the plug on tourist visas for Russians? - DW (English)

Manny’s: The Rise of Populism and the Future of the European Union – Mission Local

There has been a recent rise of populism across the EU. What can the United States learn and how does this effect the future of Europe?Populism has been rising across Europe from Poland to France becoming more and more common. Elections and politics in general have begun to lose center right/left parties as populism continues increase.What does this mean for the future of the European Union that has had strong center parties since World War II? How is the United States effected by this shift? Join Professor Crombez as he explains how Europe has changed politically, what caused these changes, and what comes next.Are you a current student? Email the word caffeine and the title of this event to angelina@welcometomannys.com for a complementary ticketMannys never turns away anyone for lack of funds. To receive a complementary ticket just email the word grapefruit and the title of this event to darian@welcometomannys.com.About Christophe Crombez, Ph.D.:Christophe Crombez is a political economist who specializes in European Union (EU) politics and business-government relations in Europe. His research focuses on EU institutions and their impact on policies, EU institutional reform, lobbying, party politics, and parliamentary government.Crombez is Senior Research Scholar at The Europe Center at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University (since 1999). He teaches Introduction to European Studies and The Future of the EU in Stanfords International Relations Program, and is responsible for the Minor in European Studies and the Undergraduate Internship Program in Europe.Furthermore, Crombez is Professor of Political Economy at the Faculty of Economics and Business at KU Leuven in Belgium (since 1994). His teaching responsibilities in Leuven include Political Business Strategy and Applied Game Theory. He is Vice-Chair for Research at the Department for Managerial Economics, Strategy and Innovation.Crombez has also held visiting positions at the following universities and research institutes: the Istituto Italiano di Scienze Umane, in Florence, Italy, in Spring 2008; the Department of Political Science at the University of Florence, Italy, in Spring 2004; the Department of Political Science at the University of Michigan, in Winter 2003; the Kellogg Graduate School of Management at Northwestern University, Illinois, in Spring 1998; the Department of Political Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in Summer 1998; the European University Institute in Florence, Italy, in Spring 1997; the University of Antwerp, Belgium, in Spring 1996; and Leti University in St. Petersburg, Russia, in Fall 1995.Crombez obtained a B.A. in Applied Economics, Finance, from KU Leuven in 1989, and a Ph.D. in Business, Political Economics, from Stanford University in 1994.

Read more here:
Manny's: The Rise of Populism and the Future of the European Union - Mission Local