[Fsfe-uk] Anyone understand EU directive process?

[Ciaran O'Riordan]

Hi all.

>From working on the EU patents issue, I've become quite familiar
with the processes of the EP but I definitely don't understand it
fully.

My understanding:
0. Someone decides that current law is ambiguous of needs updating
1. The relevant committee drafts a directive (JURI in the case of patents)
2. Other committees suggest amendments and a date is set to vote on the
   amendments (like the Jun 17th JURI vote on the patents draft)
3. When the wording is finalised (by the above vote), a date is
   set where it will be voted on in a Plenary Session.
4. On the specified date, the Plenary is asked to accept or reject
   the proposed directive.  Nothing else, just one vote, accept or reject
   and move on.  (like the Sept 1st vote on the proposed patents directive)
5. If the proposed directive is rejected, the relevant committee may (must?)
   work on a new directive since the ambiguity still exists.

Can anyone fill me in on my mistakes?
or know of a concise document that explains it?
(I recently saw a document that seems to contradict my understanding #4)

I want to get organised to lobby against the upcoming EU-DMCA, and want
to be prepared for the future EP problems that are certainly coming.

If people have this knowledge, and a document doesn't already exist, I'll
make a document from the info I get from this thread and post it here when
I get time (could be a week or three, depending on complexity).


Thanks.
Ciaran O'Riordan