wanted: summary of study on lobbying in Europarl

[PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>]

At

        
http://www4.europarl.eu.int/estudies/internet/workingpapers/afco/pdf/104_en.pdf

you can find a study on lobbying in the European Parliament, paid for
by the EP.

It literally copies long passages from the PbT Consultants study as
its own opinion, without attribution, saying e.g. that the "industry"
was largely in favor of software patents while the "opensource
position" was vociferous but less important.

I wonder whether the other findings (on how lobbying works in the EU)
are of any value, given the unserious research methods employed for
the swpat case-study part.

A plain-text summary of this study under the following aspects:

        - what we can learn about lobbying from it (e.g. they talk
          about a status of permanent lobbyist in EP, we need to get
          that) 

        - how this PbT junktalk got in there without attribution and
          whether the whole study uses such plagiarist/parrotting
          methods. 

Note that Jonas wrote the web page on the "Pinpoint ./ Amazon" case,
the result is visible at

        http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/effects/pinpoint/

-- 
Hartmut Pilch, FFII & Eurolinux Alliance              tel. +49-89-18979927
Protecting Innovation against Patent Inflation       http://swpat.ffii.org/
160,000 votes 2000 firms against software patents    http://noepatents.org/