A last minute compromise between competing political groups saw the European Parliament pass a motion for further discussions on the European Patent Litigation Agreement, EPLA, while also noting that the agreement needs a lot of work.

The political balancing act means that Europe can move forward on the plans put forward by internal market and services commissioner Charlie McCreevy to modernize the European patent system while dealing with criticism that the plan might be undemocratic, lead to higher patent costs, and potentially enable software patents.

The EPLA is among the potential solutions to modernize the European patent system and has been part of the consultation on future patent policy that has been ongoing since January 2006.

It would see the creation of a European Patent Court, which would have jurisdiction over the validity and infringement of European patents and was recently criticized by three parliamentary groups: PES, Greens/EFA, and GUE/NGL, amid concerns that it will put too much legislative power in the hands of unelected delegates.

The groups also voiced concern over the potential for increased patent costs impacting smaller businesses and cast doubts over recent decisions made by the European Patent Office that they considered too broad, raising the specter of software patentability.

The likelihood of a compromise that would keep patent improvement plans from being rejected by the European Parliament was raised last month after McCreevy admitted in a speech that there were legitimate doubts and concerns over the wording of the EPLA.

The result of the compromise is a resolution that urges the Commission to explore all possible ways of improving the patent and patent litigation systems in the EU, including participation in further discussions on the EPLA and acceding to the Munich Convention as well as revising the Community Patent proposals.

However, with regard to the EPLA, the resolution also considers that the proposed text needs significant improvements, which address concerns about democratic control, judicial independence and litigation costs, and a satisfactory proposal for the Rules of Procedure of the EPLA Court.

The balancing act was enough to have the resolution approved, by 494 votes to 109.