ImperialViolet

Fluffy BBC introduction if you don't know what IPRED is.

In red, the FFII (from here), and in blue, the text of the directive (taken from here

Anton Piller orders (secret court authorisations of raids for evidence by the plaintiff's agents)

Member States shall ensure that even before the commencement of proceedings on the merits of the case the competent judicial authorities may, on application by a party who has presented reasonably available evidence to support his claims that his intellectual property right has been infringed or is about to be infringed, order prompt and effective provisional measures to preserve relevant evidence in regard to the alleged infringement.

It's very unclear in the document as to who takes the action. Firstly, the /. crowd are wrong that this gives a right to corporate raids - you still need judicial authorities to sign off on it. We shall have to see how this is written into national law.

Mareva injunctions (freezing of assets, even before a case has been discussed in Court.

In cases of infringement committed on a commercial scale, ... the judicial authorities may order the precautionary seizure of the movable and immovable property of the alleged infringer, including the blocking of his bank accounts and other assets.

Member States shall ensure that the provisional measures referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a may, in appropriate cases, be taken without the defendant having been heard.

The FFII seems to be perfectly correct on this one.

New powers to demand the disclosure of very extensive commercial and personal information.

Well, you can look at Article 9 yourself, it goes on a long while. But my reading of it is that the FFII is correct.

And the admissibility of denounciations by anonymous witnesses as court evidence.

Member States may take measures to protect witnesses' identity.

Right on again.

We'll have to fight at the national level now. I'm getting tired of this.