Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-30-Speech-4-039"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000330.3.4-039"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, the European Parliament is right to be concerned, and this is surely an understatement, by the fact that the European Patent Office has granted a patent to the University of Edinburgh. We are simply conveying the concerns, fears and confusion felt by the general public. However, the European Parliament has already clearly formulated its position on this delicate matter. I would draw your attention to two elements.
Firstly, there is the biotechnology directive. As you are aware, a clear position was taken up in this directive after long, searching and, on occasions, heated discussion, during which all stances, opinions and interests were voiced, following which the said directive received Parliament’s definitive approval at second reading in 1998. Incidentally, this was also an issue where, perhaps for the first time, Parliament showed what it was capable of and truly stood on its authority. The outcome is a balanced text that affords science the opportunity to make progress, but in the interests and service of humanity. A number of items are unequivocally excluded from patenting in this directive, such as the human body, for example, or parts thereof at all stages of development, as per Article 3, and the cloning of human beings, as per Article 9.
Therefore, it is clear that this registered patent cannot go through. That is also why Parliament is well advised to react firmly. It is for these reasons that not only will the ELDR Group endorse the motion, it will also support Amendments Nos 1, 3, 6, 8 and 9, because they clearly reinforce the message conveyed by the directive in question.
Secondly, the European Parliament has already pointed out on a number of occasions that we are lacking a uniform European patent, as it has repeatedly condemned the fact that there are gaps in European patent legislation. The situation has reared its head again, as you will see from paragraph 5 of the draft resolution. I refer to the amendment that I submitted and that was unanimously approved by the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, relating to the very issue of our need for a European patent. This amendment also pushes for a European patent of this kind to be drafted swiftly, attempts to do so having failed hitherto on account of the costs associated with the translation problem. Just imagine that! Well, we will be able to “avoid regrettable misunderstandings”, as the European Patent Office would put it, once we have found a definitive solution to the problems attending European patent law, and have cleared such misunderstandings up, because, at the end of the day, prevention is still better than cure."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples