Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-04-10-Speech-3-112"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020410.4.3-112"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
"My group has voted against the opinion on the Community patent because the ELDR proposals have been rejected on three fundamental counts.
We need an affordable and uniform European patent system for the European market. The discussion surrounding the language regime has illustrated the fact that, unfortunately, political sentiments have carried more weight than practical arguments. Translation costs push up the price of the patent disproportionately, so that it will become too costly for European industry, the ultimate users. That is why my group is in favour of a limited language regime and cannot endorse the ‘Alicante’ regime of five languages (Amendments Nos 31 and 32).
In addition, a uniform application of the regulation is of major significance. That is why my group has proposed that disputes surrounding the Community patent should fall within the central jurisdiction of the Community Intellectual Property Court, with the possibility of appeal to the Court of Justice (Amendments Nos 26 and 29).
Finally, together with my fellow liberal MEPs, I prefer to create our own Community patent system instead of adopting the Munich Convention. A Community patent system would fall automatically within the structures of the EU. This means democratic control by the European Parliament and the authority of the Court of Justice in the last resort (Amendments Nos 23 and 24)."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples