Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-23-Speech-2-037"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-09-23"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Patentability of computer-implemented inventions2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030923.2.2-037"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-09-23-Speech-2-0382
lpv:speaker	lp:Gérard Caudron2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Socialiste Indépendant (2002-07-10--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-10-14--2004-07-19)3 member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (2002-09-10--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-06--2004-04-30)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-09-09--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, this morning’s debate follows a turbulent period in which the world of computer users, inventors and innovators has been fighting tooth and nail to protect its right to difference, freedom and creativity. At the heart of this debate is patentability, with its advantages (when the patent rightly protects the inventor) and its major disadvantages, which involve often conservative monopolies being established to the detriment of young creators. Personally, I still support this movement, which I believe follows the same approach as all alternative movements fighting for a less rigid and less commercial society. Since this debate opened, we have scored points by tabling proposals for amendments that substantially improve the original draft. Recognising that in order to be patentable, a computer-implemented invention must have an industrial application is a step in the right direction. A statement to the effect that patents must not be granted for simple computer programs was needed. Nevertheless, we cannot ignore the shades of meaning that have been introduced as well as the excessive vagueness. At this point in the debate, even at the risk of seeing these amendments fail to receive the vote or then fail to be included, we must state that not all problems have been solved, by any stretch of the imagination. I personally shall, therefore, be vigilant during voting and I remain willing to vote against the draft if the improvements prove to be nothing more than a cosmetic attempt to conceal the hold that large companies have over creative minds. In this regard, Commissioner Bolkestein’s last sentence, which smacks of blackmail, does nothing to alleviate my deep suspicion."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph