Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-03-08-Speech-2-221"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-03-08"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Services in the internal market/Patentability of computer software2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050308.22.2-221"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-03-08-Speech-2-2222
lpv:speaker	lp:Michel Rocard2
lpv:spokenAs	member; SEDE (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; AFET (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2007-01-24)3 unknown; Parti socialiste (2004-07-20--2009-01-31)3 member; PES (2004-07-20--2009-01-31)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the United States (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 substitute; JURI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, one minute is not enough for me to talk about the unease that is gripping the world of Internet users regarding the procedure for adopting the directive on the patentability of computer software. The Luxembourg Presidency did not have the right to refuse passage from point A to point B; adoption at point A albeit following a debate, with one vote against and three abstentions is almost unprecedented. This image is disastrous. We have Internet users who are saying that they will use this as a reason to vote against the Constitution. This is stupid and dangerous. There is, however, also and above all the question of the merits. We have listened to you and, once again, we agree with the vocabulary and the written text. We should not just patent anything! We should limit it. Having said that, in the draft directive there is still no clear distinction between what is patentable and what is not. I would therefore like to ask the Commission the following question: do you or do you not think that a clear distinction between what is patentable and what is not is essential to this text? If so, do you think that the only possible distinction (as we do not know of any other) is whether or not energy or materials are used, as the reference to the technical contribution is tautological and allows anything to be patented."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph