Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-07-06-Speech-3-180"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050706.23.3-180"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"As there are currently enormous differences in national patent legislations, I believe it is necessary to adopt a directive to ensure their harmonisation. For this reason, I support the consistent protection of software products by protecting proprietary innovatory solutions for an entire program or a part thereof, but not issuing patents for individual ideas. After all, it was Einstein who said that you cannot patent a mathematical formula.
A patentable invention is a solution that combines an idea with a technical device, such as software for mobile phones or ABS systems in cars. Patenting will provide companies with returns on their investments in developing an invention, and will encourage further investment in research and development.
The directive proposed by the Council contains unclear formulations making it impossible to make a precise distinction between software and technical benefits.
Lack of clear definitions for patenting software may result in competition between companies being shifted from the market to the courts. If software became patentable, the costs of the patenting process would ruin small and medium-sized software development companies. I have attached my signature in support of the Roithová – Buzek draft amendments, which strive to restrict the scope of the directive so that it does not permit the patenting of pure software, and which are a compromise that will prevent the unclear interpretation of the directive. If they are approved, I will support the thus amended text of the Council common position of 7 March 2005."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples