Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-24-Speech-3-100"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030924.2.3-100"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, that the EU had to respond to the enormous increase in the number of patent applications in this area is not a matter of doubt, nor is there any doubt about the fact that these must not be allowed to be detrimental to the interests of small software companies. What the Commission is proposing, however, encourages the domination of the software market by monopolies, as small software companies cannot afford disputes about patent rights. Greater protection for patents would enhance the large service providers’ position of strength in the market and would consequently mean that software developers would have to pay fees, in other words, royalties, for a wide variety of standard functions. It is the consumer who will end up paying the bill. The attempt to create greater legal certainty by means of this directive is to be welcomed, but, in this instance, it misses the mark. On the one hand, there is no single definition of the ‘technical contribution’ required for a patent to be granted, and, on the other, it blurs the boundaries between the end product – which can be patented – and the software itself, which cannot. The EU needs patent law that not only encourages innovation, but also gives better protection to inventors who lack financial clout. This proposal from the Commission guarantees neither of these things, and that is why we have voted against it."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples