Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-07-06-Speech-3-173"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050706.23.3-173"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Europe needs clear rules. There can be no question of patenting software programs which are, in any event, well protected by copyright. It would strike a blow against innovation, with detrimental effects on research, SMEs and Europe.
The common position was a step in the right direction, but still left grey areas which should have been eliminated by voting for the Rocard amendments. I would have voted in favour of them if they had been put to the vote. An unnatural coalition was assembled to reject the common position outright with no attempt made to amend it. Those for whom the common position did not go far enough linked up with those who feared that, with the amendments proposed, the ban on the patenting of software would carry the day.
The outright rejection of the proposal means that they were right and that the European Patent Office could therefore continue to develop legal precedents favourable to the patentability of software programs ‘as such’. All of that is detrimental to the freedom of ideas and to progress. I abstained because, firstly, I cannot approve the common position and, secondly, because I would have preferred to amend the proposal and not to allow the vacuum and the present confusion to continue…"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples