Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-02-15-Speech-2-380-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-02-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110215.22.2-380-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-02-15-Speech-2-380-5002
lpv:speaker	lp:Andreas Mölzer2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; AFCO (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; NA (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; AFET (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Chile Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"The dispute over the languages used in EU patents has been going on for more than 30 years. Over the course of these 30 years, European companies have had to cope with high translation costs and, in some cases, have been put at a competitive disadvantage on the global market. It is hard to place a value on intangible assets, such as trademarks and patents. However, they are used as the security for loans and are also taken into account in credit ratings. Against this background, the new patent law, which has been drawn up by means of the enhanced cooperation process, and which is valid at least in parts of the EU, only requires patents to be translated into German, English and French. This will certainly reduce the amount of bureaucracy involved. The new regulation also strengthens the position of the German language, which is still the most widely spoken native language within the EU, according to a survey carried out in 2006. In principle, the idea is a good one, but the rules on languages are not entirely clear, which is why I have abstained."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph