Resolution on Future of Patent Policy in Europe: Analysis of Amendments

-> [ français ] [ Backgrounds on EPLA | FFII EPLA analysis ]

On Thursday October 12, the European Parliament will vote at a mini-plenary in Brussels on three different proposals for a resolution on "future patent policy in Europe", including a position on European Patent Litigation Agreement (EPLA). A "compromise" motion filled by EPP, ALDE and PES is likely to win with a high margin. According to this foul compromise, the parliament basically supports the EPLA and asks for the EU to "join the EPC", but calls for "significant improvements" to the current EPLA text. A set of 4 amendments turns the foul compromise into a resolution that is still not perfect but worth supporting. These amendments have been filed by a cross-partisan group of 37 !MEPs/, spear-headed by Zverina (EPP Czech), Duff (ALDE UK) and Savary (PES France). EPP, PSE, GUE and Greens have also filed amendments. This documents provides voting recommandations for all amendments./

Voting Recommandations for Amendments

• Amendments presented according to the official voting order.

Text of the inter-groups Resolution

• B6-0522/2006 MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION to wind up the debate on the statement by the Commission pursuant to Rule 103(2) of the Rules of Procedure, by Klaus-Heiner Lehne, Giuseppe Gargani and Nicole Fontaine, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group Maria Berger and Michel Rocard, on behalf of the PSE Group Sharon Bowles and Toine Manders, on behalf of the ALDE Group on future patent policy in Europe European Parliament resolution on future patent policy in Europe The European Parliament, - having regard to the Commission's Green Paper of 24 June 1997 on the
  • Community patent and the patent system in Europe - Promoting Innovation through Patents (COM(1997) 314),
  - having regard to Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of
  • the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions,
  - having regard to its resolution of 26 October 2005 on patents for
  • biotechnological inventions, � having regard to the consultation launched by the Commission on 9 January 2006 on future patent policy in Europe,
  - having regard to Rule 103(2) of its Rules of Procedure,
• whereas the deficiencies of the Community Patent proposals are unlikely to be resolved in the foreseeable future, B. whereas an efficient, competitive and cost-effective patent system accessible to all is a key demand of the Lisbon Strategy for a competitive knowledge-based society and crucial for the thriving of small and medium-sized companies as well as large ones,
• Urges the Commission to explore all possible ways of improving the patent and patent litigation systems in the EU, including participation in further discussions on the European Patent Litigation Agreement (EPLA) and acceding to the Munich Convention as well as revising the Community Patent proposals; as regards the EPLA, considers that the proposed text needs significant improvements and a satisfactory proposal for the Rules of Procedure of the EPLA Court;
• Requests that Parliament's Legal Service be asked to provide an interim opinion on EUrelated aspects of the possible conclusion of the EPLA by Member States in the light of overlaps between the EPLA and the acquis communautaire and to clarify legislative competences in this field;
• Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the Governments and Parliaments of the Member States.

• Source on European Parliament website

Detailed Analysis of Amendments

• Sources on Europarliament website

Berger (PSE) and Lehne (EPP) Amendments

• AMENDMENT 1 by Maria Berger, Michel Rocard on behalf of the PSE Group Paragraph 1 a new All legislative proposals have to be accompanied by an in depth impact analysis related to patent quality, governance and legislative control of the patent system, judicial independence and litigation costs. AMENDMENT 2 by Klaus-Heiner Lehne, Piia Noora Kauppi on behalf of the EPP-ED Group Paragraph 1 a new 1a. Reminds the Commission that all legislative proposals have to be accompanied by an in depth impact analysis related to patent quality, governance of the patent system, judicial independence and litigation costs.

GUE Amendments

• AMENDMENT 3 by Umberto Guidoni on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group Recital C (new) Recital C. (NEW): Whereas there have been growing concerns about undesirable patents in various fields and about a lack of democratic control over the processes by which such patents are granted, validated and enforced, AMENDMENT 4 by Umberto Guidoni on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group 3a (new) Calls for the Commission to prepare urgently an independent impact assessment on EPLA before participate in further discussions about the potential EU access.

Greens Amendments

• AMENDMENT 5 by Eva Lichtenberger on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group paragraph 2 Requests that the President asks the European Court of Justice to provide an opinion on EU-related aspects of the possible conclusion of the EPLA by Member States in the light of overlaps of the EPLA with the acquis communautaire and to clarify legislative competence in this field; furthermore, asks to discuss this opinion in the European Parliament in order to make the future decision public, transparent and democratic. AMENDMENT 6 by Eva Lichtenberger on behalf of Verts/ALE paragraph 2 bis Calls for the Commission to prepare urgently an impact assessment of the EPLA before participating in further discussions on potential EU involvement.

Group of MEPs Amendments

• AMENDMENT 7 by Jaroslav Zverina
• Urges the Commission to explore all courses for improving the patent and patent litigation systems in the EU, including participation in further discussions on EPLA and joining the Munich convention as well as revising the Community Patent proposals; as regards EPLA, the proposed text needs significant improvements, which address concerns about democratic control, judicial independence and litigation costs, and a satisfactory proposal for the Rules of Procedure of the EPLA Court; AMENDMENT 8 by Jaroslav Zverina
• Urges the Commission to explore all courses for improving the patent and patent litigation systems in the EU, including participation in further discussions on EPLA (DELETION) as well as revising the Community Patent proposals; as regards EPLA, the proposed text needs significant improvements and a satisfactory proposal for the Rules of Procedure of the EPLA Court; AMENDMENT 9 by Jaroslav Zverina Recital C. (NEW): Whereas there have been growing concerns about undesirable patents in various fields and about a lack of democratic control over the processes by which such patents are granted, validated and enforced, AMENDMENT 10 by Jaroslav Zverina
• Requests that the President ask the European Court of Justice to provide an opinion on EU-related aspects of the possible conclusion of the EPLA by Member States in the light of overlaps of the EPLA with the acquis communautaire and to clarify legislative competence which rules this matter;