57 Amendments of Marcos ROS SEMPERE related to 2021/2007(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
– having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 20 October 2020 on intellectual property rights for the development of artificial intelligence technologies (2020/2015(INI)),
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
– having regard to the 1995 WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement),
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
– having regard to Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market,
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 a (new)
Citation 10 a (new)
– having regard to the Council conclusions setting the EU's priorities for the fight against serious and organised crime for EMPACT 2022 - 2025,
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 b (new)
Citation 10 b (new)
– having regard to the February 2021 join EPO-EUIPO firm-level analysis report on Intellectual property rights and firm performance in the European Union,
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 c (new)
Citation 10 c (new)
– having regard to the in-depth analysis 'Standard Essential Patents and the Internet of Things' of January 2019 (PE 608.854),
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas strong protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR), which play a hugevery important role in the European economy, are essential;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas investments in intangibles were significantly less affected by the 2008 economic crisis, thereby showing the potential of IP assets in creating economic stability and growth that allows for more secure and stable jobs;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas studies show that SMEs using IPRs grow faster and are more resilient to economic downturns and therefore they offer a more secure and stable labour market in IP-related sectors; whereas this points to a positive correlation between IPR ownership and quality and stability of employment, thus justifying the call for companies to ensure the increase in revenue per employee made possible by IPR ownership is reflected in the working conditions afforded to workers, including, but not only, when it comes to wages;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Amendment 29 #
Bb. whereas these facts also point to the importance of incentivising and helping SMEs protect and own their IPRs, namely by making sure that procedures are clear and simplified, since a higher number of successful SMEs directly results in a higher number of jobs available;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas European innovators are frontrunners in green technologies, holding a major portion of green patents and having strong IP portfolios in technologies such as climate change adaptation, carbon capture and storage, water and waste treatment;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B d (new)
Recital B d (new)
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B e (new)
Recital B e (new)
Be. whereas there is a need to promote the valorisation and deployment of research and development in Europe as exemplified by the fact that in the field of AI only a minority of patent applicants worldwide are European even though a significant percentage of high-value publications on AI come from Europe;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B f (new)
Recital B f (new)
Bf. whereas IPR-intensive industries account for 93% of total EU exports of goods to the rest of the world;
Amendment 34 #
Bg. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic has shown the geo-political importance of IP protection policies;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Supports the Commission in the implementation of its intellectual property action plan of November 2020, as strong, robust IPR protection at national, European and international level which enables return on investment is particularly important for the economic and social recovery from COVID-19 as well as the creation of a digital and globally competitive sustainable economy in Europe where innovation also serves the purpose of contributing to the common good of society;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Acknowledges that IPRs protection encourages the creative, inventive and innovative activity, hence providing for the largest number of people the benefit of such activity; notes that such activity requires the recognition of the creators, namely, the inventors, innovators and authors, and makes it possible for them to obtain a compensation for their creative endeavours; champions the right of the creator, whether it be an individual or a legal entity, to prevent others from benefiting from the exploitation of creations without consent and without compensation to the creator; reminds that failure to do so encourages counterfeiting and piracy;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights that IPRs have many benefits for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), since; underlines that IPRs- intensive industries offer better quality job positions, with better working conditions and higher remuneration; notes that SMEs that own IPRs havegenerate up to 68 % higher revenue per employee and wages paid are 20% higher compared to SMEs that do not; is therefore concerned that only approximately 9 % of SMEs own IPRs; welcomes, therefore, the IP vouchers, the IP-Scan and other initiatives of the Commission and the EUIPO to help SMEs make the most of their intellectual property (IP) and asks the Commission to consider to launch similar initiatives for all kind of intellectual property (IP) assets;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is convinced that support for SMEs, including financial and non-financial measures, is the right way to provide them with better knowledge and facilitate their access to IPRs and that the Union’s financial instruments are of the utmost importance in this context; calls on the Commission and the EUIPO, therefore, to continue implementing IP management support measures for SMEs in the context of the economic recovery, including the provision of one-stop shop access to information and related services and advice about IP;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Welcomes the announced European IP Information Centre as one of many measures to ensure that Europe capitalises further on the value of the knowledge our companies constantly create, develop and share and that they are equipped with the necessary tools and information or manage such assets more actively; this is furthermore shown by the fact that few European SMEs benefit from their IP when trying to get access to finance even though intangibles are some of the most valuable assets;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the Unitary Patent package (UPP) initiative, which includes the European patent with unitary effect (unitary patent) and the Unified Patent Court (UPC), will potentially make patent protection and dispute settlement across Europe less compcomprehensiblex, less costly and more efficient; askinvites the participating Member States which have not yet done so, therefore, to concludemove forward on the ratification of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA), as well as the Protocol to the UPCA on provisional application (PPA), as soon as possible, or by other means to declare that they are bound to the PPA in order to allow for a rapid entry into operation of the UPP;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Encourages the Member States that are not yet participating in enhanced cooperation for the creation of unitary patent protection and/or have not yet acceded to the UPCA, to do socontinue their process towards full participation;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that the number of national patent filings is higher than the number of European patent filings in the majority of the Member States; asks the Commission to evaluate the cost related to the European patent filings and its protection, in particular for SMEs;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the one-stop-shop alternative dispute resolution system to be established under Article 35 of the UPCA; asks the Member States to enable the quick roll-out of the patent arbitration and mediation centre and calls on the Commission to assess whether the centre could, in thethe mid and long- term, deal with all IP disputes competencies of the centre;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Strongly recommends a comprehensive analysis and revision of the preliminary impact assessments on the effectiveness of the UPC, namely to SMEs, before the Court enters into operation, to thoroughly evaluate the affordability of the litigation costs, in particular its repercussions to the sustainability of SMEs;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Underlines that inefficiencies and lack of transparency and predictability hamper innovators and producers to the ultimate detriment of patients;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Recalls the importance of ensuring the highest quality of the European Patent Office (EPO) patent granting process and the removal of the abuses of divisional patent applications together with a clear political accountability of the EPO, as vital for the credibility of the European IP system; asks the Commission to address the issue of abuses of the divisional patent applications at EPO;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Recalls that innovation should match the most urgent needs of society and that supply of medicines, including generics and biosimilars, should be promoted in this context, as well as affordability and swift availability;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Acknowledges that information on the existence, scope and relevance of standard essential patents (SEPs) is important for fair licensing negotiations allowing the potential user of standards to identify the scale of their exposure to SEPs and possible licensors; notes that although good faith negotiations between willing parties occur in most cases, SEPs are often litigated; suggests to the Commission that it looks into possible incentives for negotiation that avoid litigation as it would avoid the inherent dispute costs and reduce other related problems;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses that many patent applications declared in standard development organisations during the standard setting process as potentially essential may eventually not be essential to the standard as finally adopted or after the granting of the patent, and that an appropriate scrutiny mechanism would enhance transparency and increase legal certainty; welcomes in this regard the pilot study for essentiality assessment of SEPs9 ; acknowledges that such essentiality assessment should be truly independent and transparent on determining whether a declared SEP is essential or not; _________________ 9European Commission Joint Research Centre, Pilot study for Essentiality Assessment of Standard Essential Patents, 2020.
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Asks the Commission to further investigatecarefully consider, together with the relevant stakeholders, the requirements for an independent, neutral and transparent system of third-party essentiality checks by identifying the demand for, assessing the impact of and defining the role that resources such as emerging technologies like AI and related technologies and/or technical expertise contributed by the EPO could play in that context, and to use the knowledge gained as input for thto any future legislative initiative on SEP envisaged for the beginning of 2022; underlines that any proposed system of essentiality must be subject to judicial review and be without prejudice to the rights of the parties to access the courts to adjudicate on disputes;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Acknowledges the importance of a balanced licensing system for SEPs and insists on the importance of stable, levelled, efficient and fair rules in that regard; underlines thatrecalls the European Parliament's previous call for the Commission to publish biannual reports evidencing actual cases of unlicensed SEP use and issues regarding access to standards due to systematic non-compliance with ‘fair, reasonable and non- discriminatory terms’ (FRAND) are vague legal terms that include legal uncertainty and calls on the Commission to monitor industry developments and provide more clarity on various aspects of FRANDcommitments; calls on the Commission to provide more clarity on various aspects of FRAND, as well as case law on the topic, especially for SMEs utilising standardised technology for the first time, including through designating an observatory (a competence centre) to that effect, and to publish annual reports evidencing actual cases of non-compliance with FRAND and so-called patent ‘hold- up’ and patent ‘hold-out’;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Highlights the value of existing industry-led voluntary initiatives to facilitate SEP licensing for the Internet of Things, such as licensing pools, which bring together the vast majority of European and international technology developers;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Notes the importance of transparency and the need to proactively provide necessary information upfront while licensing standard-essential patents on FRAND terms, in a way to ensure a fair outcome of good faith negotiations between parties;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -14 a (new)
Paragraph -14 a (new)
-14a. Welcomes the initiatives and the actions towards strengthening, modernising, streamlining and better enforcing the system for geographical indications (GI) for agricultural products, food, wines and spirits to make it more precise and effective; notes that their implementation would contribute to creating and protecting quality jobs, to the promotion of social, environmental and economic sustainability of the rural areas, and to fostering the European cultural diversity;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Supports the Commission in its initiative to establish EU sui generis protection of geographical indications (GIs) for non- agricultural products, in order to align towith the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement), which sets out that geographical indications are those which identify a product as originating in the territory of a Member or a region or locality in that territory, where a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the product is essentially attributable to its geographical origin; and the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications, which includes the possibility to protect GIs for both agricultural and non-agricultural products;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Considers that such EU sui generis protection must envisage necessary safeguards, including effective and transparent application and opposition mechanisms;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Takes note that some Member States have already established national sui generis protection systems for GIs for non- agricultural products, creating fragmentation, and that protection at Union level would bring the necessary legal certainty to all players along with guaranteed prevention of intellectual property rights violations concerning manufactured and artisanal products;
Amendment 105 #
15a. Points to the advantages of establishing EU sui generis protection of geographical indications (GIs) for non- agricultural products for citizens such as fostering local identity, attracting tourism and contributing to job creation, thereby also giving a boost to less developed regions;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the Commission’s willingness to revise Union legislation on design protection to better support the transition to the digital and green economy and calls on the Commission to update the registration procedure to allow for new forms of design , such as graphical user interfaces, virtual and animated designs, fonts and icons, and those relevant following new developments and technologies to be protected in an easy and less burdensome way;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Points out that some Member States have already introduced a ‘spare parts exception’ or ‘repair clause’ into their legislation, allowing for component parts of complex products to be manufactured and sold without infringing on IPRs; notes that this creates fragmentation in the internal market and legal uncertainty; calls on the Commission, therefore, to include a ‘repair clause’ in its future proposal, that will contribute to support the transition into a more sustainable and greener economy;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Points out that counterfeit goods, in particular counterfeit medicines and fake personal protective equipment and masks in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, can have serious impacts on the health of EU citizthere is a relation between counterfeited products and risks to the health and safety of consumers; namely, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, counterfeiting of medicines, personal protective equipmenst and masks can cause serious harm to public health; suggests that such relation is included and dealt with in the scope of the upcoming review of the EU General Product Safety Directive (GPSD);
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Notes that counterfeiting and piracy result annually in direct employment losses of 416 000 jobs and that the presence of counterfeit products in the EU market not only poses serious health, safety and security threats but also negatively impacts the environment, the creative and cultural industries and the sports sector;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Highlights that in 2016, up to 6.8 % of EU imports, or a value of EUR 121 billion, were fake goods and that IPR infringement entails a low level of risk in terms of both the likelihood of detection and the punishment if detected; urges the Member States, together with the European Commission, customs authorities, Europol, Interpol, and law enforcement authorities to coordinate strategies and to develop effective and dissuasive sanctions to fight counterfeiting and piracy;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Stresses that the Internet isRegrets the significantly used to of the Internet for the distributeion of counterfeit products, infringing content and IPR- infringing services and welcomes the proposal of the Commission for a Digital Services Act on the basis of the principle that "what is illegal offline, is illegal online"; calls for the establishment of a robust framework to counter those IPR infringements; highlights the fact that proactive measures from intermediaries would contribute enormously to the fight against counterfeiting and piracy and that AI and blockchain could play an important role in detecting counterfeit and piracy and enforcing IPR in the whole supply chain; supports, therefore, the use of new technologies to combat IP infringements and welcomes publications produced by the EUIPO Observatory;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Highlights that a strong notice and action system, avoiding the reappearance of infringing IPRs products and content, a strong Know Your Business Customer principle, an accessible trusted flaggers system and a properly balanced system of personal privacy rights and intellectual property rights is key to ensure the sustainability of the Internet and to tackle IPR-infringements online;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Asks the Commission to further work on the establishment of an EU Toolbox against counterfeiting and piracy setting out principles for joint action, cooperation and data sharing among right holders, intermediaries and law enforcement authorities;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Highlights that IP protection related to AI technologies is important and that even though current rules on the protection of computer-implemented inventions by patents may cover AI technologies, clear criteria for the protection ofIPRs of creations and inventions cregenerated with the helpassistance of AI technologies are necessary; asks the Commission, therefore, in cooperation with the EPO and EUIPO, to provide legal certainty on this subject and to follow the issue closely at international level in the WIPO;
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Recognizes the high potential that blockchain technologies present for the registration and protection of IPRs; stresses that blockchain systems can help secure the supply chain by offering the traceability, safety and securing of each steps against the dangers of counterfeiting at each level of the supply chain; notes, in particular with regards to the registration of IPRs, the need for Intellectual Property Offices (IPOs) to adopt technical standards for their blockchain solutions that would promote their interoperability with each other;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23b. Underlines that the lack of harmonisation of rules on authorship and copyright ownership can lead to divergent national solutions as regards AI-assisted works; awaits the results of the Commission’s study on copyright and new technologies focusing on copyright data management and artificial intelligence; Notes the potential of high quality metadata and new technologies to boost transparency and improve data management with regard to copyright and the identification of rights owners;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 c (new)
Paragraph 23 c (new)
23c. Underlines that, despite a high level of harmonization of IP rights across Europe, there is still a lack of efficient cross-border enforcement for those rights in the EU;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Regrets the fact that the Commission’s 2016 study on patent assertion entities (PAE) in Europe10 concluded that the EU legal framework already provides for safeguards although it did not provide a clear answer to the question of whether the business models of some PAE, consisting in acquiring patents from third parties and seeking to generate revenue by asserting them against alleged infringers by misusing litigation asymmetries, abuse loopholes in existing legislation and therefore; encourages the Commission to constitute a problem that should be tackled; calls the Commission to carry out an in-depth study on this issue; nue to monitor this issue and to carry out an in-depth study, namely on business models seeking to generate revenue from the acquisition of patents from third parties to tackle this problem; _________________ 10European Commission Joint Research Centre, Patent Assertion Entities in Europe: Their impact on innovation and knowledge transfer in ICT markets, 2016.
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Notes that IPR protection is key in encouraging companies to Acknowledges the importance of compulsory licensing or waiver of IPRs for medicinvest in innovative products and processes and to produce new med as a last-resort tool meant to fight global health emergencies and to allow life-saving interventions in the public interest, but is convinced that compulsory licensing of patents is important as a last-resort tool meant to allow life-saving interventions in the public interestand in anticipation of future needs resulting from the conditions imposed by the accessibility to certain medical products that ultimately jeopardise the lives of patients; calls on the Commission, therefore, to analyse and explore possible options for ensuring effectiveness and better coordination of compulsory licensing and waiver of IPRs for medicines in the EU, taking into account cases in which it has been used in the Union, the reasons for its use, the conditions under which it was granted, its economic consequences and whether it achieved the desired effect;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Reminds that more initiatives to address public awareness is needed in order to protect intellectual property rights, also in the field of 3D printing; Recalls that 3D-printing technology may raise some specific legal concerns regarding all areas of intellectual property law, such as copyright, patents, designs, three-dimensional trademarks and geographical indications;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Defends that promotion of better IP management in the Research & Innovation community is needed in order to materialise Europe’s excellent research into innovation that is beneficial to its citizens and businesses; stresses that, in this context, publicly funded IP must be used in a fair and effective manner and that results achieved with EU funds should be used to improve the EU’s economy for all;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 c (new)
Paragraph 26 c (new)
26c. Recalls that IPR-intensive industries generate the bulk of EU trade activities; stresses the alarming poor IPRs enforcement framework in the context of trade relationships, especially at the multilateral level; asks, therefore, the Commission to call IPRs enforcement to be addressed at the World Trade Organization (WTO) and World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO);