"I would also like to say a few words on intellectual property rights.
Intellectual property rights are at the heart of a knowledge-based economy. Innovation is key for Europe’s chances to remain competitive. Protection of intellectual property stimulates and rewards innovation. A solid legal framework is essential. We must get this right. We also need to keep up. Compared to others, Europe is losing ground. We need to see where progress can be made.
The Community Patent remains blocked in the Council pending a solution on the language regime. No workable consensus on the patentability of Computer Implemented Inventions was possible. Opinions remain divided on this question. From my side I maintain the position I gave when the Parliament rejected the Common Position. I will not bring a new initiative forward on this during my time as Commissioner for the Internal Market. I will leave this choice to my successor.
Recognising the economic importance of patents, I felt it was not a good thing to leave the entire patent agenda in limbo. For this reason we launched early this year a broad consultation on future patent policy in Europe. The consultation was a considerable success in terms of stakeholders' participation. We have received 2000 replies.
The next step is a public hearing on 12 July. The hearing will focus on four topics: the principles and values that underpin the patent system; the proposed Community patent; non-Community initiatives such as the London Protocol and the European Patent Litigation Agreement (EPLA); and possible areas for harmonisation at Community level. I am very pleased that the European Parliament has shown interest in this consultation, in particular, that your Chairman, Mr Gargani, has agreed to be the first speaker at the hearing.
We intend to publish a report summarising the outcome of the written consultation and of the public hearing. I hope to come back here to discuss the conclusions with you in the autumn. One thing is certain, progress in the patent field has to be made. Businessmen, faced with a 21st century global economy, scratch their heads in disbelief when they see us stuck in discussions about language regimes and regional distribution of courts. What they want is a cheaper and reliable patent system. That’s why I think we should look at all possible routes forward, be they Community or non-Community initiatives.
On the related issue of design protection, the so-called 'spare parts proposal', we have seen little progress. I can only regret this. Over-protecting the designs market does nothing to stimulate competitiveness – on the contrary, this may just perpetuate “economic rents”. I have no doubt that the adoption of this proposal would result in more choice and lower prices. There are economic benefits to be gained – for consumers as well as industry. Consumers will benefit from lower prices and more choice. Business will benefit because newcomers will have a chance to enter this market and create growth and jobs.
Safety issues have been raised repeatedly. Safety must remain a primary concern, but let me stress that this concern has already been addressed by other EU laws, for instance by the type approval framework directive in the automobile sector. I hope that discussions on the “spare parts proposal” can resume quickly. Businesses and consumers are waiting for concrete results. This is what they are entitled to.
On copyright, I look forward to your opinion on the Recommendation on Online Music which the Commission adopted last year. We are now monitoring its impact. I am pleased to be able to report that things already seem to be moving forward. We have seen a number of deals for EU-wide licences struck since the start of this year, and we are also seeing moves towards improved governance in the more forward-looking collecting societies.
In bringing forward the Recommendation, we wanted to inject a bit of pace into the online music market. It is an area with rich potential for growth, to the ultimate benefit of all concerned – business, rightsholders and consumers. We are also looking at the question of copyright levies. This is on our work programme for later this year. We fully share the view that copyright holders deserve to be rewarded for their work. But we need to ensure that this is done in a fair, efficient and equitable way.
Levies – on media and equipment - impose a cost on both producers and consumers. We need to be sure that this is the most appropriate way to reward rights holders and to examine whether it is putting a brake on innovative products and services. Through digital rights management, there are new technological means through which rights holders can, more directly, protect their interests. The key question is whether existing levies imposed on digital devices should be reduced or phased out and be replaced by direct payment systems. We have launched a consultation to get the views of consumers and stakeholders. I have written to your chair about this and would very much welcome your views on this process.
Finally there is the question of the term of protection for sound recording and its role in fostering a more competitive EU phonogram industry. Currently, the term of protection for performers and producers is fifty years from the time of a recording. The question is whether this should be extended possibly to match the USA which offers 95 years’ protection.
Performers feel that they are entitled to greater protection, at least for their own lifetimes. The European music industry claims an extension is vital for its competitiveness. The results of an impact assessment will be available by the end of 2006. We are consulting all stakeholders during this process with an open mind."
Lees de volledige speech EU Commissaris Charlie McCreevy hier.