Dear All
There was a question in the european
parliament about a case of patented grapes in Italy – and the
debate over license fees.
The answer by the commission is not very
helpful. Maybe somebody is able to find
out more about the case ?? (I hav so far not read
the linked arrticle from italy)
Best
François
Union européenne : [REPONSE] Parlement
européen,
question écrite à la Commission
N°E-004527/2020 du 10 août
2020 de Rosa D’Amato (NI) – Brevetabilité des
raisins
(Réponse le 14 octobre 2020)
Texte de la question :
« It is enshrined in Directive 98/44/EC that
plant and animal varieties, including
parts and characteristics thereof, and
essentially biological processes and
products obtained by means of such processes
cannot be patented.
The European Patent Office, by way of Opinion
G3/19 adopted by its Grand
Board of Appeal on 14 May 2020, has abandoned
its previous position and
established that plants obtained exclusively
from essentially biological
processes cannot be patented (1) .
Disputes have arisen in Apulia between
farmers and the patent holders of
seedless grape varieties (2) .
Breeders are switching from granting patent
concession contracts to trademark
concession contracts, but despite this change
there are still disagreements
between
patent holders and farmers, who are the ones losing out
financially (3) .
Can the Commission therefore state:
1. What action is will take at EU level, in
conjunction with the Member States,
to reduce this financial imbalance for
farmers, who are unable to produce
patented varieties without a licence;
2. What steps it will take vis-à third
countries to ensure that essentially
biological processes and products obtained
from them are not deemed
patentable; and
3. whether the reports provided for in
Article 16 of Directive 98/44/EC have
Veille juridique semences, Réseau Semences
Paysannes.
louise@ semencespaysannes.org 3 octobre 2020
been published and can be easily consulted. »
(1) www.uvadatavola.com/focus1/4725-le-piante-non-sono-brevettabili-ladiscussione-%
C3%A8-chiusa.html
(2) www.lagazzettadelmezzogiorno.it/news/home/1202158/l-uva-pugliesericattata-
dai-padroni-dei-brevetti.html
(3) www.uvadatavola.com/focus1/4730-snfl-interviene-in-italia-contro-icoltivatori-
illegali-di-uve-brevettate.html
Réponse donnée par Mr Breton, au nom de la
Commission
européenne, le 14 octobre 2020 :
« The Commission confirms that both the
Directive 98/44/EC (Biotech Directive)
(1) and the European Patent Convention
(EPC)(2) exclude plant varieties as
such from patentability. Plants obtained
through essentially biological
processes
are also excluded from patentability under these
legislations. In
relation
to the EPC, this was recently confirmed in the opinion G
3/19 of the
Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European
Patent Office. These exclusions
apply irrespective of the origin of the
plants in question, meaning that they
cannot be patented in Europe, even if they
were developed in a third country.
The Commission notes that plant varieties may
be protected by a different
intellectual property right, granted for new
plant varieties either at EU level
(under Council Regulation 2100/943)(3), or
under national laws of the EU
Member States. Protected plant varieties
cannot be produced and reproduced,
without authorisation of the right holder,
for the purposes of propagation, sale,
marketing, imports and exports to the EU and
stocking. Trademark protection
is also available for products like grapes,
provided that the trademarks do not
consist of the denomination of a registered
variety or reproduce it in their
essential elements. The limited information
available appears to suggest that
the disputes in question relate to protected
varieties and related trademarks.
TheCommission
understands that proceedings are ongoing before the
national
authorities in Italy on their licensing
conditions. The Commission cannot
comment on these proceedings.The Commission
has issued or facilitated
several publications on the application of
the Biotech Directive, including two
reports under Article 16c(4), an Expert Group
report(5) and an interpretative
Notice(6). »
(1) eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A31998L0044
(2) www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/html/epc/2016/e/ma1.html
(3) eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A31994R2100
(4) COM(2002) 545 final, available at
ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2002/EN/1-2002-545-EN-F1-1.Pdf
and
COM(2005) 312 final eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?
uri=COM:2005:0312:FIN:EN:PDF
(5) ec.europa.eu/DocsRoom/documents/18604/attachments/1/translations/
Veille juridique semences, Réseau Semences
Paysannes.
louise@ semencespaysannes.org 4 octobre 2020
(6) Commission Notice 2016/C 411/03, available
at eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/
EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52016XC1108(01)&from=DE
Lien vers la page de la question ici
PS:
Etappensieg! Nach über 10 Jahren Kampf zusammen mit der
Koalition «No Patents on Seeds» hat das Europäische
Patentamt Patente auf konventionell gezüchtete Pflanzen
verboten. Mehr
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ProSpecieRara
Schweizerische
Stiftung für die kulturhistorische und genetische Vielfalt
von Pflanzen und Tieren
François
Meienberg - Projektleiter Saatgutpolitik
Tel. direkt +41 (0)61 545 99 19
Sekretariat +41 (0)61 545 99 11 (vormittags)
ProSpecieRara,
Unter Brüglingen 6, 4052 Basel
Spendenkonto
CH29 0900 0000 9000 1480 3
www.prospecierara.ch
auf
Facebook
auf
Instagram