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