THE TYPE OF COMPUTER MANUFACTURED BY CONTROL DATA IS ORIENTATED TOWARDS WORDS OF 60 BITS .
11 IN THE COURSE OF THE PROCEEDINGS THE COMMISSION ACCEPTED THAT A WORD LENGTH OF 60 BITS, GIVING 14-DECIMAL-DIGIT ACCURACY FROM SINGLE LENGTH OPERATION, IS A DISTINCTIVE FEATURE OF THE CYBER COMPUTERS AND CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE LATTER WERE DESIGNED FOR HIGH-PRECISION NUMERICAL COMPUTATION . IN ADDITION, THE COMMISSION STATED AT THE HEARING THAT IT HAD FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT' S ARGUMENT REGARDING THE LENGTH OF THE WORDS THAT COULD BE HANDLED AND THAT, CONSEQUENTLY, IT HAD NOT DEALT WITH IT IN THE CONTESTED DECISION . IT ALSO OBSERVES THAT THE INABILITY OF THE HARDWARE TO HANDLE UNITS OF LESS THAN 60 BITS COULD BE OVERCOME BY THE USE OF APPROPRIATE SOFTWARE .
12 IT MUST BE POINTED OUT IN THE FIRST PLACE THAT, AS THE COURT HAS ALREADY STATED IN ITS JUDGMENT OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1983 ( CASE 216/82 UNIVERSITAET HAMBURG V HAUPTZOLLAMT HAMBURG-KEHRWIEDER (( 1983 )) ECR 2771 ), IT MAY NOT FIND FAULT WITH THE CONTENTS OF A DECISION WHICH THE COMMISSION HAS ADOPTED IN CONFORMITY WITH THE OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON DUTY-FREE ARRANGEMENTS, SAVE IN THE EVENT OF MANIFEST ERROR OF FACT OR LAW OR MISUSE OF POWER .
13 IT IS CLEAR FROM THE WORDING OF THE FIFTH RECITAL IN THE PREAMBLE TO THE CONTESTED DECISION THAT, AS THE COMMISSION ITSELF HAS RECOGNIZED, IT PROCEEDED ON AN ERRONEOUS BASIS BY FAILING TO TAKE PROPER ACCOUNT OF THE APPLICANT' S ARGUMENT CONCERNING THE 60-BIT WORD LENGTH . IT WAS ONLY EX POST FACTO THAT THE COMMISSION RAISED THE POINT THAT THE USE OF APPROPRIATE SOFTWARE LARGELY ENABLED THAT OBSTACLE TO COMMERCIAL USE TO BE OVERCOME .
14 THE COMMISSION ALSO STATED IN THE FIFTH RECITAL THAT "NEITHER THE USE OF INDIVIDUAL FUNCTIONAL UNITS NOR THE PERFORMANCE OF COMPLEX OPERATIONS AT HIGH SPEED CAN BE CONSIDERED AS BEING REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIC ONLY TO SCIENTIFIC COMPUTATION ". IN ADDITION, AT THE HEARING, IT CONTESTED THE APPLICANT' S ARGUMENT THAT THE ABILITY TO HANDLE LONG WORDS CONSTITUTED AN ADVANTAGE EXCLUSIVELY OR MAINLY IN RELATION TO SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITIES AND CONTENDED THAT COMPLEX NUMERICAL FUNCTIONS ALSO HAD TO BE PERFORMED IN NUMEROUS INDUSTRIES SUCH AS THE MOTOR AND AEROSPACE INDUSTRIES . THE COMMISSION SEEMS THEREFORE TO HAVE ADOPTED THE VIEW THAT APPARATUS CANNOT BE SUITABLE FOR SCIENTIFIC PURPOSES IF IT IS CAPABLE OF USE FOR BOTH RESEARCH AND INDUSTRIAL PURPOSES .
15 IN THAT REGARD THE COURT HAS ALREADY HELD IN ITS JUDGMENT OF 29 JANUARY 1985 ( CASE 234/83 GESAMTHOCHSCHULE DUISBURG V HAUPTZOLLAMT MUENCHEN-MITTE (( 1985 )) ECR 327 ) THAT THE CONCEPT OF THE SCIENTIFIC NATURE OF INSTRUMENTS OR APPARATUS IS NOT TO BE INTERPRETED RESTRICTIVELY . THAT FOLLOWS FROM THE OBJECTIVES OF REGULATION NO 1798/79 AS STATED, IN PARTICULAR, IN THE FIRST AND SECOND RECITALS IN THE PREAMBLE THERETO . THE REGULATION WAS INTENDED TO FAVOUR, NOT HAMPER, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FLORENCE AGREEMENT OF 1952 ON THE IMPORTATION OF EDUCATIONAL,