Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

[**Avis juridique important**](../../../editorial/legal_notice.htm)

*|*

# 92002E3609

**WRITTEN QUESTION E-3609/02 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission. Safeguarding European languages.** 
  
*Official Journal 137 E , 12/06/2003 P. 0231 - 0232*

  

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3609/02

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(16 December 2002)

Subject: Safeguarding European languages

The London Protocol on Patents, which still being ratified, prompted justified reactions on the part of the President of the French Senate, who said at Brive on 8 November last we cannot accept the provisions which would lead to English dominating this strategic sphere.

Can the Commission say:

1. whether it took part in drafting the Protocol;

2. whether it is concerned about safeguarding the cultural and linguistic diversity of Europe;

3. whether it does not consider that Europe is enriched by developing the vitality of its cultures rather than by dull monolingual standardisation?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(28 January 2003)

The Commission would draw attention to its answer of 3 December 2002 to Written Question No E-3132/02 from Mr Pohjamo(1) in emphasising that the European Patent Organisation (EPO) is not a Community body, but is completely autonomous and independent of the Community. The Commission's involvement in the work of the EPO is therefore that of an observer. More specifically, as an observer and as part of the Community delegation, the Commission followed the work conducted by the EPO which, on 17 October 2000 at the second intergovernmental conference on the reform of the EPO, led to the conclusion of a voluntary agreement by the EPO on reducing translation costs (agreement on the application of Article 65 of the Convention on the grant of European patents, EPC). It should be made clear that the result of these negotiations has not led to an English only system being applied to European patents.

The Commission shares the Honourable Member's concern about safeguarding cultural and linguistic diversity in the Community, particularly in the cultural industries sector.

However, as the Commission stated in its proposal for a Council Regulation on the Community patent(2), the objective of an affordable Community patent militates in favour of a patent that is valid throughout the Community in the language in which it was granted under the EPC. In this context, the Commission noted that the arrangements concerning translations of the patent are a particularly important aspect in terms of the cost of the current European patent, which is three to five times higher than that of patents in the EU's main partner countries(3). It is interesting to note that the translations of current European patents are very rarely consulted. According to information available to the Commission, less than 2 % of the translations at the French National Institute for Industrial Property are consulted. Given these circumstances, the Commission feels that in this highly specialised sector it is essential to ensure that costs are affordable in order to promote innovation and ensure the competitiveness of European industry.

(1) OJ C 110 E, 8.5.2003, p. 170.

(2) OJ C 337 E, 28.11.2000.

(3) COM(2000) 412 final.

[Top](#document1)