natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Hvis en sådan proces indebærer løsning af et teknisk problem på en opfindsom måde (dvs. på en måde, som er ny og ikke er åbenlys for en kyndig), ville der være tale om en patenterbar opfindelse.
If such a process were to involve the solution of a technical problem in an inventive way (that is, in a way which is new and not obvious to a skilled person), then a patentable invention would be present.
Dette er helt foreneligt med de normale principper i europæisk patentlovgivning.
This is what is meant by a computer-implemented invention.
Det er muligt, at en særlig handling under visse omstændigheder kunne betyde samtidig krænkelse af ophavsretten og af et patent.
The grant of a patent for such an invention is completely consistent with the normal principles of European patent law.
F.eks. indebærer loading og kørsel af et program, at der skabes en midlertidig kopi af en version af koden i computerens hukommelse, hvilket ville betyde overtrædelse af ophavsretten, hvis det sker uden tilladelse.
Practice to date at the EPO has evolved over a succession of decided cases in the direction of what some consider to be a liberalisation of the criteria for patentability, as a result of which they will now grant patents for computer-implemented inventions provided they make a "technical contribution".
Den samme handling kunne betyde krænkelse af ethvert patent, som dækker den programmerede maskine eller de processer, som udføres under programkontrol.
However, this has resulted in the complaint that too many applications for patents for computer program patents are for trivial inventions or make an insufficient contribution in relation to the state of the art and that examination of these questions tends to take second place to "the rather sterile and philosophical issue of whether or not the alleged invention confers a 'technical effect'" Ibid. .
Dette indebærer muligvis ikke nogen mindskelse af rettighederne for hverken ophavsretejeren eller for patenthaveren.
Far from being radical, the Commission's proposal - which the rapporteur endorses whilst seeking to tighten it up further - aims to counter any extension of the scope of patent protection for software while resisting the call to exclude patent protection altogether.
Det kan ret ofte ske, at udnyttelse af flere rettigheder sker i en enkelt handling.
Thus it focuses on whether claims are for bona fide inventions.
F.eks. kunne et stykke funktionelt apparatur indebære patenteret teknologi, registrerede mønstre og varemærker.
The rapporteur's amendments would also very clearly exclude the grant for patents for non-inventive business methods.
Afgørelser truffet af EPO's appelkamre
European business does not operate in a vacuum.
Patenter, som indebærer anvendelse af software, er der blevet ansøgt og givet meddelelse om siden den europæiske patentordnings start.
Computer-implemented inventions are increasingly important, yet many of the 20,000 patents for software-related patents already granted in Europe are in non-European hands.
De følgende to sager, som stammer fra ansøgninger indgivet i de første måneder af EPO's eksistens, fastslog, at hvis en opfindelse implementeres ved anvendelse af software (dvs. at selve hardwaren er traditionel), kan der være tale om en patenterbar opfindelse, hvis et teknisk problem løses.
Indeed, we would do small and medium-sized European software developers a disservice if we were either to leave matters as they stand, or if we were to attempt to ban all patents for such inventions, thus potentially putting our software developers at a disadvantage when they seek to compete in the US.
De betragtes i dag stadig som god lovgivning:
Moreover, a study conducted by the Intellectual Property Institute in London has found that "the patentability of computer-related inventions has helped the growth of computer program-related industries in the US, in particular the growth of small and medium enterprises and independent software developers into sizeable indeed major companies" http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/indprop/comp/studyintro.htm .
Europæisk Patent 0 005 954, ansøgning oprindelig indgivet i 1979: Sag T 208/84 Vicom
Nobody in Europe can have any interest in seeing the destruction of small European software developers.
Den kendsgerning, at en matematisk algoritme ligger til grund for en metode, betyder ikke nødvendigvis, at metoden ikke kan patenteres.
On the contrary, large corporations are often dependent upon the innovativeness of small businesses and patents allow them to turn their creativity to good account, as witness the world-wide non-exclusive licence recently granted to a US multinational by a ten-person company located in an employment blackspot in south-west England in respect of all of their voice-recognition software patents.
Et patentkrav, som dækker en teknisk proces med anvendelse af en algoritme, giver ikke eneret på algoritmen selv, men kun på den tekniske proces.
Accordingly, the directive would not only improve on the present situation as regards patentability of computer-invented inventions by affording greater legal certainty and uniformity in the law across Europe, it would also mandate the European Commission to keep a watching brief on the sector, while paying special attention to the small and medium-sized business sector.
Europæisk Patent 0 001 640, ansøgning oprindelig indgivet in 1978: Sag T 26/86 Koch & Sterzel
The economic importance of patentability of computer-implemented inventions for European industry
Der blev meddelt patent for en opfindelse, som indebar et røntgenapparat under softwarekontrol, og som vedrørte optimeret eksponering og beskyttelse mod overbelastning.
Although no consolidated data seem to exist concerning royalties for patents paid in Europe, the important thing about patents as far as companies are concerned is the protection of their R&D investments.
I dette tilfælde løste opfindelsen et problem i relation til behandling af files mellem særskilte, inkompatible systemer.
This means that companies with substantial software-related R&D can be estimated to be spending as much as perhaps 10% of their overall R&D budgets on patenting.
I dette tilfælde blev patent nægtet.
Specific observations and conclusions
Ansøgningen påkaldte en metode til at kontrollere et pensionsprogram samt en maskine til at gennemføre en sådan metode.
As regards some specific amendments put forward in the other committees, the rapporteur considers that she should make two specific observations.
Skønt metoden som implementeret på en computer i sig selv blev anset for at værende af teknisk karakter, fandt man, at forbedringen heraf i det væsentlige var ikke-teknisk (nærmere bestemt på det økonomiske område).
First, the test laid down in the Rote Taube case antedates the European Patent Convention, but it is significant that the drafters of the Convention chose not to include it as part of the definition of patentable subject-matter.
Den korrekte grund til nægtelse var manglende opfindelseshøjde og ikke, at den påkaldte metode ikke udgjorde nogen "teknisk "opfindelse.
The imposition of a specific interpretation of that test must be rejected, as it would not be relevant to all inventions or appropriate in all situations.
Disse sager fastslog praksis om, at patentkrav på edb-programmer kunne antages.
She has therefore included an amendment to cater for this concern in her draft report.
Praksis blev efterfølgende bifaldet af Bundesgerichtshof i sag X ZB 16/00, " Metode og computersystem til at søge efter ukorrekte strenge i en tekst ".
In the rapporteur's view, there are only two choices: either to approve the Commission's proposal, possibly with amendments, such as her own, consistent with the European Patent Convention and TRIPs, or to reject it.
Nærværende forslag til direktiv ville faktisk gå imod disse sager.
If the Commission's proposal is rejected, the European Patent Office and its Boards of Appeal would remain the principal arbitrators of the law and there would be nothing to prevent a gradual drift towards the patentability of business methods and the like, as has been witnessed in the United States.
Amerikanske sager, hvor der ikke ville blive meddelt patent i henhold til forslaget til direktiv
There would therefore continue to be uncertainty and a lack of transparency and there would be no Community competence in this area.
Denne ansøgning om computer-implementeret metode til at udføre forretninger blev taget tilbage i EPO, da den var under behandling.
Your rapporteur strongly commends the amendments set out in her draft report.
21.februar 2003 UDTALELSE FRA UDVALGET OM INDUSTRIPOLITIK, EKSTERNE ØKONOMISKE FORBINDELSER, FORSKNING OG ENERGI
21 February 2003 OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, EXTERNAL TRADE, RESEARCH AND ENERGY
om forslag til Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv om computer-implementerede opfindelsers patenterbarhed
on the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions
Rådgivende ordfører: Elly Plooij-van Gorsel
Draftsman: Elly Plooij-van Gorsel
På mødet den 27. marts 2002 valgte Udvalget om Industripolitik, Eksterne Økonomiske Forbindelser, Forskning og Energi Elly Plooij-van Gorsel til rådgivende ordfører.
The Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy appointed Elly Plooij-van Gorsel draftsman at its meeting of 27 March 2002.
På møder den 3. juni, 25.-26. november 2002, 23. januar og 20. februar 2003 behandlede det udkastet til udtalelse.
It considered the draft opinion at its meetings of 3 June 2002, 25/26 November 2002, 23 January 2003 and 20 February 2003
På sidstnævnte møde vedtog det nedenstående ændringsforslag (for: 30; imod: 21).
At the last meeting it adopted the following amendments by 30 votes to 21.
Til stede under afstemningen var: Peter Michael Mombaur (mødeformand), Yves Piétrasanta (næstformand), Jaime Valdivielso de Cué (næstformand), Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (rådgivende ordfører), Gordon J. Adam (for Massimo Carraro), Konstantinos Alyssandrakis, Niall Andrews (for Seán Ó Neachtain, jf. forretningsordenens artikel 153, stk. 2), Per-Arne Arvidsson (for Guido Bodrato), sir Robert Atkins, María del Pilar Ayuso González (for Godelieve Quisthoudt-Rowohl), Luis Berenguer Fuster, Gérard Caudron, Giles Bryan Chichester, Nicholas Clegg, Dorette Corbey (for Erika Mann), Willy C.E.H. De Clercq, Marie-Hélène Descamps (for Dominique Vlasto), Harlem Désir, Concepció Ferrer, Francesco Fiori (for Angelika Niebler), Per Gahrton (for Nuala Ahern), Norbert Glante, Alfred Gomolka (for Konrad K. Schwaiger), Michel Hansenne, Hans Karlsson, Bashir Khanbhai, Efstratios Korakas (for Fausto Bertinotti, jf. forretningsordenens artikel 153, stk. 2), Dimitrios Koulourianos (for Marianne Eriksson), Bernd Lange (for Gary Titley), Werner Langen, Rolf Linkohr, Eryl Margaret McNally, Elizabeth Montfort, Bill Newton Dunn (for Colette Flesch), Reino Paasilinna, Paolo Pastorelli, John Purvis, Bernhard Rapkay (for Carlos Westendorp y Cabeza), Imelda Mary Read, Mechtild Rothe, Christian Foldberg Rovsing, Paul Rübig, Umberto Scapagnini, Ilka Schröder (for Roseline Vachetta), Esko Olavi Seppänen, Maurizio Turco (for …, jf. forretningsordenens artikel 153, stk. 2), Claude Turmes, W.G. van Velzen, Alejo Vidal-Quadras Roca, Myrsini Zorba og Olga Zrihen Zaari.
The following were present for the vote: Peter Michael Mombaur, acting chairman; Yves Piétrasanta, vice-chairman; Jaime Valdivielso de Cué, ice-chairman; Elly Plooij-van Gorsel, draftsman; Gordon J. Adam (for Massimo Carraro), Konstantinos Alyssandrakis, Niall Andrews (for Seán Ó Neachtain) pursuant to Rule 153(2)), Per-Arne Arvidsson (for Guido Bodrato), Sir Robert Atkins, María del Pilar Ayuso González (for Godelieve Quisthoudt-Rowohl), Luis Berenguer Fuster, Gérard Caudron, Giles Bryan Chichester, Nicholas Clegg, Dorette Corbey (for Erika Mann), Willy C.E.H. De Clercq, Marie-Hélène Descamps (for Dominique Vlasto), Harlem Désir, Concepció Ferrer, Francesco Fiori (for Angelika Niebler), Per Gahrton (for Nuala Ahern), Norbert Glante, Alfred Gomolka (for Konrad K. Schwaiger), Michel Hansenne, Hans Karlsson, Bashir Khanbhai, Efstratios Korakas (for Fausto Bertinotti, pursuant to Rule 153(2)), Dimitrios Koulourianos (for Marianne Eriksson), Bernd Lange (for Gary Titley), Werner Langen, Rolf Linkohr, Eryl Margaret McNally, Elizabeth Montfort, Bill Newton Dunn (for Colette Flesch), Reino Paasilinna, Paolo Pastorelli, John Purvis, Bernhard Rapkay (for Carlos Westendorp y Cabeza), Imelda Mary Read, Mechtild Rothe, Christian Foldberg Rovsing, Paul Rübig, Umberto Scapagnini, Ilka Schröder (for Roseline Vachetta), Esko Olavi Seppänen, Maurizio Turco (for ... pursuant to Rule 153(2)), Claude Turmes, W.G. van Velzen, Alejo Vidal-Quadras Roca, Myrsini Zorba, Olga Zrihen Zaari.
Patent- og ophavsretsbeskyttelse supplerer - og kan overlappe - hinanden.
Patent and copyright protection are complementary and may overlap.
I en computersammenhæng vil den konkrete kode (hvad enten den er maskinelt læsbar eller foreligger i en form, der er forståelig for den menneskelige læser) næsten altid være ophavsretligt beskyttet, medens de tilgrundliggende teknologiske ideer måske kan patentbeskyttes.
In computer terms, the actual code (whether machine-readable or in a form which is intelligible to human readers) would almost always be subject to copyright protection, while any underlying technological ideas may be eligible for patent protection.
Et patent, der beskytter tilgrundliggende teknologiske ideer, beskytter også de konkrete former, ideerne kommer til udtryk i, herunder former, der implementeres via software.
A patent protecting the underlying technological ideas also protects all embodiments of those technical ideas, including embodiments implemented by means of software.
Hvis et stykke software således er baseret på en tilgrundliggende teknisk idé, og hvis denne idé er beskyttet af et patent, vil det pågældende software være omfattet af såvel ophavsrets- som patentbeskyttelse.
So, if software is based on an underlying technical idea, and if that technical idea is protected by means of a patent, then the software is covered by both copyright protection and patent protection.
Patentlovgivningen giver indehaveren af et patent på en computer-implementeret opfindelse ret til at forhindre tredjemand i at anvende software, der indeholder enhver ny teknologi, som han har opfundet (som defineret i patentkravene).
Patent law gives the holder of a patent for a computer-implemented invention the right to prevent third parties from using software incorporating any new technology he has invented (as defined by the patent claims).
Inden for såvel EF-retten som national ret er den retlige beskyttelse af software sikret som et spørgsmål om intellektuel ejendomsret (droit d'auteur, Urheberrecht, ophavsret) på samme måde som for litterære værker, og normalt ikke via patenter, selv om der i artikel 9 i direktiv 91/250/EØF udtrykkeligt åbnes mulighed for patentbeskyttelse i tilgift til ophavsretsbeskyttelsen.
In the EC legal framework as well as in the national laws, the legal protection of software is ensured as a intellectual property matter (droit d'auteur, Urheberrecht) similar to a literary work, and usually not through a patent, although Article 9 of EC Directive 91/250 explicitly allows for patent protection in addition to copyright protection.
Den vigtigste af de gældende retsforskrifter på dette område er direktiv 91/250/EØF om retlig beskyttelse af edb-programmer.
The main text applicable is the Directive 91/250/EEC on the legal protection of computer programs.
Der er imidlertid blevet meddelt mange patenter vedrørende software og hermed forbunde opfindelser på anordninger og processer inden for tekniske områder, der ikke kan fungere uafhængigt af de softwarekomponenter, de implementerer.
However, many patents relating to software and related inventions have been granted for devices and processes in technical areas which cannot operate independently of the software components that they implement.
Hovedparten af disse vedrører nu digital databehandling, -genkendelse og -repræsentation samt informationshåndtering.
The majority of these now relate to digital data processing, data recognition and representation and information handling.
Dette har skabt en debat om, hvorvidt grænserne for patenterbarhed stadig er tilstrækkelig klare, og om de håndhæves korrekt, navnlig i betragtning af, at de forskellige nationale love og Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed (EPO) ikke altid bygger på de samme kriterier.
This has fuelled debate on whether the limits of what is patentable are still sufficiently clear and properly applied, especially since the various national laws and the EPO do not always take account of the same criteria.
Nogle anser det faktum, at den europæiske industri ikke nyder den samme retlige beskyttelse fra patenter, som det er tilfældet i USA, for at være til skade for dens ekspansionsmuligheder og konkurrenceevne.
Some argue that the fact that the European industry does not enjoy the legal protection of patents, as is the case in the USA, is detrimental to its expansion and competitiveness.
Imidlertid har mange observatører og industrielle ledere i USA fremhævet ulemperne ved softwarepatenter på deres hjemmemarked.
But many observers and industry leaders in the USA emphasise the drawbacks of software patents in their home market.
Modstanderne af enhver form for omtale af software i patentretten frygter for deres del, at softwarepatenter skal blive til hovedreglen og dermed skabe permanent usikkerhed om anvendelsen af algoritmer og tekniske løsninger, som på nuværende tidspunkt cirkulerer frit, eller skabe flaskehalse, der begrænser innovationen.
On the other hand, the opponents of any mention of software in patent law fear that software patents may become the general rule, thus creating permanent legal uncertainty about the use of algorithms and technical solutions that currently circulate freely or the creation of bottlenecks limiting innovation.
Det foreslåede direktiv vil ikke gøre det muligt at udtage patent på edb-programmer "som sådanne".
The proposed Directive will not make it possible to patent computer programs "as such".
Generelt vil intet blive gjort patenterbart, som ikke er det i forvejen.
In broad terms, nothing will be made patentable which is not already patentable.
Formålet er simpelthen at tydeliggøre lovgivningen og fjerne visse forskelle i de fremgangsmåder, de nationale love anvender.
The objective is simply to clarify the law and to resolve some inconsistencies in approach in national laws.
Det er imidlertid klart, at direktivet, uanset hvad Kommissionen påstår, også baner vej for en bredere anvendelse af patenter som metode til beskyttelse af computersoftware.
However, it is clear that, despite the Commission's claims, it paves the way to a broader use of patents as a model for protecting computer software.
Det er et åbent spørgsmål, om et sådant skridt i politisk henseende er hensigtsmæssigt, og - hvis patenterbarhed kan siges at være politisk ønskeligt - om grænserne for patenterbarhed kan fastlægges på en sådan måde, at misbrug og negative virkninger undgås.
Two types of questions remain open: the political expediency of such a move, and, if patentability is regarded as politically desirable, the criteria for defining the borders of patentability in such a way that abuses and perverse effects are avoided.
Anvendelsesområdet for direktivet bør derfor - hvis det vedtages endeligt - efter vor opfattelse begrænses til entydige tilfælde, hvor eventuelle negative virkninger ikke vil bringe beskyttelsens nytteværdi i fare.
In our view, therefore, the scope of the Directive - if it is ultimately adopted - should be strictly limited to unequivocal cases where any adverse effects would not jeopardise the usefulness of the protection.
Endelig skal det bemærkes, at patenter og ophavsret ikke er de eneste beskyttelsesinstrumenter: design, mønstre og varemærker er omfattet af specifikke beskyttelsesordninger, og sågar inden for tekniske opfindelser flankeres patenter af det mere fleksible system med brugsmodeller.
Finally, it should be noted that patents and copyright are not the only instruments for protection: designs, models and trademarks enjoy specific protection schemes and, even in the field of technical inventions, patents are flanked by the more flexible system of utility models.
Kommissionens forslag EFT C 151E af 25.6.2002, s. 129-131.
Text proposed by the Commission OJ C 151E of 25.6.2002, p.129-131.
Ændringsforslag Ændringsforslag 1 Betragtning 5
Amendments by Parliament Amendment 1 Recital 5
D en retssikkerhed, der herved opnås, skal gøre det muligt for virksomhederne at få det fulde udbytte af patenter på computer-implementerede opfindelser og skal udgøre et incitament til investering og innovation.
T he resulting legal certainty should enable enterprises to derive the maximum advantage from patents for computer-implemented inventions and provide an incentive for investment and innovation.
(5) Lovbestemmelserne vedrørende computer-implementerede opfindelsers patenterbarhed bør derfor harmoniseres med henblik på at sikre, at d en herved opnåede retssikkerhed og omfanget af de betingelser, der stilles for patenterbarhed, gør det muligt for virksomhederne at få det fulde udbytte af deres opfindelsesproces og udgør et incitament til investering og innovation.
(5) Therefore, the legal rules governing the patentability of computer-implemented inventions should be harmonised so as to ensure that t he resulting legal certainty and the level of requirements demanded for patentability enable innovative enterprises to derive the maximum advantage from their inventive process and provide an incentive for investment and innovation.
(7a) Europa-Parlamentet har gentagne gange krævet, at Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed reviderer sit reglement og underlægges offentlig kontrol i forbindelse med udøvelsen af sine funktioner.
(7a) Parliament has repeatedly asked the European Patent Office to review its operating rules and for the Office to be publicly accountable in the exercise of its functions.
Det ville i den forbindelse især være hensigtsmæssigt, om man tog Patentmyndighedens praksis med at tage sig betalt for de patenter, den udsteder, op til fornyet overvejelse, for så vidt som denne praksis skader institutionens offentlige karakter.
In this connection it would be particularly desirable to reconsider the practice in which the Office sees fit to obtain payment for the patents that it grants, as this practice harms the public nature of the institution.
Europa-Parlamentet har gentagne gange i forskellige beslutninger understreget, at Den Europæiske Patentmyndigheds metoder bør revideres.
Parliament has repeatedly said, in a number of resolutions, that the European Patent Office’s practices need reforming.
Ændringsforslag 3 Betragtning 7 b (ny)
Amendment 3 Recital 7 b (new)
(7b) Software spiller en vigtig rolle inden for en lang række erhverv, men repræsenterer samtidig en grundlæggende form for kreativitet og selvudfoldelse.
(7b) While software plays an important role in a number of industries it is also a basic form of creativity and self-expression.
Software er herudover et specialiseret teknisk felt og en grundlæggende menneskelig aktivitet, der beskæftiger over 10 millioner professionelle programudviklere på verdensplan, hvortil kommer de mange millioner andre, der skaber software til et eller andet formål.
Software is, in addition, a field of specialised engineering and a basic human activity, with more than 10 million professional developers throughout the world and tens of millions of people creating software for one purpose or another.
Uafhængige programudviklere og små virksomheder er af afgørende betydning for innovationen på dette område.
Independent developers and small businesses play a fundamental role in innovation in this area.