natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Rezultat dolgotrajnih in napornih pogajanj je bila rešitev „zamrznitve in nadgradnje“ ( freeze plus ), kot jo določa člen 14 Direktive 98/71/EG.
The result of the long and difficult negotiations was the “freeze plus” solution as it now appears in Article 14 of Directive 98/71/EC.
Stanje na področju nadomestnih delov, ki se uporabljajo za obnovo zunanjega videza kompleksnih izdelkov, je v državah članicah po prenosu Direktive 98/71/EG različno.
At present, following the transposition of Directive 98/71/EC, there are varying situations in the Member States regarding spare parts intended to restore the appearance of complex products.
1 V ZDA je patent za model („design patent“) za nadomestne dele mogoče pridobiti pod skoraj enakimi pogoji kot v Evropi : 35 USC (Zakonik Združenih držav) 171: „Whoever invents any new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
In the USA, a design patent may be obtained for a spare part under practically the same protection conditions as in Europe: 35 USC (United States Code) 171: "Whoever invents any new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Mnenje poročevalca
Your rapporteur’s position
Čeprav predlog direktive načeloma obsega vse nadomestne dele, ki se uporabljajo za popravilo kompleksnih izdelkov, „da bi se obnovil njegov prvotni videz“, poteka razprava predvsem o najpomembnejšem področju, na katerem se predlog uporablja, namreč o nadomestnih delih za motorna vozila.
Although the proposal for a directive in principle covers all spare parts which serve to repair a complex product “so as to restore its original appearance”, discussions centre on its most important area of application, namely spare parts for motor vehicles.
Pri tem ne smemo pozabiti, da gre za temeljna vprašanja o obsegu varstva modelov.
However, it should not be forgotten that these are issues of principle relating to the scope of design protection.
Pri vprašanju varstva modelov za nadomestne dele z obveznim ujemanjem na sekundarnem trgu se pojavlja dvoje zelo različnih mnenj:
There are two fundamentally contrasting views of design protection for “must-match” spare parts on the secondary market.
Nekateri menijo, da je varstvo modelov za nadomestne dele logična posledica pravice intelektualne lastnine.
The first holds that design protection for spare parts is a logical corollary of the right to intellectual property.
Razlikovanje med primarnim in sekundarnim trgom za nadomestne dele je potemtakem v nasprotju s splošnim načelom intelektualne lastnine.
In this view, drawing a distinction between the primary and secondary markets for spare parts would contradict fundamental principles of intellectual property rights.
Na drugi strani obstaja mnenje, da se varstvo modelov ne bi smelo razširiti na sekundarni trg, saj bi to povzročilo nastanek neupravičnih monopolov.
In the other view, design protection should not be extended to cover spare parts because this would lead to prohibited monopoly positions.
To mnenje zagovarja klavzulo o popravilih iz predloga direktive kot primerno rešitev problema.
Supporters of this view defend the repair clause in the proposal for a directive as the most appropriate solution to the problem.
Poročevalec meni, da rešitev, ki jo predlaga Komisija in v skladu s katero varstvo modelov za nadomestne dele od sedaj ne velja, ne upošteva dovolj napetosti med različnimi zainteresiranimi stranmi.
Your rapporteur considers that the solution proposed by the Commission, which means that design protection for spare parts ceases immediately, fails to take sufficient account of this tension between the various interested parties.
Zato predlaga prehodno rešitev, v skladu s katero „Države članice z zakonodajo, v kateri obstaja varstvo kot v primeru modela za model, ki predstavlja sestavni del kompleksnega izdelka, ki se uporablja v smislu člena 12(1) direktive 98/71/EGS v namen popravila tega kompleksnega izdelka, da bi se obnovil njegov prvotni videz,“ lahko to varstvo modelov ohranijo še pet let po začetku veljavnosti direktive.
Your rapporteur therefore proposes a transitional solution, whereby those ‘Member States under whose existing legislation protection as a design exists for a design which constitutes a component part of a complex product used within the meaning of Article 12(1) of Directive 98/71/EEC for the purpose of the repair of that complex product so as to restore its original appearance’ may retain this design protection for another five years after the entry into force of the directive.
Predlog direktive obravnava varstvo modelov, zato ne zadeva vprašanj varnosti motornih vozil in njihovih nadomestnih delov.
The proposal for a directive relates to design protection issues and consequently does not touch matters of the safety of vehicles and their components.
Kljub temu lahko odprtje trga posredno vpliva na kakovost izdelkov in s tem na varnost.
Nevertheless, liberalisation may have indirect effects on product quality and thus also on safety.
Študija o tem vprašanju je pokazala, da bi morala homologacija izdelka zajemati tudi nekatere nadomestne dele, ki so pomembni z vidika varnosti, in tako zagotoviti varnost nadomestnih delov.
The study commissioned on this topic found that the type approval procedure should be extended to cover certain safety-related spare parts in order to guarantee the safety of the spare parts.
o predlogu Direktive Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o spremembah Direktive 98/71/ES o pravnem varstvu modelov
on the proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive amending Directive 98/71/EC on the legal protection of designs
Direktiva 98/71/ES obravnava pravno varstvo modelov.
The Directive 98/71/ EC concerns the legal protection of design.
Namen prava modelov je varstvo videza, zunanje in vidne oblike izdelka.
The aim of design law is to protect the appearance, outside and visible form of a product.
V tem smislu mora varstvo zagotavljati izključne pravice za nov in izviren model ter nagraditi intelektualno delo ustvarjalca modela.
In this context protection should grant exclusivity in new and original design and reward the intellectual work of the creator of a design.
Države članice ohranijo svoje obstoječe zakonske določbe o varstvu modelov, kar pomeni varstvo modelov ali liberaliziranih trgov, tj. brez varstva modelov, do spremembe te direktive.
Member States shall keep in force their existing legal provisions on protection of design - meaning protection of design or liberalised markets, i.e. no protection of design - until an amendment changes this Directive.
Države članice spremenijo svojo zakonodajo le, če liberalizirajo trg (rešitev „zamrznitev in nadgradnja“).
Member States shall change their legislation only if they liberalise the market ("freeze plus" solution).
15 držav članic (Avstrija, Danska, Finska, Francija, Nemčija, Portugalska, Švedska, Ciper, Češka republika, Estonija, Litva, Malta, Poljska, Slovaška, Slovenija) je svoj trg zaščitilo, 9 držav članic (Belgija, Irska, Italija, Luksemburg, Nizozemska, Španija, Združeno kraljestvo, Madžarska, Latvija) liberaliziralo, Grčija pa ima časovno omejeno zaščito trga.
15 Member States (Austria, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Portugal, Sweden, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia) have protected markets, 9 Member States (Belgium, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Spain, United Kingdom, Hungary, Latvia) have liberalised markets and Greece has a time-limited protection.
Ta določba je bila kompromis nasprotnikov in zagovornikov morebitne vseevropske liberalizacije, ni pa bila mišljena kot dolgoročna rešitev.
This provision was a compromise of antagonists and supporters of a possible Europe-wide liberalisation, but was not meant to be a long term solution.
Komisija je sedaj predlagala liberalizacijo sekundarnega trga nadomestnih delov.
The Commission has currently proposed to liberalise the secondary market of spare parts.
Zato varstvo modelov ne sme obstajati za sestavni del kompleksnega izdelka, ki se uporablja za popravilo tega izdelka v namen obnove njegovega prvotnega videza.
Thus protection of design should not exist for a component part of a complex product used for the purpose of the repair of this product so as to restore its original appearance.
Liberalizacija je predlagana pod pogojem, da države članice zagotovijo obveščenost potrošnikov o izvoru nadomestnih delov, tako da se lahko odločijo, ali želijo kupiti nadomestni del proizvajalca vozila, dobavitelja originalne opreme ali neodvisnega dobavitelja.
The liberalisation is proposed on the condition that Member States ensure that the consumers are informed about the origin of spare parts so that they can decide if they want to buy a spare part of the vehicle manufacturer (VM), of the original equipment supplier (OES) or of an independent supplier (non-OES).
Države članice morajo prilagoditi svojo nacionalno zakonodajo z začetkom veljave najkasneje dve leti po sprejetju predlagane direktive.
The Member States have to adapt their national legislation, entering into force at the latest two years after the adoption of the proposed directive.
Področje uporabe predloga direktive
Scope of the proposed Directive
Predlog direktive obravnava le vidne nadomestne dele „z obveznim ujemanjem“ (tj. ki so del izdelka) za kompleksne izdelke.
The proposed Directive only concerns visible "must match" (i.e. body-integrated) spare parts for complex products.
Čeprav predlog dejansko vpliva na vsak sektor, kjer gre za nadomestitev in popravilo vidnih sestavnih delov kompleksnih izdelkov, obravnava predvsem avtomobilski poprodajni trg in ima le manjši vpliv na druge trge, na primer sanitarne naprave, ure, motorna kolesa in električne gospodinjske aparate.
Although the proposal affects essentially any sector where the replacement and repair of visible components of complex products is at stake, it largely concerns the automotive aftermarket and has only a minor impact on other markets such as sanitary appliances, watches, motorbikes and domestic electrical appliances.
Podatke teh drugih trgov je težko količinsko opredeliti in večinoma vplivajo na razkošni segment teh trgov; strokovnjaki se strinjajo, da je le avtomobilski poprodajni trg izredno pomemben in zato bistveno prizadet.
The data for these other markets is difficult to quantify and mostly affects the luxury segment of these markets; experts agree that only the automotive aftermarket is of major importance and thus crucially affected.
Zlasti obravnavana področja so deli karoserije, avtomobilska zasteklitev in luči.
The areas specifically concerned are namely, car body panels, automotive glass and lighting.
Za nakup teh nadomestnih delov se vsako leto porabi 9–11 milijard EUR.
9-11 billion € are annually spent to buy these spare parts.
Neko minimalno povpraševanje po popravilih in nadomestilih je nujno za donosno poslovanje proizvajalcev nadomestnih delov.
A certain minimum demand for repair and replacement is necessary for spare part manufacturers to operate profitably.
Zato je ponudba nadomestnih delov donosna le za nek obseg avtomobilov.
Thus offering spare parts is only profitable for certain volume cars.
Kljub temu gre za trg, vreden nekaj milijard EUR.
Nevertheless, a several billion € market is concerned.
Morebitne prednosti in slabosti predloga Direktive
Possible advantages and disadvantages of the proposed Directive
Cene: Na trgih z varstvom modelov lahko monopolističen sistem cen povzroči previsoke cene nadomestnih delov.
Prices: In markets with design protection a monopolistic pricing system risks to create overcharges for spare parts.
Liberaliziran trg ponuja večjo izbiro in veliko verjetnost nižjih cen.
A liberalised market offers a greater choice and a high probability of lower prices.
Študija je pokazala, da je 10 od 11 nadomestnih delov dražjih na zaščitenih trgih kot na liberaliziranih trgih.
A study showed that 10 out of 11 spare parts are more expensive in protected markets than in liberalised markets.
Ob tem je na primer cena proizvajalca vozil za nek nadomestni del lahko več kot 200 % višja, kot na prostem trgu.
Furthermore -for example- the VM price for a wing front can be up to over 200% higher than it is on the free market.
Inovacije: Liberalizacija nima negativnega vpliva na inovacije.
Innovation: The liberalisation does not affect innovation negatively.
Do inovacij pride zaradi konkurence na primarnem trgu.
Innovation is created through competition in the primary market.
Glavni namen oblikovanja modela avtomobila je zagotoviti edinstvenost avtomobilske blagovne znamke za zaščito tržnega položaja znamke.
The main purpose of creating a car design is to ensure the uniqueness of a car brand in order to defend the market position of a brand.
Model novega avtomobila je odločilen za odločitev potrošnika za nakup in osnova za uspešno prodajo, vendar pa model ne vpliva na vedenje potrošnikov na poprodajnem trgu.
The design of a new car is crucial for the buying decision of the consumer and the basis for a successful sale, but design does not affect consumer behaviour in the aftermarket.
Zaposlitve: Neodvisni proizvajalci v cenovno ugodnih državah pogosto nimajo dovolj tehničnega znanja za proizvodnjo delov z ravnjo kakovosti, ki jo zahteva evropski trg.
Employment: Independent manufacturers in low-cost countries frequently lack the technical know-how to produce parts at the quality level required by the European market.
Proizvodnjo na tujem opravijo raje proizvajalci vozil sami, ker se odločijo za zunanje izvajanje proizvodnje nadomestnih delov, da bi jih potem uvozili v EU.
Production abroad is done rather by the VM themselves as they outsource and dislocate the production of spare parts in order to import them afterwards in the EU.
Ravno nasprotno pa lahko mala in srednje velika podjetja bolje zagotovijo delovna mesta na svojih trgih.
In contrast, SMEs in the EU can better guarantee jobs in their own markets.
Mala in srednje velika podjetja zdaj trpijo zaradi pomanjkanja usklajevanja v Evropi in od liberalizacije bodo imela koristi.
SMEs currently suffer from the lack of harmonisation in Europe and will benefit from a liberalisation.
Razen tega bodo imeli vsi dobavitelji koristi od odprtja trga, ker bo dovoljena proizvodnja nadomestnih delov za avtomobile izven EU.
In addition, all suppliers will benefit from the opening-up of the market as the production of spare parts for non-EU cars will be permitted.
Sedaj je 15 % avtomobilov v EU uvoženih iz tujine (npr. iz Japonske, Koreje in ZDA) in vsi PV izven EU imajo modele avtomobilskih delov registrirane v EU.
Currently, 15% of the cars in the EU are imported from abroad (e.g. from Japan, Korea and US) and all non-EU VM have registered car component designs in the EU.
Varnost: Varnost ni vprašanje varstva modelov.
Safety: Safety is not a question of design protection.
Za dodelitev varstva modelov ni nobenega preskusa varnosti.
No safety test exists for granting design protection.
Namesto tega je varnost predmet režima homologacije za iste dele in se lahko razširi na vse druge dele z nadaljnjo evropsko zakonodajo.
Safety is instead subject to a regime of type-approval for same parts and could be extended to all other parts through further European legislation.
Konkurenca : Na zaščitenih trgih ni konkurence.
Competition : No competition exists in protected markets.
Potrošnik mora nadomestne dele kupiti od proizvajalca vozil.
The consumer must buy the spare parts from the VM.
Za nekatere nadomestne dele lahko navežejo stik z dobaviteljem originalne opreme, vendar je to mogoče samo za izdelke nekaterih velikih in vplivnih dobaviteljev originalne opreme.
They can contact the OES for some spare parts, although this is only possible for products of some of the big and powerful OES.
Enotni evropski trg ne obstaja in nacionalni zaščiteni trgi so za različne nadomestne dele v resnici različno zaščiteni.
A single European market does not exist and national protected markets are, in reality, protected to a different degree for different spare parts.
Liberalizirati trg bi pomenilo odpreti ga za konkurenco.
To liberalise the market would mean to open it up to competition.
Konkurenca ni le cenovna konkurenca, temveč vključuje tudi druge faktorje, kot so storitev, kakovost izdelka in sloves.
Competition is not only price competition, but other factors such as service, product quality and reputation come into play.
Tudi na liberaliziranih trgih ostaja tržni delež PV/DOO visok, npr. v ZDA so neodvisni proizvajalci delov karoserije dosegli le 15 % tržnega deleža.
Even in liberalised markets the market share of VM/ OES stays high, e.g. in the USA independent body panels have reached only 15% of the market share.
Vaš poročevalec želi izraziti veliko podporo predlogu Komisije.
Your rapporteur wishes to express his strong support for the Commission's Proposal.
Ni sprejemljivo, da imamo enoten trg za avtomobile, nimamo pa enotnega trga za nadomestne dele.
It is not satisfactory that we have a single market for new cars but no single market for spare parts.
Liberalizacija sekundarnega trga nadomestnih delov bo privedla do večje konkurence in pospešila razvoj notranjega trga.
A liberalisation of the secondary market of spare parts will lead to more competition and push the development of the internal market.
Cene bodo postale bolj prilagodljive.
The prices will become more elastic.
Ne bo negativnega vpliva na inovacije.
Innovation is not negatively affected.
Dejansko se bodo mogoče povečale, ker bodo PV oblikovali dele svojih izdelkov tako, da bodo neodvisni dobavitelji težko proizvedli te nadomestne dele.
In fact it might be increased since VM will tend to design the parts of their products in such a way that independent suppliers will find it difficult to manufacture these spare parts.
Vaš poročevalec podpira zahtevo po intelektualni lastnini, vendar po našem mnenju to ni ovira za liberalizacijo tega trga.
Your rapporteur supports the claim for intellectual property, but in our opinion it is no obstacle for a liberalisation of this market.
Razen tega je presenetljivo, da je le en primer, ko je PV tožil drugega PV zaradi posnemanja modela na primarnem trgu, čeprav so si nekateri modeli zelo podobni.
In addition, it is remarkable that there is only one single case where a VM sued another VM for the copying of design in the primary market, even if some models greatly resemble each other.
Mala in srednje velika podjetja bodo imela koristi od liberalizacije.
SMEs will benefit from the liberalisation.
Liberalizacija bo imela pozitivne učinke na zaposlovanje v EU ter posameznemu potrošniku bo končno omogočeno svobodno odločanje in moral bo biti sposoben sprejeti odgovornost za to odločitev.
The liberalisation will have positive effects on the employment in the EU and finally the individual consumer will be able to have the freedom of choice and should be able to accept the responsibility for that choice.
Liberalizacija sekundarnega trga nadomestnih delov je pravilna pot naprej.
A liberalisation of the secondary market of spare parts is the right way forward.
Odbor za ekonomske in monetarne zadeve poziva Odbor za pravne zadeve, da kot pristojni odbor v svoje poročilo vključi naslednje predloge sprememb:
The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs calls on the Committee on Legal Affairs, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:
(1) ker je glavni namen varstva modelov podeliti ekskluzivne pravice za zunanji videz izdelka, ne pa tudi monopola za sam izdelek; ker bi varstvo modelov, za katere ni nobene druge praktične rešitve, vodilo v monopol nad izdelki; ker bi se tako varstvo približalo zlorabi režima modelov; ker se, če se tretjim strankam omogočita izdelava in distribucija nadomestnih delov, ohrani konkurenca; ker bi tretje stranke, če bi se varstvo modelov razširilo na nadomestne dele, kršile te pravice, konkurenca bi bila odstranjena in imetniku pravice iz modela bi bil dejansko dodeljen monopol nad izdelkom;
(1) Whereas the sole purpose of design protection is to grant exclusive rights to the appearance of a product, but not a monopoly over the product as such; whereas protecting designs for which there is no practical alternative would lead in fact to a product monopoly; whereas such protection would come close to an abuse of the design regime; whereas if thirds parties are allowed to produce and distribute spare parts, competition is maintained; whereas if design protection is extended to spare parts, such third parties infringe those rights, competition is eliminated and the holder of the design right is de facto given a product monopoly,
(1) ker je glavni namen varstva modelov podeliti ekskluzivne pravice za zunanji videz izdelka, ne pa tudi monopola za sam izdelek ali za njegove sestavne dele ; ker bi varstvo modelov, za katere ni nobene druge praktične rešitve, povzročilo monopol nad izdelki, ki nastanejo iz tega ; ker bi se tako varstvo približalo zlorabi režima modelov; ker se, če se tretjim strankam omogočita izdelava in distribucija nadomestnih delov, namenjenih popravilom, ohrani konkurenca; ker bi tretje stranke, če bi se varstvo modelov razširilo na nadomestne dele, kršile te pravice, konkurenca bi bila odstranjena in imetniku pravice iz modela bi bil dejansko dodeljen monopol nad izdelkom;
(1) Whereas the sole purpose of design protection is to grant exclusive rights to the appearance of a product, but not a monopoly over the product as such or the component parts thereof ; whereas protecting designs for which there is no practical alternative would lead in fact to a product monopoly on the products for which they were used; whereas such protection would come close to an abuse of the design regime; whereas if third parties are allowed to produce and distribute spare parts for repair purposes , competition is maintained; whereas if design protection is extended to spare parts, such third parties infringe those rights, competition is eliminated and the holder of the design right is de facto given a product monopoly,
UVODNA IZJAVA 3A (novo)
Recital 3 A (new)
(3a) odprava varstva modelov za vidne nadomestne dele, namenjene popravilom, bo odprla nove možnosti malim in srednje velikim podjetjem ter prinesla ugodno ponudbo za potrošnike;
(3a) The abolishment of protection of design for visible spare parts for repair purposes leads to new liberties for small and medium-sized enterprises and favourable offers for the consumer,
UVODNA IZJAVA 3B (novo)
RECITAL 3 B (new)
(3b) ker je na podlagi opredelitve „originalnih nadomestnih delov“ in „kakovostno enakovrednih nadomestnih delov“ v skladu z Uredbo 1400/2002, členom 1(t) in (u), ter na podlagi člena 4(i), (j), (k) in (l) Uredbe 1400/2002 omejitev trgovine z avtomobilskimi nadomestnimi deli prepovedana;
(3b) Whereas in the light of the definitions of ‘original spare parts’ and ‘spare parts of matching quality’ set out in Article 1(1)(t) and (u) of Regulation (EC) No 1400/2002 and of Article 4(1)(i), (j), (k), and (l) thereof, restrictions on trade in automotive spare parts should be prohibited,
Liberalizacija trga nadomestnih delov je sestavni del liberalizacije celotnega avtomobilskega sektorja, uvedene leta 2002 z Uredbo o skupinskih izjemah za motorna vozila.
Liberalisation of the spare parts market is central to the liberalisation of the entire motor vehicle sector introduced under the block exemption regulation (Regulation (EC) No 1400/2002).
Zato omejitev trgovine z nadomestnimi deli in monopol avtomobilskih proizvajalcev na tem področju pod pretvezo „varstva modelov“ ovirata jasno veljavno konkurenčno pravo in ju je treba zato odpraviti.
That being the case, the restrictions imposed on spare parts trade and the monopoly accorded to the motor manufacturers – the pretext in each case being ‘design protection’ – are plainly contrary to current competition law and should consequently be removed.