natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Ta uredba temelji na jezikovni ureditvi Evropskega patentnega urada in se ne sme obravnavati, kot da vzpostavlja posebno jezikovno ureditev za Unijo ali precedens za omejeno jezikovno ureditev v kakršnem koli prihodnjem pravnem instrumentu Unije.
This Regulation is based on the linguistic regime of the European Patent Office and should not be regarded as creating a specific linguistic regime for the Union, or as creating a precedent for a limited language regime in any future legal instrument of the Union.
Ob objavi patentne prijave in podeljenega patenta se da strojne prevode patentnih prijav in spisov v vse jezike Unije iz člena 6(3), ko so pripravljeni, brezplačno na voljo na spletu.
Once available, the machine translations of patent applications and specifications into all languages of the Union as referred to in Article 6(3) shall be made available online and free of charge on publication of the patent application and of the granted patent.
Po koncu prehodnega obdobja iz člena 6 in v skladu s členom 12 Uredbe št. xx/xx [materialne določbe] sodelujoče države članice v skladu s členom 143 EPK Evropskemu patentnemu uradu naložijo, da objavi dodatne celotne prevode spisov v angleški jezik, če je prijavitelj prostovoljno zagotovil tak dodaten prevod.
After the end of the transitional period referred to in Article 6 and in accordance with Article 12 of Regulation xx/xx [substantive provisions], the participating Member States shall, pursuant to Article 143 of the EPC, give the European Patent Office the task of publishing an additional full translation of the specification into English, if such additional translation has been provided voluntarily by the applicant.
Tak prevod ni opravljen avtomatizirano.
Such translation shall not be carried out by automated means.
V primeru spora glede evropskega patenta z enotnim učinkom imetnik patenta na zahtevo in po izbiri domnevnega kršitelja zagotovi celoten prevod patenta v uradni jezik sodelujoče države članice, v kateri se je zgodila domnevna kršitev ali v kateri ima domnevni kršitelj stalno prebivališče.
In the case of a dispute relating to a European patent with unitary effect, the patent proprietor shall provide at the request and the choice of an alleged infringer, a full translation of the patent into an official language of the participating Member State in which either the alleged infringement took place or in which the alleged infringer is domiciled.
V primeru spora glede evropskega patenta z enotnim učinkom imetnik patenta med sodnim postopkom na zahtevo sodišča, pristojnega za spore glede evropskih patentov z enotnim učinkom na ozemljih sodelujočih držav članic, zagotovi celoten prevod patenta v jezik postopka navedenega sodišča.
In the case of a dispute relating to a European patent with unitary effect, the patent proprietor shall provide in the course of legal proceedings, at the request of a court competent in the territories of the participating Member States for disputes concerning European patents with unitary effect, a full translation of the patent into the language of the proceedings of that court.
V primeru spora glede odškodninskega zahtevka sodišče, ki obravnava spor, upošteva, da je domnevni kršitelj, preden je prejel prevod iz odstavka 1, morda ravnal v dobri veri in ni vedel ali upravičeno ni mogel vedeti, da krši patent.
In the case of a dispute concerning a claim for damages, the court hearing the dispute shall take into consideration that the alleged infringer may have acted without knowing or having reasonable grounds to know that he was infringing the patent before having been provided with the translation referred to in paragraph 1.
V primeru spora o odškodninskem zahtevku sodišče, ki obravnava spor, upošteva, zlasti v primeru malih in srednjih podjetij, fizičnih oseb, neprofitnih organizacij, univerz in javnih raziskovalnih organizacij, ali je domnevni kršitelj, preden je prejel prevod iz odstavka 1, morda ravnal v dobri veri in ni vedel ali upravičeno ni mogel vedeti, da krši patent.
In the case of a dispute concerning a claim for damages, the court hearing the dispute shall take into consideration whether, especially if it is a small or medium-sized enterprise, a natural person, a non-profit organisation, a university or a public research organisation, the alleged infringer has acted without knowing or having reasonable grounds to know that he was infringing the patent before having been provided with the translation referred to in paragraph 1.
Glede na to, da se evropske patentne prijave lahko vložijo v katerem koli jeziku iz člena 14(2) EPK, v skladu s členom 12 Uredbe xx/xx [materialne določbe] sodelujoče države članice v skladu s členom 143 EPK dodelijo Evropskemu patentnemu uradu nalogo upravljanja sistema za nadomestila za povrnitev vseh stroškov prevajanja do določene zgornje meje iz pristojbin iz člena 13 navedene uredbe, in sicer za prijavitelje, ki pri Evropskem patentnem uradu vložijo patentne prijave v enem od uradnih jezikov Unije, ki ni uradni jezik Evropskega patentnega urada.
Given the fact that European patent applications may be filed in any language under Article 14(2) of the EPC, in accordance with Article 12 of Regulation xx/xx [substantive provisions], the participating Member States, shall give, within the meaning of Article 143 of the EPC, the European Patent Office the task of administering a compensation scheme of reimbursing all translation costs up to a ceiling, from the fees referred to in Article 13 of that Regulation, for applicants filing patent applications at the European Patent Office in one of the official languages of the Union that is not an official language of the European Patent Office.
Sistem nadomestil iz odstavka 1 se financira iz pristojbin iz člena 13 Uredbe št. xx/xx [materialne določbe] in je na voljo samo malim in srednjim podjetjem, fizičnim osebam, neprofitnim organizacijam, univerzam in javnim raziskovalnim organizacijam s stalnim bivališčem ali glavnim krajem poslovanja v državi članici Unije.
The compensation scheme referred to in paragraph 1 shall be funded through the fees referred to in Article 13 of Regulation xx/xx [substantive provisions] and shall be available only for small and medium-sized enterprises, natural persons , non profit organisations , universities and public research organisations having their residence or principal place of business within a Member State of the Union.
Taki prevodi niso opravljeni avtomatizirano.
Such translations shall not be carried out by automated means.
Uporablja se od [določen bo poseben datum, ki se bo ujemal z datumom začetka uporabe Uredbe xx/xx o izvajanju okrepljenega sodelovanja na področju uvedbe enotnega patentnega varstva] .
It shall apply from [a specific date will be set and it will coincide with the date of application of Regulation xx/xx on the implementation of enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection] .
Uporablja se od 1 . januarja 2014 ali od datuma začetka veljavnosti sporazuma o enotnem patentnem sodišču, karkoli nastopi pozneje.
It shall apply from 1 January 2014 or from the date of entry into force of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court , whichever is the later.
Dobro delujoč patentni sistem se je zmožen odzivati na dejanske potrebe svojih uporabnikov ter igra zelo pomembno vlogo za gospodarsko rast in konkurenčnost Evropske unije.
A well-functioning patent system that is able to meet the real needs of users plays a vital role in the economic growth and competitiveness of the EU.
2 Glej Gambardella et al.
1 Cfr Gambardella et al.
(2006): Study on evaluating the knowledge economy - What are patents actually worth?
(2006): 'Study on evaluating the knowledge economy - What are patents actually worth?
The value of patents for today's economy and society, dostopno na spletnem mestu: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/indprop/docs/patent/studies/patentstudy-report_en.pdf.
The value of patents for today's economy and society' – can be consulted on the following website: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/indprop/docs/patent/studies/patentstudy-report_en.pdf.
Države članice si že skoraj pol stoletja prizadevajo doseči enotno patentno zaščito znotraj Evropske unije.
The aim of achieving unitary patent protection within the EU has been pursued by the Member States for nearly half a century.
Po tem, ko ni bilo mogoče doseči dogovora o enotnem patentu skupnosti, je bila leta 1973 sklenjena tako imenovana münchenska konvencija
Further to the impossibility of reaching agreement on a Community patent, in 1973 the so-called Munich Convention
K münchenski konvenciji, ki je bila podpisana 5. oktobra 1973, je doslej pristopilo 38 držav.
At present 38 countries are party to the Munich Convention, signed on 5 October 1973.
Konvencija je omogočila ustanovitev Evropske patentne organizacije 7. oktobra 1977, ki jo sestavljata dva organa: Evropski patentni urad in Upravni odbor.
The Convention led to the establishment, on 7 October 1977, of the European Patent Organisation, which has two bodies: the European Patent Office and the Administrative Council.
Konvencija omogoča dodelitev evropskega patenta preko enega samega postopka dodelitve.
The Convention enables a European patent to be granted through a single procedure.
Po dodelitvi evropskega patenta mora imetnik patenta zahtevati, da tega priznajo države pogodbenice konvencije na podlagi posameznih nacionalnih predpisov in postopkov priznanja. , h kateri so nato pristopile vse države, ki so danes članice Unije.
Once the European patent has been granted, it is up to the patent holder to request that it be recognised by the contracting states, on the basis of the relevant individual national regulations and recognition procedures. was drawn up, to which all current EU Member States subsequently acceded.
Vseeno pa centraliziran postopek, ki je predviden v tej konvenciji, ni omogočil preseganja poglavitnih preprek za razvoj evropskega patentnega sistema.
The centralised procedure provided for by the Convention did not, however, enable the main barriers to the development of the European patent system to be removed.
Zlasti kar zadeva visoko raven pravne negotovosti
In particular, the high level of legal uncertainty
Skupni stroški sodnih postopkov, sproženih vzporedno v štirih državah članicah, v katerih trenutno poteka največji del sodnih postopkov na področju patentov (Nemčija, Francija, Združeno kraljestvo in Nizozemska), znašajo med 310.000 EUR in 1.950.000 EUR na prvi stopnji ter med 320.000 EUR in 1.390.000 EUR na drugi stopnji.
The accumulated costs of parallel litigation in the four Member States that currently have the bulk of patent litigation cases (Germany, France, United Kingdom and the Netherlands) vary between €310 000 and €1 950 000 at first instance and €320 000 and €1 390 000 at second instance.
Skupni stroški potrjevanja evropskega patenta v povprečju dosegajo 12.500 EUR, če se patent potrdi v 13 državah članicah, in več kot 32.000 EUR, če se potrdi v celotni EU.
The overall cost of validation of a European patent reaches, on average, €12 500 if validated in 13 Member States and over €32 000 if validated in the whole EU.
Glej van Pottelsberghe, Bruno in François Didier (2006): The Cost Factor in Patent Systems, Université Libre de Bruxelles, delovni dokument WP-CEB 06-002. .
Cfr. van Pottelsberghe, Bruno and François Didier (2006): The Cost Factor in Patent Systems , Universitè Libre de Bruxelles, Working Paper WP-CEB 06-002. .
Sovpadanje omenjenih omejitev je podlaga patentnega sistema, ki je izjemno razdrobljen in premalo konkurenčen v mednarodnem merilu.
The concomitance of these limitations has led to a patent system that is extremely fragmented and insufficiently competitive internationally.
Glej SEC(2010)796: Ocena učinka Komisije glede ureditve prevajanja za patent Evropske unije, str.
SEC(2010)796: Commission impact assessment on the translation arrangements for the EU patent, p.
Stališče poročevalca o ureditvi prevajanja
Rapporteur's position on the translation arrangements
2.1 Predhodne ugotovitve in prednostne naloge
2.1 Preliminary remarks and priorities
Četudi sedanji predlog temelji na delovnih jezikih Evropskega patentnega urada in je plod težavnega političnega kompromisa, se poročevalcu zdi potrebno ohranjati in spodbujati čim širšo uporabo angleščine, saj je to prevladujoč jezik v mednarodnih gospodarskih odnosih.
Although the current proposal is based on the working languages of the European Patent Office and is the result of a difficult political compromise, your rapporteur considers it necessary to protect and promote, as far as possible, the English language, as the language which is predominantly used in international trade relations.
V zvezi s tem velja opozoriti, da je že sedaj v angleškem jeziku
In this regard, it is worth noting that 77%
Glej van Pottelsberghe, Bruno (2010): Europe should stop taxing innovation.
Cfr. v. Pottelsberghe, Bruno (2010): Europe should stop taxing innovation .
Bruegel Policy Brief, 2010/02, str.
Bruegel Policy Brief, 2010/02, p.
6. vseh patentnih prijav, vloženih pri Evropskem patentnem uradu.
6. of all patent applications filed at the EPO are already in English
Iz tega podatka je enostavno sklepati, da angleščina že sedaj predstavlja jezikovno izbiro podjetniškega in akademskega sektorja, povezanega z dejavnostmi tehnoloških raziskav in inovacij.
From this it is easy to deduce that English is now the language of choice of the business and academic sector as far as technological research activities and innovation are concerned.
Temu velja dodati, da je angleščina dejansko tehnični jezik par excellence, kar potrjuje dejstvo, da 95 % znanstvenih revij s področja raziskav in razvoja objavlja v angleščini
In addition, English is in fact the technical language par excellence, as evidenced by the fact that 95% of all scientific reviews in R&D sectors are published in English
Glej van Pottelsberghe, Bruno (2010), op. cit., str.
Cfr. van Pottelsberghe, Bruno (2010), op. cit., p.
Poročevalec nadalje meni, da evropska mala in srednja podjetja še naprej trpijo zaradi manjše produktivnosti in počasnejšega razvoja v primerjavi s podobnimi podjetji v ZDA in v drugih rastočih gospodarstvih, zlasti na področju inovacij.
Your rapporteur also believes that European SMEs are continuing to suffer from lower productivity and slower development compared to their counterparts in the US and in other emerging economies, especially as far as innovation is concerned.
Tovrstne težave je sicer zaznala že Komisija v svojem sporočilu iz leta 2007, ki je bilo namenjeno ponovnemu odprtju razprave o evropskem patentnem sistemu.
This difficulty was also identified by the Commission in its 2007 communication aiming to reopen the debate on the European patent system.
Komisija je kot glavne razloge za pomanjkljivo sodelovanje malih in srednjih podjetij na trgu patentov opredelila: pomanjkanje razpoložljivega svetovanja, zlasti v fazi raziskav, in stroški, ki so pogosto nevzdržni
The Commission pointed out that the main reasons for the lack of participation by SMEs in the patent market were the lack of available advisory services – especially at the research stage – and the costs, which were all too often unsustainable
Tudi sama mala in srednja podjetja so v fazi posvetovanja o prihodnosti patentnega sistema v Evropi
During the consultation on the future of the patent system in Europe
Dostopno na: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/indprop/patent/consultation_en.htm. opozorila na potrebo po specifični podpori, zlasti kar zadeva stroške prevajanja, patentne raziskave in pravno varstvo.
Commission report on the preliminary findings of the consultation available at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/indprop/patent/consultation_en.htm. the SMEs themselves drew attention to the need for specific support, in particular with reference to the costs of translation, patent research and legal protection.
Enaka potreba je bila izražena tudi v fazi posvetovanj o Aktu za mala podjetja, kjer so mala in srednja podjetja opredelila visoke stroške in pravno kompleksnost patentnega sistema kot najpomembnejše ovire pri dostopanju do evropskega trga patentov ter izrazila potrebo po patentnem sistemu, ki bo enostavnejši, dostopen in stroškovno manj obremenjujoč
The same requirement was expressed during the consultations on the Small Business Act, in which SMEs maintained that the main obstacles to access to the European patent market were the high costs and legal complexity of the patent system, stressing the need for a simplified, accessible patent system with reduced costs
Glej naslednje prispevke v postopku posvetovanja: DI (Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie – državna zveza nemške industrije), DIHK (Deutscher Industrie- und Handelskammertag – nemška gospodarska zbornica), CBI (Confederation of British Industries – konfederacija britanske industrije) in UEAPME (European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises – evropsko združenje obrtnih, malih in srednjih podjetij), dostopno na: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/small-business-act/. .
Cfr. the following contributions to the consultation process: BDI (Bundesverband der deutschen Industrie), DIHK (Deutscher Industrie- und Handelskammertag), CBI (Confederation of British Industries) and UEAPME (European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises), Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/small-business-act/. .
(2009): The cost factor in patent systems, Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 2009:9(4), 329–355. so večkrat potrdile potrebo po specifičnih ukrepih, s katerimi bi se podpiral dostop malih in srednjih podjetij do evropskega trga patentov.
Cfr.: Van Pottelsberghe, B. and Danguy, J.(2010): Patent fees for a sustainable EU (community) patent system ; Van Pottelsberghe, B. and Francois, D. (2009): The cost factor in patent systems , Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 2009:9(4), 329 - 355. .
Glej Harhoff, D., Hoisl, K., van Pottelsberghe, B.
Harhoff, D., Hoisl, K., van Pottelsberghe, B. (2009): Languages, fees and the international scope of patenting , Ecore Discussion Paper, n.
(2009):Languages, fees and the international scope of patenting, dokument za razpravo Ecore, št. 50. , zaradi česar je bil oviran tudi razvoj inovacij znotraj EU.
50. , thus hampering the development of innovation in the EU.
Poročevalec soglaša z omenjenimi spodbudami in s potrebo po specifičnih ukrepih, s katerimi bi se podpiral dostop MSP do evropskega trga patentov in do inovacij.
Your rapporteur agrees with the above-mentioned requests and the need for specific measures to facilitate the access of SMEs to the European patent market and to innovation.
V zvezi s tem je poročevalec prepričan, da so zakonodajni ukrepi na področju patentne zaščite na ravni Unije dobra priložnost za odziv na zahteve, ki so jih izrazila mala in srednja podjetja, zlasti na področju stroškov in pravne pomoči.
In this regard, he is convinced that the legislative measures concerning unitary patent protection provide an excellent opportunity to respond to the requests expressed by SMEs, in particular as far as costs and legal support are concerned.
2.2 Predlogi sprememb
2.2 Proposed amendments
Ureditev prevajanja za evropski patent z enotnim učinkom
Translation arrangements for the European patent with unitary effect
Poročevalec namerava ohraniti odločitev, po kateri se jezikovna ureditev opira na delovne jezike Evropskega patentnega urada, kar je rezultat ocene učinka Komisije
Your rapporteur intends to retain the decision to base the linguistic arrangements on the working languages of the EPO, in accordance with the outcome of the impact assessment carried out by the Commission
23–25. in je v skladu s sklepom Sveta 2011/167/EU o odobritvi okrepljenega sodelovanja na področju uvedbe enotnega patentnega varstva.
23 - 25. and with Council Decision 2011/167/EU, which authorises enhanced cooperation in the area of unitary patent protection.
Vseeno je poročevalec kritičen do izbire instrumenta, kot je okrepljeno sodelovanje, za področje, ki je neločljivo povezano z notranjim trgom.
That said, your rapporteur is somewhat critical that an instrument such as enhanced cooperation has been chosen in a sector that is integral to the internal market.
Ob upoštevanju omenjenega in v upanju, da se bodo čim prej vključile vse države članice EU, poročevalec namerava opozoriti, da izbrana jezikovna ureditev ne sme predstavljati precedensa omejene jezikovne ureditve za katerikoli pravni instrument Unije v prihodnosti (glej predlog spremembe 8).
Accordingly, while hoping that all EU Member States will soon be able to participate, your rapporteur wishes to point out that the linguistic arrangements chosen should not set a precedent for a limited language regime in any future legal instrument of the Union (see Amendment 8).
Glede na že omenjene podatke poročevalec meni, da bi moral biti patentni sistem usmerjen v uporabo angleščine.
Equally, in the light of the above information, your rapporteur takes the view that the patent system should be oriented towards the use of the English language.
V zvezi s tem se zaveda težav, ki bi jih za Evropski patentni urad in del njegovih uporabnikov predstavljal neposreden in celovit prehod v enojezikovni patentni sistem.
In this regard, he is aware of the difficulties that a direct shift to a monolingual patent system would involve for the European Patent Office and for some of its users.
Poročevalec vseeno meni, da je treba uporabnikom ponuditi možnost usmerjanja sistema v k uporabi angleščine, da bi se lahko odločali, kako najbolje propagirati in zaščititi svoje izume.
Nevertheless, your rapporteur is of the opinion that users should be offered the possibility of steering the system towards the use of English, in order to decide how better to publicise and protect their own inventions.
V ta namen poročevalec predlaga, da se ob izteku prehodnega obdobja, določenega v členu 6 uredbe, Evropskemu patentnemu uradu zaupa naloga čimprejšnje objave prevoda evropskega patentnega spisa v angleščino, ki ga sicer prostovoljno na svoje stroške predloži prijavitelj (glej predloga sprememb 7 in 10).
Your rapporteur therefore proposes that at the end of the transitional period governed by Article 6 of the regulation, the European Patent Office should be given the task of publishing a translation into English of the specification of the European patent as provided voluntarily by the applicant at his or her expense (see Amendments 7 and 10).
Poročevalec meni, da bo na ta način prijavitelj lahko kar najbolje promoviral svoj izum in se istočasno zaščitil pred morebitno zlorabo klavzule o dobri veri (glej člen 4(4)) s strani domnevnega kršitelja
Your rapporteur believes that this will enable applicants to give greater publicity to their inventions, whilst protecting themselves from any misuse of the 'good faith' clause (see Article 4(4)) by alleged infringers
Predlog uredbe določa, da mora pristojno sodišče oceniti vse okoliščine v posamezni zadevi in med drugim v času prehodnega obdobja tudi predložen prevod skupaj z zahtevkom za enotni učinek (glej uvodno izjavo 8). .
The proposal for a regulation stipulates that the competent court should assess all the circumstances of the individual case including, inter alia , during the transitional period, the translation submitted together with the request for unitary effect (see recital 8). .
2.2.2 Posebni ukrepi v korist malih in srednjih podjetij
2.2.2 Specific measures for SMEs
Poročevalec soglaša s tem, kar so izrazili uporabniki sistema, in sicer, da je treba prednostno zmanjšati stroške, ki jih imajo mala in srednja podjetja, ter istočasno povečati pravno varstvo, ki se zagotavlja tem podjetjem (glej predlog spremembe 1).
As expressed by the users of the system, your rapporteur agrees that priority should be given to reducing the costs incurred by small and medium-sized enterprises, whilst at the same time increasing the legal protection they are afforded (see Amendment 1).
Kar zadeva ta zadnji vidik, poročevalec pozdravlja določbo iz člena 4 predloga, ki je namenjena zaščiti dobre vere kršitelja.
In relation to the latter, your rapporteur welcomes the provision set out in Article 4 of the proposal, designed to protect the good faith of infringers.