Activities of Stéphane SÉJOURNÉ related to 2021/2007(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on an intellectual property action plan to support the EU’s recovery and resilience
Amendments (21)
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3 a (new)
Citation 3 a (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 6 October 2015 with recommendations to the Commission on the possible extension of geographical indication protection of the European Union to non-agricultural products,1a _________________ 1a Texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0331.
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the Commission to continue supporting the ability of European companies to innovate on the basis of a comprehensive intellectual property regime, in order to maintain effective protection for their R&D investments, to secure fair returns through licensing and, at the same time, to continue developing open technology standards that support competition and choice as well as the participation of EU industry in the development of key technologies at global level;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is convinced that support for SMEs, including financial and non-financial measures, is the right way to provide them with better access to IPRs and that the Union’s financial instruments are of the utmost importance in this context; calls on the Commission and the EUIPO, therefore, to continue implementing IP management support measures for SMEs in the context of the economic recovery, including the provision of one-stop shop access to information and related services and advice about IP; stresses that this support will help to leverage and promote all national and regional initiatives of members of the European Union Intellectual Property Network (EUIPN);
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Recalls that innovative SMEs benefit from a consistent European patent system, and underlines that the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA) and its Rules of Procedure represent a carefully balanced solution reflecting the Union's fundamental principles of proportionality, flexibility, fairness and equity;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that the supplementary protection certificate (SPC) regime within the EU, while of great practical relevance, suffers from fragmented implementation across the Member States; urges the Commission to issue guidelines for the Member States and address this fragmentation, including by legislative proposals;
Amendment 83 #
12. Asks the Commission to further investigate, together with the relevant stakeholders, the requirements for an independent system of third-party essentiality checks by identifying the demand for, assessing the impact of and defining the role that resources such as emerging technologies like AI and/or technical expertise contributed by the EPO could play in that context, and to use the knowledge gained as input for the legislative initiative on SEP envisaged for the beginning of 2022 based on appropriate impact assessments;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Highlights the value of existing industry-led voluntary initiatives to facilitate SEP licensing for the Internet of Things, such as licensing pools, which bring together the vast majority of European and international cellular technology developers;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -14 a (new)
Paragraph -14 a (new)
-14a. Believes that the recognition of GIs for non-agricultural products is relevant to the priorities of EU programmes being developed, including those of the Industrial Strategy, with the development of short supply chains, as well as the Green Deal by fostering locally-made products with greater traceability and transparency on the origin of the product and manufacturing processes deployed;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Supports the Commission in its initiative to establish EU sui generis protection of geographical indications (GIs) for non-agricultural products in order to align to the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications, which the EU has signed and which includes the possibility to protect GIs for both agricultural and non-agricultural products; expects the Commission to propose legislation in this regard as soon as possible and at the end of 2021 at the latest;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Emphasizes that the introduction of an EU sui generis protection system of geographical indications for non- agricultural products will have a positive economic impact on microenterprises and SMEs, as well as a general impact on employment, development and tourism in rural areas, which could in particular help the EU’s recovery after the COVID- 19 crisis; believes that such sui generis protection of non-agricultural GIs would also facilitate access to third country markets through EU trade agreements;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -16 a (new)
Paragraph -16 a (new)
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the Commission’s willingness to revise Union legislation on design protection to better support the transition to the digital and green economy and calls on the Commission to update the registration procedure to allow for new forms of design to be protected in an easy and less burdensome way; calls on the Commission to further harmonise the application and invalidation procedures in the Member States;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses that while rights attached to trade marks are enforceable against infringing goods transiting though the EU, those attached to design are not; calls on the Commission to close this gap in the revision of the design legislation and make it possible for brand owners to put a stop to design counterfeits transiting through the EU; believes that the EU Design protection system should be aligned with the EU Trademark system in order to allow for design holders to prevent design infringing goods to enter into the EU’s customs territory and should encompass all customs situations, including situations, where such goods are not intended to be released for free circulation in the European Union;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Considers that there should be no private use exception of 3D printed designs and that copies of infringing 3D printed files for private and non- commercial use have to be considered as design infringement;
Amendment 118 #
19. Points out that counterfeit goods, in particularsuch as, for example, counterfeit medicines andor fake personal protective equipment andor masks in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, can have serious impacts on the health of EU citizens and can cause serious harm to public health; argues that although market surveillance activities are aimed at protecting general public interests, while counterfeited products relate to the protection of private intellectual property rights, there is a close relation between counterfeited products and risks to health and safety of consumers;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Calls on the Commission to take concrete actions to monitor wilful infringement of intellectual property rights, where infringement is used in bad faith as a deliberate commercial strategy;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Stresses that the Internet is significantly used to distribute counterfeit products and IPR-infringing services and welcomes the proposal of the Commission for a Digital Services Act; highlights the fact that proactive measures from intermediaries would contribute enormously to the fight against counterfeiting and that AI and blockchain could play an important role in detecting counterfeited and piracy and enforcing IPR in the whole supply chainted goods available online as well as contribute to enhanced enforcement of IPR in the whole supply chain, from extracting raw materials to selling the final product; supports, therefore, the use of new technologies to combat IP infringements and welcomes publications produced by the EUIPO Observatory in this respect, in order to further promote the use of these new technologies;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Suggests to further clarify how rights holders, intermediaries and law enforcement authorities at national and at EU level could ameliorate their cooperation and how they could extend data sharing on counterfeited goods, detected online, with each other; recommends that domain name registries and registrars are included in the list of shared data, in line with data protection rules, in order to enhance the effectiveness of IPR enforcement;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Highlights that IP protection related to AI technologies is important and that even though current rules on the protection of computer-implemented inventions by patents may cover AI technologies, clear criteria for the protection of inventions created with the help of AI technologies are necessary; asks the Commission, therefore, in cooperation with the EPO and EUIPO, to provide legal certainty on this subject and to follow the issue closely at international level in the WIPO; underlines that AI and related technologies used for the registration procedure to grant IPRs cannot be a substitute for human review carried out on a case-by-case basis, in order to ensure the quality and fairness of decisions;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Regretcalls the fact that the Commission’s 2016 study on p"Patent aAssertion eEntities (PAE) in Europe"10 did not provide a clear answer to the question of whether the business models of some PAE, consisting in acquiring patents from third parties and seeking to generate revenue by asserting them against alleged infringers by misusing litigation asymmetries, abuse loopholes in existing legislation and thereforeconcluded that the EU legal framework already provides for safeguards against abusive behaviour; nevertheless encourages the European Commission to constitute a problem that should be tackled; calls the Commissionnue monitoring this issue and to carry out an in-depth study on this issueies where needed; _________________ 10European Commission Joint Research Centre, Patent Assertion Entities in Europe: Their impact on innovation and knowledge transfer in ICT markets, 2016.
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Suggests that , as a political priority, an IP coordinator be established at European level in order to ensure a holistic and coordinated approach to EU IP policy and enhance cooperation between the different national IP authorities, the Directorates-General of the Commission and other bodies in charge of IPR, such as the EPO, EUIPO and WIPO; the IP coordinator would further promote the fight against counterfeiting at highest political level, which becomes necessary due to the scale of practice of counterfeiting, its upwards trend and the negative impact counterfeited goods have on consumers and businesses alike;