Activities of Claude GRUFFAT related to 2021/2007(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on an intellectual property action plan to support the EU’s recovery and resilience
Amendments (8)
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Notes that consumers generally link GIs and TSGs to localised and extensive production, respectful of animal welfare; calls on the Commission to propose binding rules on the origin of ingredients and on environmental, social and animal welfare conditions in the framework of the revision of the corresponding legislation, in order to match the consumers’ perception of GIs and TSGs and to contribute to the goals of the European Green Deal;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that promotion campaigns raise consumer awareness about these products, making it easy to identify their authenticity and, indirectly, to protect them against usurpation and imitations; calls on the Commission to strengthen GI and TSG promotional campaigns in the next revision of the corresponding legislation, including with the aim to increase local consumption, support short supply chains and a healthy, resilient and sustainable territorialised food systems ;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers it essential to protectdesign intellectual property rights to promotin a way that promotes sustainable innovation, in particular with the aim of introducing more resilient agricultural varieties to cope with climate change and achieve the objectives of the European Green Deal;, achieve a sustainable and agro-ecological farming model protective of natural resources, and achieve the objectives of the European Green Deal; highlights also the potential of non- protected reproductive material, like heterogeneous material and non- registered varieties, for better adapting crops to local soil and climatic conditions and to meet the growing needs of varieties adapted to organic farming, and calls on the Commission to give them a more solid legal status in the framework of the upcoming revision of the seed legislation:
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Insists, however, that intellectual property rights should not lead to a reduction in the diversity of species and varieties and a loss of independence for farmers; also insists that farmers must remain the owners of their seeds and breeding material. highlights in that regard the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas, and notably its article 19 on the right to seed; notes that patents have been linked to overconcentration of markets, notably in the seed sector in countries where they are predominantly used, leading to quasi-monopoles and higher prices for some crop species; also insists that farmers must remain the owners of their seeds and breeding material; in consequence, calls on the Commission to propose a change to Regulation (EC) No2100/94 in order to extend to all crops the so called farmers’ privilege in its article 14 (1); recalls that Directive 98/44/EC explicitly excludes from patentability animals and plant varieties obtained through essentially biological processes and remains vigilant concerning the strict implementation of this principle by the European Patent Office; points out that this ban includes conventional techniques for the breeding of plants and animals and the products obtained by these conventional techniques, as well as all plants and animals of the public domain, which constitute a common heritage for all;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Opposes any patenting of live animals;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Highlights the importance of respecting the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization while designing intellectual property legislation for plants and animals, including for their genetic description and for gene banks, so that natural and collectively bred genetic resources are not appropriated by private actors;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. Points out that data on agriculture and farmland is of public interest but that farmers’ ownership, access to and control of their own farm data must be protected; notes that big data platforms in the agricultural sector are owned by a few large corporations, which enables them to have control over the market and a competitive advantage; highlights that small farmers are having to buy from these large corporations data that concerns their own farms if they want access to it, which poses risks to the privacy, profitability and independence of farmers, and to food security and sovereignty;
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6 d. Calls on the Commission to ensure that data collected or created with help of public funds stay public and are not appropriated by private companies;