Examples of using Computer-implemented in English and their translations into Danish
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
-
Medicine
-
Financial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Official/political
-
Computer
Software and computer-implemented inventions were the talking points a few months ago.
Therefore, a new proposal dealing specifically with the patentability of computer-implemented inventions would not be desirable.
Why should we not patent computer-implemented inventions, which benefit us all in our everyday lives?
We cannot be left behind and we must regulate here in Europe as well the possibility of registering computer-implemented inventions as patents.
Europe needs some form of patentability on computer-implemented inventions, but tomorrow we are not going to get it.
It is only right that individual inventors and companies should be able to take out patents on their inventions,including computer-implemented inventions.
Indeed, the potential patentability of computer-implemented inventions is already accepted in current European Patent Office practice.
Mr President, Commissioner, our starting point is also that we do not think that the patent is the right way to protect computer-implemented inventions.
Recognising that in order tobe patentable, a computer-implemented invention must have an industrial application is a step in the right direction.
Once again the European Parliament has failed to listen to the voice of reason andhas accepted the principle of the patentability of computer-implemented inventions.
Without a doubt computer-implemented inventions- genuine inventions which, in some cases, are the result of 10 to 15 years' R&D investment- are important for the European economy.
Surely there is plenty of material to work on, since tens of thousands of computer-implemented inventions have already been patented in Europe.
Mr Rocard, your amendments really focus on little more than programs on personal computers rather than the vast array of important technology that depends on computer-implemented inventions.
Mr President, the Commission proposal on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions before Parliament is not, as some opponents of the directive have suggested, a new phenomenon.
At first reading,we voted on an amendment in which the Commission was requested to report on the effect of computer-implemented inventions on SMEs.
The question of how to define the patentability of computer-implemented inventions is thus becoming steadily more important, especially as such inventions are estimated to cover 15% of new patent applications.
The directive states this quite explicitly, and it is also prevented by the fact that patent protection for computer-implemented inventions requires a technical contribution.
One need only think of the increasingly frequent convergence of information technology and telecommunications, allowing businesses to supply anduse integrated software packages and computer-implemented services.
In its vote of 6 July 2005, Parliament rejected the Council common position on the directive on computer-implemented inventions, which implies rejection of the proposed directive.
What our economy does, of course, need, though, is patents, for patents denote and indicate a knowledge-based economy, which produces such things as technical advances, inventions with such additional requirements as novelty,whether they be computer-based, computer-implemented or computer-managed.
I was able to follow the proceedings from the very beginning, and none of the things that have gone on in relation to this draft directive on computer-implemented inventions can be described as everyday legislative work at European Union level.
The Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy is therefore positive about the aim of this proposal:recognition of the patentability of computer-implemented inventions and more transparent rules.