Message 04323 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxdeT04323 Message: 1/1 L0 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

[ox] Kulturvielfalt vs Patentkosten



Unter

        International Network for Safeguarding Cultural Diversity
        http://www.incd.org/ 

findet sich eine programmatische Ansprache vor der UNESCO im Juli
2001, in der die europäische Patent-Sprachenfrage als Testfall für die
Ernsthaftigkeit der Bekenntnisse zum Schutz der kulturellen Vielfalt
hervorgehoben wird:

   An example of the upheaval of the principle of subsidiarity is the
   proposal, up to now strangely enough supported by the Swedish Minister
   of Commerce, that applications to the European Patent Bureau may not
   be written in the Swedish language but only in German, French or
   English due to the costs of translations.
   
   Of course this is an unacceptable marginalization of the Swedish
   language. To forbid Swedish entrepreneurs to apply for patent rights
   in their own tongue is not only an infringement upon freedom of speech
   but will also limit their chances to compete on the free and open
   market. Applications of this kind are often very precious. Why should
   Swedish applicants be punished for writing in Swedish when French,
   German or English applicants will be automatically accepted?
   
   Apart from the economic aspect there is also a cultural reason to
   protest against this violation of the Swedish language. The area of
   patents may look like a special sector of little cultural interest.
   But this is a false impression. On the contrary, a language needs to
   be sharpened and developed all the time in all fields of human
   activity. There cannot be any linguistic exception.
   
   There are also other consequences. If this new legislation comes into
   practice the Swedish language will not be accepted in Swedish courts
   in upcoming trials on controversies about Swedish patents. They will
   also have to be conducted in English, French or German. This is of
   course an absurd situation.
   
   In Sweden we are many who have been fighting for the Kurdish people´s
   right to speak their own language in Turkey. We have claimed that if
   the Turkish government does not respect the human right for the
   Kurdish minority to speak their own language, Turkey will have no
   place in the European Union. But what signals does Sweden send to the
   world if we accept this ignorance of the Swedish language? The
   proposal has consequently provoked several Swedish organizations,
   among them the Swedish Academy which has in its charter dating from
   1786 the responsibility to supervise the development of the Swedish
   language, to react and together with KLYS make the Swedish Government
   change its intentions.
   
   It seems that cultural diversity today is not only threatened by
   "globalisation" but also by "europeisation".
   
   Within a short time, the member states of WTO will meet again in Qatar
   to discuss conditions for free trade across borders. At the same time
   they should also agree to safeguard the rights of participating states
   to carry out their national cultural policy, even if this policy might
   be in conflict with the interests of free trade. But this is not
   likely to happen. Therefore it is a first priority that UNESCO and
   other international bodies do their utmost to create international
   agreements to ensure that cultural diversity will be taken into
   account in all kinds of international operations.
   
   In this work the cultural NGO's might also play a role which we hope
   to show when the INCD - our International Network for Cultural
   Diversity - convenes in Lucerne in September 2001 to formulate a new
   cultural instrument. With confidence we look for support from UNESCO.
   
   Thank you for your kind attention.

In ähnlichem Sinne argumentiert FICPI (Weltverband der Patentanwälte)
in einer kürzlich herausgegebenen Resolution:

        http://www.ficpi.org/ficpi/newsletters/49/resolGWengl.html

und auch der Eurolinux-Standpunkt zum Gemeinschaftspatent

        http://www.eurolinux.org/news/cpat01B/

nennt das Problem und empfiehlt die Suche nach einer Alternative zur
sprachlichen Vereinheitlichung etwa auf dem Wege von Logiksprache und
automatischer Übersetzung.

Die Patentsprachenfrage illustriert recht anschaulich die Kosten der
sprachlichen Vielfalt und die Überlegenheit der USA als des größten
kulturell und politisch einheitlichen Wirtschaftsraumes.  Das
Patentwesen vergrößert diese Überlegenheit, indem es für eine
überproportional hohe Anzahl von US-Patenten im Welthandel sorgt.  Die
Schlussfolgerung, nun auch Europa kulturell zu vereinheitlichen, stößt
jedoch auf Ablehnung, zumindest sobald sie laut artikuliert wird.

Eine Alternative wäre die Propagierung von internationalen
Regelwerken, welche kulturell uneinheitlichen Räumen wie Europa und
Asien stärker entgegenkommen und weniger die USA begünstigen.  Da
hierzu das Patentwesen am allerwenigsten gehört, kann Europas Rolle in
der internationalen Patentpolitik nur darin bestehen, für eine
konsequente Einengung des Patentwesens zu plädieren.  Was ja ohnehin
vernünftig ist und letztlich auch im Interesse der USA liegt.

-- 
Hartmut Pilch                                      http://phm.ffii.org/
Schutz der Innovation vor der Patentinflation:   http://swpat.ffii.org/ 
100000 Stimmen gegen Logikpatente:           http://www.noepatents.org/

________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.de/
Organisation: projekt oekonux.de


[English translation]
Thread: oxdeT04323 Message: 1/1 L0 [In index]
Message 04323 [Homepage] [Navigation]