What changed

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 on Community designs and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 2246/2002

ORDINARY LEGISLATIVE procedure

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 on Community designs and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 2246/2002

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 on Community designs and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 2246/2002

1. Rapporteur: Gilles LEBRETON (ID / FR)

(COM(2022)0666 – C90394/2022 – 2022/0391(COD))

2. Reference numbers: 2022/0391 (COD) / A9-0315/2023 / P9_TA(2024)0164

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

3. Date of adoption of the resolution: 14 March 2024

The European Parliament,

4. Legal basis: Article 118(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2022)0666),

5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI)

– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 118(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C90394/2022),

6. Commission's position: accepts all amendments

– having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 22 March 2023,

– having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A9-0315/2023),

1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Amendment 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 3

Justification

It is worth recalling the role of the European Parliament

Amendment 2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4 a (new)

Amendment 3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6

Amendment 4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 10

Justification

Linguistic clarification (linked to Article 18a)

Amendment 5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 10 a (new)

Justification

It is important to emphasise that functional and technical products are not excluded from design protection. To align with amended recital 21 of the recast Directive.

Amendment 6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 11

Amendment 7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 13

Amendment 8

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 16

Amendment 9

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 18

Amendment 10

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 18 a (new)

Justification

Alignment with directive on the legal protection of designs, recital 43

Amendment 11

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 19

Amendment 12

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 22

Amendment 13

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 24

Amendment 14

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 2 – paragraph 1

Amendment 15

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)

Amendment 16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Justification

The scenario where an illegal copy of an (unregistered) design is used as a disclosure against a later registered EU design is not contemplated. This situation significantly harms the rights of users of the design system, and it is unclear whether it constitutes ‘an abuse in relation to the designer’.

Amendment 17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 11 – paragraph 2

Justification

Linguistic clarification.

Amendment 18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 20a – paragraph 1

Amendment 19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 20 a – paragraph 1 a (new)

Amendment 20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 20a – paragraph 2

Amendment 21

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 26(a) – paragraph 1

Amendment 22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 35 - paragraph 1a (new)

Amendment 23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 31

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 42 – paragraph 2

Amendment 24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 47(a) – paragraph 2

Justification

When a discrepancy between views of the design occurs, the current regulation allows the applicant to opt option between deleting conflicting views or splitting the application into two or more applications as necessary. The amendment seeks to solve such errors in a more efficient way.

Amendment 25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 49

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 50e – paragraph 1

Justification

When a discrepancy between views of the design occurs, the current regulation allows the applicant to opt option between deleting conflicting views or splitting the application into two or more applications as necessary. The amendment seeks to solve such errors in a more efficient way. In alignment with the amendment to Article 47a, paragraph 2.

Amendment 26

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 59

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 55a – subparagraph 1

Justification

This is a reference to the terms used in Article 73 of Regulation No 2017/2001.

Amendment 27

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 65 – point b

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 65 - paragraph 5

Amendment 28

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 67

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 66 – paragraph 2

Amendment 29

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 72(a) – paragraph 3

Amendment 30

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 93 – point a

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 78 - paragraph 4 - subparagraph 2

Amendment 31

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 100

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 88 – paragraph 2

Justification

There is no subject matter limitation in the Commission proposal, and it should mirror the EU Trade Mark Regulation’s provision (Article 129 (2)) ‘On all trade mark matters not covered by this Regulation, ....’.

Amendment 32

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 111

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 102 – paragraph 1 – point e

Amendment 33

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 106a(d) – paragraph 2

Amendment 34

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 106a(d) – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

Amendment 35

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 106a(d) – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

Amendment 36

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 106a(d) – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3

Amendment 37

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Article 110b – paragraph 1

Amendment 38

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Annex – point 1

Amendment 39

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 129

Regulation (EC) No 6/2002

Annex – point 6

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 can be credited for establishing a European design protection system. But having been in place for over 20 years, the regulation needed to be modernised, in particular to adapt it to the digital age and also to make it more attractive for independent creators and businesses, in particular SMEs. This is the focus of the Commission proposal.

The rapporteur broadly agrees with the proposed guidelines, but suggests some 20 amendments which seek primarily to bolster legal certainty. The main aims are to clarify the ‘repair clause’ (recital 16, Article 20a), to remove powers from the Executive Director which are difficult to justify (Articles 42, 65, 72a, 78, 100 and 102), and to increase the amount of the renewal fees (annex).

MINORITY OPINION

24/10/2023

Rule 55(4) of Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament

Amending Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 on Community designs and

repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 2246/2002

As pro-European and democratic political group, committed to the improvement and modernisation of the EU legal framework on industrial design protection, Renew Europe fully supports the revision of the Regulation on Community designs introduced by the European Commission and amended by Members of this Parliament.

For this reason, our political group will support the legislative report attributed to Mr LEBRETON from ID Group. Nevertheless, our support can in no way link us to this political group and the Eurosceptic positions it conveys, which we firmly oppose.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Key: