What is the Proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)?
In 2007 a select handful of the wealthiest countries began a treaty-making process to create a new global standard for intellectual property rights enforcement, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). ACTA is spearheaded by the United States, the European Commission, Japan, and Switzerland — those countries with the largest intellectual property industries. Other countries invited to participate in ACTA’s negotiation process are Canada, Australia, Korea, Mexico and New Zealand.Noticeably absent from ACTA’s negotiations are leaders from developing countries who hold national policy priorities that differ from the international intellectual property industry.
After the multi-lateral treaty’s scope and priorities are negotiated by the few countries invited to participate in the early discussions, ACTA’s text will be “locked” and other countries who are later “invited” to sign-on to the pact will not be able to re-negotiate its terms. It is claimed that signing-on to the trade agreement will be "voluntary", but few countries will have the muscle to refuse an “invitation” to join, once the rules have been set by the select few conducting the negotiations.
The US is negotiating ACTA through the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR), an office within the Bush Administration that has concluded more than 10 “free trade” agreements in recent years, all of which require both the US and the other country to increase intellectual property rights enforcement measures beyond the international legal norms in the WTO-TRIPS Agreement.
As of 25 March 2008, no draft text has been published yet to provide the public with substance of the proposed international treaty. A “Discussion Paper on a Possible Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement” was reportedly provided to select lobbyists in the intellectual property industry, but not to public interest organizations concerned with the subject matter of the proposed treaty.
1 May, 2008: Canadian Law Prof Michael Geist Submission on ACTA to Canadian Govt "I begin by noting that it is difficult to provide meaningful feedback on a treaty that no one has publicly seen. However, with some public documents indicating that lobby groups hope to use the treaty to increase intermediary liability, force cross-border disclosure of Internet service provider subscriber information, and further advance the cause of anti-circumvention legislation, there is reason ...
30 Apr, 2008: “The Problem with the Anti-Counterfeiting Treaty (and What To Do About It)” by Aaron Shaw (KEI Studies) In mid-February 2008, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) issued a request for public comments on the proposed “Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement” (ACTA). However, with the exception of a handful of press releases, information about the proposal itself remains scarce. Mainstream media outlets have printed USTR officials' talking points about the importance of winning “the fight against fakes,” ...
30 Apr, 2008: CIPPIC Submission on ACTA to Canadian Government The content of ACTA could have significant implications for Canada. Counterfeiting activity harms Canadian consumers and Canadian trade. All Canadians endorse the dedication of appropriate law-enforcement resources to addressing trade-debilitating commercial infringement. However, intellectual property policy equally touches on important policy frameworks governing innovation, privacy, security, trade, creativity and freedom of expression. Enthusiasm to address the harms legitimately attributed ...
25 Apr, 2008: 2008 USTR Special 301 Report (full report) The “Special 301” Report is an annual review of the global state of intellectual property rights (IPR) protection and enforcement, conducted by the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) pursuant to Special 301 provisions of the Trade Act of 1974 (Trade Act). The 2008 Special 301 review process examined IPR protection and enforcement in 78 countries. ...
25 Mar, 2008: IP Justice White Paper on the Proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) In 2007 a select handful of the wealthiest countries began a treaty-making process to create a new global standard for intellectual property rights enforcement, the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). ACTA is spearheaded by the United States, the European Commission, Japan, and Switzerland -- those countries with the largest intellectual property industries. Other countries invited to participate in ...
25 Mar, 2008: Provisions for ACTA - According to Office of US Trade Representative According to Oct. 2007 USTR "Fact Sheet", the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) would contain the following provisions: International Cooperation, Enforcement Practices & New Legal Framework....
21 Mar, 2008: ACTA’s Misguided Effort to Increase Govt Spying and Ratchet-Up IPR Enforcement at Public Expense IP Justice Comments to the U.S.T.R. on the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). IP Justice firmly believes that ACTA’s costs to the public far outweigh any public benefit it might provide. The financial expense to tax-payers to fund ACTA would be enormous and steal scarce resources away from programs that deal with genuine public needs like providing education ...
20 Mar, 2008: Essential Action Comments to USTR on Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) The comments argue that background information on the treaty conflate the concepts of counterfeiting, "piracy" and infringement. "An agreement based on, or reflecting, such a conflation of distinct concepts is likely to be overly broad, proscribing behavior that cannot correctly be identified as counterfeiting and that is not necessarily detrimental to the public interest." As regards medicines, the proper focus ...
20 Mar, 2008: Comments of Knowledge Ecology International on the Proposal for ACTA The Lack of Transparency is Not Encouraging. The Request for Comment in the February 15, 2008 Federal Register (Volume 73, Number 32), contains very little information about the proposal. The "Fact Sheet" on the USTR website has very little real
information. We have, in fact, located an undated "Discussion Paper on a Possible Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement," that has ...
