IP Justice Publications
IP Justice White Paper on the Proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)
Anti-Consumer and Anti-Public Interest Treaty Proposed by Intellectual Property Industry, US, Europe, Switzerland, and Japan
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 and eliminating hunger. ACTA would burden the judicial system and divert badly needed law enforcement and customs resources away from public security and towards private profit. Unfortunately the zeal to “beef-up†enforcement measures on which ACTA rides often leads to the violation of privacy rights, bypassing due process protections, and cutting-off the free flow of information. ACTA proposes to set new international norms to lock countries into pre-determined policy choices when flexibility is needed.
Comments to US Government on Review of Joint Project Agreement with ICANN by Robin Gross
"...In my view, given the international nature of the Internet, it is imperative that ICANN work toward moving away from oversight by a single nation and toward responding to the needs of the global Internet community. However, ICANN has yet to demonstrate that it has sufficiently evolved to the point that it should be left without any oversight and accountability, although it has made some progress in recent years. There remain significant problems with the existing structure and management of ICANN that must be resolved before ICANN can be left to itself to manage this crucial and shared public resource. In particular, “Internet users†(or the public-at-large) still remain outside of the ICANN decision-making process, such that the concerns of individuals, who have no “business†stake in ICANN policy are not adequately taken into account. ICANN continues to be dominated by large business interests and by specific commercial interests involved in providing Internet services...."
IP Justice Report on 2007 Internet Governance Forum (IGF)
Links to Audio, Video, and Photos of IGF-Rio. Where 2007 IGF Excelled: High Quality of Independently Organized Workshops, World-Class Technical Capabilities, Offline Interactions & Networking Opportunities; But: Human Rights & Controversy Avoided, Glaring Lack of Gender Balance & Youth Voices, Last' Year's Speakers ...
Robin Gross’ Remarks at IGF 2007 on Internet Bill of Rights
Today I’d like to address a few issues that are specifically relevant to the positive development of the Internet and a healthy information society. 1. Freedom of Expression Rights. 2. Access to Knowledge Rights. 3. Communication Rights. 4. Privacy Rights and Data Protection. 5. Anonymity. 6. Excessive and unbalanced intellectual property rights. 7. Open Technical Standards. 8. Democratic Values. I cannot emphasize enough that the enforcement of our existing legal rights is the first and most important step we can take to ensure human rights are protected in an information society of the future.....
IP Justice Statement on “GNSO Improvements” at ICANN
ICANN’s Board Governance Committee Report (BGC), in attempting to achieve the laudable result of greater inclusiveness, effectiveness, and efficiency conceives a near total restructuring of the GNSO and its processes. It proceeds from an assumption that any voting inherently inhibits the process and proceeds to find the most dramatic route to eliminate any vote. While many of the BGC Report’s recommendations would certainly improve the effectiveness of the GNSO, the report does not adequately consider the values inherent in the vote of the GNSO Council and the dangers of forcing consensus in all cases....