ACTA talks – the ‘highest level of secrecy’
p2pnet news view P2P | Politics:- Last week Canadian officials travelled to Seoul for the latest round of closed-door negotiations on an international treaty called the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). While battling commercial counterfeiting would seem like a good idea, the ACTA process has been marked by unprecedented secrecy as well as leaks revealing that the treaty is really about copyright rather than counterfeiting.
From the moment the talks began last year, observers noted the approach was far different from virtually any other international treaty negotiation.
Rather than negotiating in an international venue such as the United Nations and opening the door to any interested countries, ACTA partners consisted of a small group of countries (Canada, the United States, the European Union, Japan, Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, Morocco and Singapore) meeting in secret and opposed broadening the process.
The substance of the treaty was also accorded the highest level of secrecy. Draft documents were not released to the public and even the locations of negotiations were often kept under wraps. In fact, the U.S. government refused to disclose information about the treaty on national security grounds.
Despite the efforts to keep the public in the dark, there has been a steady stream of leaks. Earlier this year, it was revealed criminal provisions would target both commercial and non-commercial infringement, creating the prospect of jail time even in cases where there was no intent to profit. Further, border guards would be given new powers to search people and seize products as they enter a country.
Just as negotiators were sitting down to discuss ACTA’s Internet-related provisions last Wednesday, information on those proposals also leaked. The disclosures were the most disturbing to date, since they conclusively demonstrated that ACTA is fundamentally not a counterfeiting treaty, but rather one focused on copyright.
The Internet provisions feature specific requirements on the legal protection for digital locks that extend far beyond those required under international law. Moreover, they would move Canada toward a three-strikes-and-you’re-out approach that requires Internet providers to cut off subscriber access on three allegations of infringement. Canada’s successful “notice and notice” approach to addressing infringing content hosted by Internet providers – adopted by both Conservative and Liberal copyright bills – would be rejected in favour of a U.S. model that requires removal of content without evidence of infringement.
The combined effect of these provisions would dramatically reshape Canadian copyright law and eliminate sovereign choice on domestic copyright policy. These issues were at the heart of thousands of submissions as part of this summer’s national copyright consultation. However, if Canada agrees to ACTA, flexibility would be lost and the government would be forced to implement a host of new reforms.
Such an approach contradicts recent comments from Industry Minister Tony Clement. In an interview earlier this month, he stated “Canada and its international trading partners each have distinct copyright policies, laws and approaches for addressing the challenges and opportunities of the Internet. Canada’s current framework provides strong intellectual property protections and our copyright laws apply in the digital context, including on the Internet. Moreover, Canada’s regime for the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights is fully consistent with its international obligations.”
Yet the ACTA provisions seek to remove those distinctions.
If adopted, the robust copyright debate that occurred over the summer would be rendered moot. Instead, it would appear that a made-in-Canada approach would give way to decisions made last week at secret meetings in Seoul.
Michael Geist – Michael Geist’s Blog
[Geist is the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa. He can be reached by email at mgeist @ uottawa dot ca]
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi
November, 2009
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
They can take ACTA and fuck themselves with it as it is not a project of law by the people and certainly not for the people.
And we will just splendidly ignore any ACTA generated law. Any attempt to enforce such a law will be devastating for the enforcer and the beneficiaries companies.
THE PEOPLE OF THE WORD HAVE ENOUGH!
November 10th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
There’s only so many jails and once people are bankrupt, no tax dollars flow, no income for the corporations pushing this, and sure as hell no votes for any MP/Congress-person who supported this.
So go ahead, you’ll all lose! You’re so blind you can’t see you’re cutting off your own foot and invoking sheer rage in the mass public, especially once they see what’s happening. “Why’s ma and pa been arrested? Aaiight, let’s deal with this the ‘ol South way!”
Canadians will complain and then have a nap, but US citizens, citizens of France, UK, etc… will not just complain but make their voices heard loud and clear. Then Canadians will follow, until hockey playoffs start.
Just kidding about the Canada jokes, I’m Canadian and I know we can take the jokes.
November 10th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
“The disclosures were the most disturbing to date, since they conclusively demonstrated that ACTA is fundamentally not a counterfeiting treaty, but rather one focused on copyright.”
Don’t you know? Copyright is the absolute, most important thing in the world today. Everything revolves around it and everyone must bow down to it. A country’s rights mean nothing if they don’t cater to the all-important copyright industry.
It’s the like the catholic church during the middle ages. It may not be official, but they’re the ones writing the laws. Soon, they’ll be enforcing them as well.
November 10th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
“It’s the like the catholic church during the middle ages. It may not be official, but they’re the ones writing the laws. Soon, they’ll be enforcing them as well.” I never made that connection, but it certainly is true. Great comment there.
November 10th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
“Soon, they’ll be enforcing them as well.”
This days the corporate parasites will die by the dozen since no law can stand without a consensus they will not have.