The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)

topic posted Wed, November 4, 2009 - 6:04 PM by  Deborah
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
The discussions exclude almost all civil liberties groups, and include mostly industry groups. It's hard to get a handle on what's really in the agreement. One thing that seems fairly certain, given all of the discussion about it, would be a provision allowing for a 'three strikes and you're off the internet' policy. France just enacted such a law, Britain is flirting with one, and Wired just posted this article today about the US.

(more at the link)
Copyright Treaty Is Policy Laundering at Its Finest
www.wired.com/threatlevel...-laundering/
* By David Kravets
* November 4, 2009

The blogosphere is abuzz over an apparently leaked document showing the United States trying to push its controversial DMCA-style notice-and-takedown process on the world. But since Threat Level already lives in the land of the DMCA, we’re more bothered by the fact that the U.S. proposal goes far beyond that 1998 law, and would require Congress to alter the DMCA in a manner even more hostile to consumers.

At issue is the internet section of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement being developed under a cloak of secrecy by dozens of countries.The leaked document is a three-page European Commission memo written by an unnamed EU official, which purports to summarizes a private briefing given in September by U.S. trade officials.

The language in the Sept. 30 memo shows the United States wants ISPs around the world to punish suspected, repeat downloaders with a system of “graduated response” — code for a three-strikes policy that results in the customer eventually being disconnected from the internet with the ISP alone deciding what constitutes infringement and fair use.

==

Older info in chron order

Secret ACTA treaty can't be shown to public, just 42 lawyers
arstechnica.com/tech-polic...-policy.ars

As the secret Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement rolls forward, it's clear that some kind of Internet "enforcement" will end up in the text; but what kind? Thirty-eight corporate lawyers and 4 public interest lawyers are the only ones with a say.
By Nate Anderson | Last updated October 15, 2009 9:37 AM CT

Newer info:

The ACTA Internet Chapter: Putting the Pieces Together
Michael Geist
Tuesday November 03, 2009

www.michaelgeist.ca/content/.../4510/125

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement negotations continue in a few hours as Seoul, Korea plays host to the latest round of talks. The governments have posted the meeting agenda, which unsurprisingly focuses on the issue of Internet enforcement. The United States has drafted the chapter under enormous secrecy, with selected groups granted access under strict non-disclosure agreements and other countries (including Canada) given physical, watermarked copies designed to guard against leaks.

Boing Boing coverage

Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.
www.boingboing.net/2009/11/...-tre.html

The internet chapter of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, a secret copyright treaty whose text Obama's administration refused to disclose due to "national security" concerns, has leaked. It's bad.
posted by:
Deborah
SF Bay Area
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • Re: The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)

    Wed, November 4, 2009 - 6:37 PM
    Deborah, do you have any sense of what the practical implications would be for the average Joe?
    • Re: The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)

      Wed, November 4, 2009 - 6:59 PM
      Not sure at all - since the text isn't available to read and analyze.

      As the Wired article states... the DMCA grants a safe harbor to ISPs if they promptly remove allegedly infringing content (the notice and take down provisions). Under ACTA (as far as we can tell from the limited press that ACTA is getting), this wouldn't be enough. The ISP would have to 'actively work to combat the flow of unauthorized copyrighted material through their pipes, and specifically implement the “graduated response” program.' Which means that ISPs would be forced to implement some kind of 'three strikes and you're off the net' policy. Maybe it would be three strikes, maybe it would be four, who knows. It would be 'graduated'. So....upload allegedly infringing videos to youtube some number of times, and your ISP could end your internet access.

      New Zealand recently tried to implement a three strikes policy, where you didn't even have to be convicted. All that needed to happen was that you were **accused**. You could lose your internet access based solely upon an accusation that you were infringing someone's copyright! creativefreedom.org.nz/blackout.html It was killed, but those things have a habit of not dying.

  • Re: The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)

    Thu, November 5, 2009 - 8:24 AM
    The Recording Industry will have its revenge.

    90% of all music downloads are done illegally. Copyrights to movies and videos are also widely ignored on the web. How can an industry survive when 90% of its product gets stolen?

    These industries will fail if they can't find a way to stop it.

    The response of the web culture is" "I enjoy my vast free and illegal collection of downloads, and you're idiots for not having made it more attractive for me to purchase this vast collection than to steal it for free. You deserve to go out of business if you can't make it more attractive for me to buy from you than to steal from you."

    The industry, so far, hasn't found a magic wand to make paying for music and video on the web more attractive than stealing it. And even when they can get people to pay for it, like on iTunes, people won't pay very much. The only entity getting rich off of iTunes is Apple Computers, and they're not even in the music or entertainment business. iTunes mandates the songs be sold cheap so as to promote the sale of iPods and iPhones. Apple could care less about the music industry.

    Hence, the industry files lawsuits and makes examples of people who steal. What else can they do? But still, the web steals from them, and the lawsuits are little deterent to the masses.

    Plan B: change the laws so as to attack the web itself.

    That industry is not going down without a fight.

    The web asked for this. It's got it coming. Like the pirates who used to raid the seas, eventually business and government fight back and put them out of business. But will it work? Will these laws end internet piracy? It will be interesting to see if it makes any difference if it gets passed.

Recent topics in "Privacy and Civil Rights"