The Canadian response provided a different take from the European Commission. On the issue of ACTA provisions within CETA, Verheul confirmed that the ACTA Internet provider provision had been removed and that the EU was re-evaluating what it hopes to achieve in light of the European Parliament’s rejection of ACTA last month. However, Verheul noted that the ACTA criminal provisions were still very much in play and that the European Commission was seeking support from the member states. Since Canada signed ACTA, it may be willing to support the inclusion of ACTA provisions.
Further, Verheul denied claims that the IP chapter would ultimately look like the EU – South Korea FTA. He stated that Canada was not looking at that agreement as a model and that the final chapter would draw on several sources, including TRIPS, the WIPO Internet Treaties, domestic legislation, and ACTA. Given the lack of transparency associated with the CETA discussions (both sides insist that the draft text remain secret), the concerns that CETA may replicate ACTA appear to be very real despite the denials from the European Commission.