Article &
subject
|
Position #1
|
Position #2
|
Article 1.2: Nature and Scope of
Obligations
|
Aus/EU/CH/NZ/Can:
ACTA should be limited in scope of enforcement of IPRs
|
Others:
Status quo of text, ACTA should cover both protection and enforcement
of IPRs
|
Article 1.3: Relation to
Standards concerning availability of IPRs
|
Aus/Can/Sing/NZ:
ACTA does not apply to goods that do not infringe any IPRs in a members
territory
|
Others:
No such limitation should exist.
|
Article 1.X: (Principles)
|
Aus/NZ/Sing/Can:
Should add on article that outlines principles of IP enforcement, such
as technology dissemination and transfer, a manner conducive to social
and economic welfare, measures necessary to protect health and
nutrition, etc.
|
Others:
Would not have this article and probably rely on a preface.
|
Article 2.x.4: General
enforcement obligations (government liability)
|
US:
Parties can limit remedies against governments
|
Others:
No such limitation
|
2.1.1: Availability of Civil
Procedures (scope of availability)
|
US/Mex/Can/Aus/Sing/NZ:
Civil remedies available for copyrights, related rights and TMs |
EU/J/CH:
Civil remedies will be available to enforce any IPRs
|
2.x.1: Injunctions (scope of
availability)
|
US/Can/NZ/Aus/Sing/Mex:
Injunctions available for copyrights, related rights and TMs
|
EU/J:
Injunctions available for any IPRs
|
| 2.x.1: Injunctions (scope of
availability) |
Can/Aus:
Injunctions subject to statutory limitations under domestic law
|
Others:
No identified limit.
|
| 2.x.1: Injunctions (third
parties) |
EU/CH:
Rights holders in position to apply for injunction against
intermediaries who services used by third party to infringe IP right
[NZ/Mor/Mex want this permissive]
|
US/NZ/Can/Aus/Mex/J:
Oppose this provision.
|
Article 2.2: Damages
|
US:
Damage provisions apply to copyright, related rights, and TMs
|
EU:
Damage provisions apply to all IPRs
|
Article 2.3: Other remedies
(scope of availability destruction)
|
US/Aus/Can/Sing/Kor/NZ/Mex:
Courts can order destruction for pirated or counterfeit goods
|
EU/J/CH:
Courts can order destruction for any infringing goods.
|
Article 2.4: Information related
to infringement (scope of authority's power)
|
US/Can/NZ/Aus/Sing/Mex:
Courts can order information be disclosed about the infringement in the
case of pirated/counterfeit goods
|
EU/J/CH:
Courts can order information about infringement be disclosed about the
infringement regardless of the type of infringement.
|
Article 2.5: Provisional
measures (scope of procedures)
|
Can/Aus/Mex:
Provisional measures should only be available for copyright, related
rights and TMs
|
EU/J/CH:
Provisional measures available for any IPR infringement
|
Article 2.5.2: Provisional
Measures (Scope of evidence gathering)
|
US/J/NZ/MX/Aus:
Judicial authorities can order the seizure of suspecting infringing
goods and other evidence in the case of copyright, related right or TM
counterfeiting
|
Others:
Judicial authorities can order seizures for any type of infringement
|
Article 2.X.2: Scope of Border
Measures
|
US/Sing/J:
Border measures should be applied at least to copyright, related right
and TM infringement and can be for other infringements
|
EU/CH:
No recognition of any limits or optional expansion on the application
of border measures
|
Article 2.X: De minimis provision
|
NZ/Aus/Can/Sing/Kor/J:
De minimis exception should include goods sent in small consignments
|
Others:
Small consignments not protected by de minimis exception.
|
Article 2.6: Application by
Rights Holders for border suspension (scope of availability of
suspension, both type of IPRs and obligation regarding goods in transit)
|
US/J/CH/Mex:
Each party shall provide procedures to seize pirated copyright or
counterfeit trademark goods at border when imported and may do so for
in-transit goods
|
EU/Kor:
Each party shall provide measures to seize any type of infringing goods
at border being imported, exported or in transit
(EU is alternatively proposing more general wording that parties shall
provide procedures to seize goods at border for infringing IPRs
(without explicitly distinguishing import/export/transit)
|
Article 2.7: Ex officio border
action (scope: pirated/counterfeit vs all infringing)
|
Others:
Customs officials may act on their own initiative to seize pirated
copyright or counterfeit trademark goods
|
EU/CH:
Customs officials may act on their own initiative to seize any type of
infringing goods at border
|
Article 2.7: Ex officio border
action (scope: imported/exported/in transit vs any infringing good)
|
US/J/Mex/Aus/Can/NZ/Sing:
Customs officials may act on goods which are imported/exported/in
transit
|
EU:
Proposes more general language that customs officials can act on any
type of infringing good, which specifying imported/exported/transit
|
Article 2.10: Determination as
to Infringement
Article 2.11: Remedies
Article 2.13: Disclosure of Information
|
All three articles subject to
scope - ie. copyright, related rights and TMs vs. all IPRs
|
All three articles subject to
scope - ie. copyright, related rights and TMs vs. all IPRs |
Article 2.14.1: Criminal
Offenses (commercial scale and end users)
|
US/J/CH:
Acts on a commercial scale for criminal offense MAY exclude end user
acts
|
EU:
Acts on a commercial scale for criminal offenses DOES exclude end user
acts.
[provision under internal examination in the EU]
|
Article 2.14.3: Criminal
Offenses (anti-camcording offense)
|
Others:
Camcording in a theatre is an offense.
|
EU/Sing:
Delete this provision.
|
Article 2.18: Enforcement in the
digital environment (scope of rights protected)
|
US/Aus/NZ/Can/Sing/MX:
Parties shall provide measures to permit effective enforcement of
copyright, related rights and trademark rights
|
EU/J/CH:
Parties shall provide measures to permit effective enforcement of all
IPRs
|
Article 2.18.3(c): Necessary
conditions for ISPs to qualify for safe harbour
|
US: ISPs must not be receiving
financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity
|
Others:
No such requirement
|
Subscribe to this comment's feed
