Romanian Prime Minister Victor Ponta says
his country will not ratify the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement
unless the European Parliament modifies the agreement. Since the EP
does not have the power to amend ACTA, that makes ratification unlikely.
Dozens of leading U.S. law professors have written
to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance to express concern about the
lack of constitutional authority to approve the Anti-Counterfeiting
Trade Agreement without submitting it for Congressional approval.
Earlier this year, I appeared at the European Parliament's INTA
Committee Workshop on ACTA where I reached the following conclusion:
This report concludes that ACTA's
harm greatly exceeds its potential benefits. Given ACTA’s corrosive
effect on transparency in international negotiations, the damage to
international intellectual property institutions, the exclusion of the
majority of the developing world from the ambit of the agreement, the
potentially dangerous substantive provisions, and the uncertain
benefits in countering counterfeiting, there are ample reasons for the
public and politicians to reject the agreement in its current
form. In
doing so, governments would help restore confidence in the global
intellectual property system and open the door to a new round of
negotiations premised on transparency, inclusion, and evidence-based
policy-making.
While I previously posted my opening
remarks and a video
of comments,
I was unable to post the full report until granted approval by the
European Parliament INTA Committee (the Dutch government issued a response
to my comments). That report
is now available for download and is part of a full report
on the workshop that includes all the background reports and a
summary of the workshop discussion. My analysis
follows the same format as the comments but offers more detailed
analysis and discussion.
EDRI has a strong
editorial that points out that while ACTA is damaged in Europe, it
is not dead yet. The editorial comes as Switzerland announces
that it is delaying plans to sign ACTA.
Harvard professor Yochai Benkler recently delivered an exceptional
talk
examining how the SOPA and ACTA protests unfolded. The talk highlights
the role of online new sources and the rapidly changing key players in
raising awareness or generating protest activity.
EU Commissioner Neelie Kroes spoke
at a Berlin conference and acknowledged what has become increasingly
apparent: ACTA is going to be defeated by the European Parliament.
Kroes stated:
We have recently seen how many
thousands of people are willing to protest against rules which they see
as constraining the openness and innovation of the Internet. This is a
strong new political voice. And as a force for openness, I welcome it,
even if I do not always agree with everything it says on every subject.
We are now likely to be in a world without SOPA and without ACTA. Now
we need to find solutions to make the Internet a place of freedom,
openness, and innovation fit for all citizens, not just for the techno
avant-garde.
The European Data Protection Supervisor has issued a new
opinion
on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, expressing serious concerns
about the impact of the agreement on privacy and data protection (a prior opinion
was released in 2010). The
EDPS states:
Many of the measures that could be
implemented in the context of Articles 27(3) and 27(4) of ACTA would
involve a form of monitoring of individuals' use of the Internet,
whether by detecting actual IP rights infringements or by trying to
prevent any future infringements. In many cases, the monitoring would
be carried out by right holders or right holders' associations and
third parties acting on their behalf, although they often seek to
delegate such task to ISPs.
A targeted form of monitoring by
right holders would be legitimate if the processing is carried out in
the context of specific, current or forthcoming judicial proceedings,
to establish, make or defend legal claims. However, the generalised
monitoring followed by the storage of data on a general scale for the
purpose of enforcing claims, such as the scanning of the Internet as
such, or all the activity in P2P networks, would go beyond what is
legitimate. Such general monitoring is especially intrusive to
individuals' rights and freedoms when it is not well defined and there
is no limitation to it, in scope, in time, and in terms of persons
concerned. As a consequence, the indiscriminate or widespread
monitoring of Internet user' behaviour in relation to trivial,
small-scale not for profit infringement would be disproportionate and
in violation of Article 8 ECHR, Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of
Fundamental Rights, and the Data protection Directive.
The opinion engages in detailed analysis of specific provisions, noting
the lack of clarity on the scope of enforcement, the problems of
vagueness with respect to "competent authorities" entrusted with
injunction power, that voluntary cooperation agreements may require
conduct in violation of EU law, and the absence of sufficient
limitations and safeguards on monitoring practices. The EDPS statement
is a must-read for European politicians currently considering ACTA and
should be assessed by privacy authorities - including Canadian Privacy
Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart - to assess the impact of ACTA within
their national laws.
The draft
recommendation
from the European Parliament INTA committee on ACTA has been posted
online, confirming the committee "declines to consent to conclusion of
the agreement."
The Socialists and Democrats Group at the European Parliament, the
second largest bloc of MEPs, has announced
that it plans vote against the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, yet
another indication that ACTA is likely to be defeated later this spring
at the EP.
David Martin, the ACTA rapporteur at the European Parliament, has
published an op-ed
expressing skepticism about the agreement's effectiveness, noting "so
far there is little evidence that it will have the intended effect.
Indeed several non-signatories have stressed their opposition to the
agreement."
Following UBC's
announcement that it will not sign the Access Copyright model
licence, three additional universities have followed suit - Athabasca,
Windsor,
and Winnipeg.
The four universities demonstrate that the licence raises concerns in
all types of universites - big, medium, small and distance-focused.
May.22/12Comments (2)
Reports indicate
that the European Union is set to provide an 80 billion euro boost to
open access by making open access publishing the norm for its Horizon
2020 research program.
May.22/12Comments (0)
Romanian Prime Minister Victor Ponta says
his country will not ratify the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement
unless the European Parliament modifies the agreement. Since the EP
does not have the power to amend ACTA, that makes ratification unlikely.
May.22/12Comments (0)
Dozens of leading U.S. law professors have written
to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance to express concern about the
lack of constitutional authority to approve the Anti-Counterfeiting
Trade Agreement without submitting it for Congressional approval. May.17/12Comments (0)
Harvard Professor Winston Hide has stepped
down from the editorial board of the prestigious Genomics journal
over the lack of open access. May.17/12Comments (0)
In addition to the UBC decision to not sign the Access Copyright model
licence, the Manitoba Library Association has added
its voice
in opposition to the agreement. Moreover, the Trent University Senate
has adopted a motion stating "that the Senate, in solidarity with the
CAUT, the CFS and dozens of other constituent and governing bodies,
reject this unfair and unreasonable AUCC-Access Copyright 'model
license' and instead affirm and abide by 'the right to fair and
reasonable access to copyrighted works for educational purposes.'"
May.16/12Comments (1)
The Globe's John Ibbitson has a column
that confirms much of the private speculation about lawful access,
namely that the bill is going nowhere so long as Vic Toews remains
public safety minister. This is consistent with the prevailing view
that Toews is so closely associated with the worst of the bill -
warrantless disclosure of subscriber information, new surveillance
technologies, and divisive us vs. them framing - that a change will be
needed for the bill to come back. Ibbitson focuses on the likelihood of
Parliament proroging before the bill is revamped and returns, yet
speculating on those issues is always difficult. What is certain
is
that lawful access will return at some point, meaning Canadians will
need to remain vigilant to ensure that any future bill addresses the myriad of
concerns associated with Bill C-30.
May.16/12Comments (2)
Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro offers up one of the oddest copyright
analogies during the C-11 debate, likening format shifting to socks
and shoes.
May.16/12Comments (12)
The Wall Streeet Journal's MarketWatch picks
up
on Canada's missing digital economy strategy, using the Penske File
framing to discuss the failure of Industry Minister Christian Paradis
to lead on the file.
May.16/12Comments (0)
