The Dutch Minister of Economic Affairs Van der Hoeven has issued a release calling for ACTA transparency. Van der Hoeven adds that a three-strikes system is unacceptable.
Archive for March 2nd, 2010
Yesterday's ACTA leak that provides full detail on each country's negotiation position attracted immediate media attention, with the New Zealand press picking up on the story (and that country's tough position), while the Australian press lamented their country's relative silence at the negotiation table. And what of Canada? The Canadian positions on the Internet chapter culled from the EU leaked document are:
- expresses concern with the disparity between the section title and the scope of content of the section
- seeks clarification of the scope of "related rights" in provision dealing with a general enforcement obligation. Argues that it should be consistent with the Criminal and Civil Enforcement chapters
- concerns with a footnote on third party liability that seeks to define its scope. Canada notes that the footnote effectively changes the meaning of the main text.
- seeks more information on the scope of "modification" to the content in a provision on online service providers
- notes that the relationship between third party liability and ISP limitation on liability is unclear
- seeks clarification of the relationship of anti-circumvention exceptions to access control measures
That's it. Compare the Canadian focus on clarifications of legal language and hints at opposition with the far-tougher, more explicit New Zealand positions:
The EU has established a new requirement to prevent surprise wireless bills, allows consumers to require cut offs after roaming bills reach certain levels.
Last week's revelation that Denmark is one of the countries blocking ACTA transparency has stirred up media attention in that country. The issue was covered by the national broadcaster and in the press.