CASE 382 - ACTA

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) which was proposed in a private agreement between 39 governments and corporations in April of 2010 for the purpose of establishing international standards on intellectual property rights enforcement. It would establish an international legal framework for countries to join voluntarily, and would create a governing body outside international institutions such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) or the United Nations. Negotiating countries have described it as a response "to the increase in global trade of counterfeit goods and pirated copyright protected works." The scope of ACTA includes counterfeit goods, generic medicines and copyright infringement on the Internet.Groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) oppose ACTA, stating that civil society groups and developing countries were excluded from discussion during ACTA's development in an example of policy laundering.

The agreement was signed on 1 October 2011 by Australia, Canada, Japan, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea and the United States. In January 2012, the European Union and 22 of its member states signed as well, bringing the total number of signatories to 31. After ratification by 6 states, the convention will come into force.
Supporting and negotiating countries have heralded the agreement as a response to "the increase in global trade of counterfeit goods and pirated copyright protected works", while opponents have lambasted it for its potentially adverse effects on fundamental civil and digital rights, including freedom of expression and communication privacy. Others, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, have derided the exclusion of civil society groups, developing countries and the general public from the agreement's negotiation process and have described it as policy laundering. The signature of the EU and many of its member states resulted in the resignation in protest of the European Parliament's appointed rapporteur, as well as widespread protests across Poland



Opponents have argued that the treaty will restrict fundamental civil and digital rights, including the freedom of expression and communication privacy."The bulk of the WTO's 153 members" have raised concerns that treaty could distort trade and goes beyond the existing Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. Opponents also criticize ACTA's removal of "legal safeguards that protect Internet Service Providers from liability for the actions of their subscribers" in effect giving ISPs no option but to comply with privacy invasions. According to an analysis by the Free Software Foundation, ACTA would require that existing ISPs no longer host free software that can access copyrighted media, and DRM-protected media would not be legally playable with free or open source software.



Canada, the European Union and Switzerland joined the preliminary talks throughout 2006 and 2007. Official negotiations began in June 2008, with Australia, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea and Singapore joining the talks. Apart from the participating governments, an advisory committee of large US-based multinational corporations was consulted on the content of the draft treaty, including the International Intellectual Property Alliance, (which includes the Business Software Alliance, Motion Picture Association of America, and Recording Industry Association of America) and Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. The treaty calls for the creation of an "ACTA committee" to make amendments, for which public or judicial review are not required. Industry representatives may have "consultatory input" to amendments. A 2009 Freedom of Information request showed that the following companies also received copies of the draft under a nondisclosure agreement: Google, eBay, Intel, Dell, News Corporation, Sony Pictures, Time Warner, and Verizon.



Similar cases to this
CASE 380 - SOPA
CASE 388 - PIPA