ACTA är tillbaka i ny form

  • ACTA’s Back: European Commission Trying To Sneak In Worst Parts Using Canada-EU Trade Agreement As A Trojan Horse | Techdirt

    The European Commission strategy appears to be to use CETA as the new ACTA, burying its provisions in a broader Canadian trade agreement with the hope that the European Parliament accepts the same provisions it just rejected with the ACTA framework. If successful, it would likely then argue that ACTA poses no new concerns since the same rules were approved within the Canadian trade deal.

  • Michael Geist – ACTA Lives: How the EU & Canada Are Using CETA as Backdoor Mechanism To Revive ACTA

    The backdoor ACTA approach creates enormous risks for Canada’s trade ambitions. Given the huge anti-ACTA movement, the Canada – EU trade deal could face widespread European opposition with CETA becoming swept up in similar protests.

    With anti-ACTA sentiment spreading across Europe, Canada should push to remove the intellectual property chapter from CETA altogether. The move would not be unprecedented. Many of Canada’s free trade agreements feature only limited IP provisions and last year a Canadian parliamentary committee recommended that “domestic copyright policies are not part of any present or future trade negotiations.”

Allt hopp om ACTA är äntligen ute!

Europaparlamentet har skickat en stark signal att så här får det inte går till.

Lite kommentarer från olika sidor runt om på internet:

ACTA-bloggen » ACTA-avtalet besegrat!

ACTA-avtalet är besegrat! EU-Parlamentet röstade precis nej till avtalet. Som väntat försökte de konservativa grupperna EPP och ECR att skjuta upp omröstningen, men deras förslag föll klart med röstsiffrorna 255 – 420. I stället beslutade en majoritet av Parlamentets ledamöter att säga nej till ACTA-avtalet, med röstsiffrorna 478 mot 39 (165 avstod). Därmed kan EU inte ingå avtalet, varvid hela avtalet lär falla, då det inte bör finnas någon större vits för övriga parter i avtalet att gå vidare när EU saknas. Handelskommissionär Karel de Gucht har tidigare sagt att EU-Kommissionen vid ett nej inte tänker att ge upp ACTA, utan att återkomma med avtalet efter att EU-domstolens yttrande kommit. Huruvida detta bara var ett tomt hot är oklart. Det är dock tveksamt om detta är möjligt, och definitivt osannolikt att EU-Parlamentet då plötsligt skulle ändra sig.Kommissionen sade precis efter omröstningen att man fortsätter med sin förfrågan till EU-domstolen, kommer att avvakta yttrandet och därefter överväga hur man tänker gå vidare.

EDRi welcomes European Parliament’s rejection of ACTA | EDRI

European Digital Rights (EDRi) warmly welcomed today’s decision by the European Parliament to reject ACTA with an overwhelming majority (478 against, 39 in favour, 165 abstentions).

“ACTA was a bad proposal on every level. The drafting process was closed and undemocratic. The final text would have prevented a positive reform of Europe’s profoundly broken copyright system for years to come. Today’s victory is an important milestone for internet freedoms in Europe and cross the globe,” said Joe McNamee, Executive Director of EDRi. ACTA Post Mortem

Europaparlamentets nej till Acta är en tydlig markering mot att tjänstemän och särintressen sitter och upprättar avtal med lagstiftande verkan, bakom stängda dörrar och utan demokratisk insyn. Detta är en markering mot korporativism och den post-representativa demokratins tjänstemannavälde.

Detta är också en viktig signal om att det faktiskt kan finnas gränser för hur långt politiker, byråkrater och särintressen kan gå i jakten på fildelare och vad gäller att inskränka internets frihet. Och det visar sig att det finns gränser där politikerna inte kan göra hur de vill utan att medborgarna blir förbannade. Detta kommer att vara oerhört användbart att ha med sig in i det fortsatta arbetet med upphovsrätts- och internetfrågorna i EU.

Michael Geist – The European Parliament Rejects ACTA: The Impossible Becomes Possible

The European developments have had a ripple effect, with the recent Australian parliamentary committee recommendation to delay ACTA ratification and the mounting opposition around the world. ACTA is not yet dead – it may still eke out the necessary six ratifications in a year or two for it to take effect – but it is badly damaged and will seemingly never achieve the goals of its supporters as a model for other countries to adopt and to emerge as a new global standard for IP enforcement. That said, ACTA supporters will not take today’s decision as the final verdict. In the coming weeks and months, we can expect new efforts to revive the agreement within Europe and to find alternative means to implement its provisions. That suggests the fight will continue, but for today, it is worth celebrating how the seemingly impossible – stopping a one-sided, secretly negotiated global IP agreement – became possible.

European Parliament Declares Its Independence From The European Commission With A Massive Rejection Of ACTA. Now What? | Techdirt

In other words, the rejection of ACTA by the EU is not just a victory for the activists who took to the streets of Europe earlier this year, and the huge numbers of people who contacted their politicians to express their concern: this is also a victory for the European Parliament, which hitherto has been little more than a rubber stamp for the European Commission’s proposals.

That has important consequences for the future, since it means that the Commission will need to be more circumspect when dealing with the Parliament. That, in its turn, is likely to lead to more transparency and participation by European citizens in the process of crafting new laws and treaties. In particular, it means that whatever the European Commission comes up with as a response to this major defeat over ACTA, it will not be able to assume that it can always get what it wants. Today’s subtle but important shift in power within European politics will also be felt at the international level, since the Commission’s negotiators will no longer be able to conduct meetings behind closed doors that fail to take into account what the European Parliament — and ultimately the people of Europe — are willing to accept.

Nej till ACTA i det tyngsta utskottet

Även INTA-utskottet rekommenterar EU-parlamentet att säga nej till ACTA

Ändringsyrkandet att skjuta upp förfarandet i EU-Parlamentet tills dess att EU-domstolen kommit med sitt yttrande slogs ned. Det röstades först ner med siffrorna 13-19, men omröstningen fick göras om då 32 personer (mot tillåtna 31) hade röstat. Slutliga resultatet blev 12 – 19. Således slogs ändringsyrkandet ner med betryggande majoritet. Sedan godkändes den acta-kritiska yttrandet, som rekommenderar att EU-Parlamentet säger nej till ACTA, med samma siffror, 19-12.

DN: Slutstriden om Acta-avtalet börjar i dag | Hårt tryck från lobbyister kring Acta-avtalet | Nej till Acta-avtalet
SVD: Dödsstöt mot Acta-avtalet
Europaportalen: Acta föll i sista parlamentsutskottet

Läckta TPP-dokument visar att USA vill ge enorma befogenheter till privata företag

Tidigare har raportering runt TPP mest handlat om IP-kapitlet (intelecual property) som har visat på att man återigen, precis som med ACTA, med hemliga förhandlingar försöker anta ett handelsavtal som får långtgående konsekvenser och bland annat inskränker våra fri- och rättigheter på internet.

Leaked TPP Proposal Reveals That US Wants To Give Multinational Companies Tremendous Power | Techdirt

It’s important to note that TPP covers a lot more than just intellectual property. We’ve mainly been focused on the IP chapter, but this leak covers other parts of the agreement. That doesn’t make it any less troubling. As is being reported, the proposals appears to completely contradict President Obama’s campaign promises, while also giving tremendous power to international companies.

Controversial Trade Pact Text Leaked, Shows U.S. Trade Officials Have Agreed to Terms That Undermine Obama Domestic Agenda

Although the TPP has been branded a “trade” agreement, the leaked text of the pact’s Investment Chapter shows that the TPP would:

  • Limit how U.S. federal and state officials could regulate foreign firms operating within U.S. boundaries, with requirements to provide them greater rights than domestic firms;
  • Extend the incentives for U.S. firms to offshore investment and jobs to lower-wage countries;
  • Establish a two-track legal system that gives foreign firms new rights to skirt U.S. courts and laws, directly sue the U.S. government before foreign tribunals and demand compensation for financial, health, environmental, land use and other laws they claim undermine their TPP privileges; and
  • Allow foreign firms to demand compensation for the costs of complying with U.S. financial or environmental regulations that apply equally to domestic and foreign firms.

Obama Trade Document Leaked, Revealing New Corporate Powers And Broken Campaign Promises

A critical document from President Barack Obama’s free trade negotiations with eight Pacific nations was leaked online early Wednesday morning, revealing that the administration intends to bestow radical new political powers upon multinational corporations, contradicting prior promises.

The leaked document has been posted on the website of Citizens Trade Campaign, a long-time critic of the administration’s trade objectives. The new leak follows substantial controversy surrounding the secrecy of the talks, in which some members of Congress have complained they are not being given the same access to trade documents that corporate officials receive.

Hur har ACTA förhandlats fram?

EDRi har publicerat fyra dokument som belyser hur förhandlingarna har framskridit och problemen EU har haft med de amerikanska positionerna.

ACTA: European Commission negotiation failures | EDRI

De förklarar även vad kommissionen har bett om och vad man fick:

What the EC asked for: What the EC got:
Transparency Some transparency for US companies, but nothing meaningful for European citizens and businesses.
Transparency EU Presidency actively choosing not to brief EU Member States.
No mandatory enforcement of intellectual property law by ISPs Mandatory obligations on states party to ACTA to encourage enforcement of intellectual property law by ISPs.
No change to substantive copyright law A further complication of EU law on copyright exceptions and limitations.
Prioritisation of health and safety issues in international cooperation Nothing.
Adequate environmental protection in the disposal of seized material A “safeguard” which creates no change to the status quo. In essence, nothing
Definitions of key terms in ACTA Nothing
Protection for geographical indications Nothing

Dokumenten visar dessutom hur kommissionen och EU-presidenten har vilselett parlamentet och EUs medborgare.

Amerikanska juridukprofessorer ifrågasätter ACTA-processen i USA

Law Professor Letter to Senate Finance Committee

Dear Members of the United States Senate Committee on Finance:

We write as legal academics with expertise in Constitutional, international, and intellectual property law to encourage you to exercise your Constitutional responsibility to ensure that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is submitted to the Senate for approval as an Article II treaty, or to the Congress as an ex post Congressional-Executive Agreement. It is our studied opinion that the administration has failed to identify ex ante authorization of ACTA by Congress, and that these are thus the only Constitutional bases for U.S. entry into ACTA. It is clear that other ACTA negotiating parties – including the EU, Australia, Mexico, and others—are treating ACTA as a binding international agreement requiring legislative ratification under constitutional standards similar to our own. We encourage you to demand the same element of public process in our own country.

De som skriver under det öppna brevet har stora problem med hur processen för ACTA har skötts i USA och hävdar att det är kongressen som måste besluta om detta och att det inte är ett vanligt handelsavtal. Den exekutiva delen av staten (presidenten) har enligt dem inte mandat att förhandla fram och skriva under ett så omfattande avtal.

Remedying this state of affairs is uniquely within Congress’s province. Congress, and specifically the Senate, as the Constitutionally recognized chamber with responsibilities for the approval of treaties, should secure from the Administration a public pledge to send ACTA to the Senate as a treaty, or to the Congress as an ex post Congressional-Executive Agreement. Absent a pledge to this effect, we encourage the Committee to hold hearings and to pass legislation that would prevent the United States from binding itself to ACTA without express Congressional consent.

Brevet är underskrivet av 53 personer kopplade till allt från Yale till University of Oregon och alla däremellan.

EU-kommissionen har skickat ACTA-avtalet till EU-domstolen

European Commission officially referred ACTA to the European Court of Justice -ACTA

We can confirm that the European Commission has now officially submitted its request for an opinion on ACTA to the European Court of Justice. The Court’s opinion is vital to respond to the wide-ranging concerns voiced by people across Europe on whether ACTA harms our fundamental rights in any way. The European Commission has a responsibility to provide Members of the European Parliament and the public at large with the most detailed and accurate information available. We now look forward to Europe’s top court to independently clarifying the legality of this agreement. Let us reiterate our firm position that we call on the European Parliament to await this Court opinion before deciding on ACTA

Från ACTA-bloggen:
ACTA-bloggen » EU-Kommissionen har skickat ACTA till EU-domstolen

Det är svårt att inte se det här beskedet samt det uttalande som medföljer det som ett sista desperat försök från Kommissionen att undvika ett rungande Nej till ACTA i EU-Parlamentet i juli genom att försöka skjuta upp hanteringen av avtalet i avvaktan på domstolens yttrande, vilket antagligen kommer att dröja relativt lång tid. Beskedet betyder också att även om det skulle bli ett Ja i ACTA-omröstningen i EU-Parlamentet i juli, så kommer EU-domstolens yttrande behöva färdigställas innan EU i sådana fall kan ingå ACTA, förstås förutsatt att domstolen inte har några invändningar.

Sammanfattning av ACTA-avtalet

Vad är ACTA?

ACTA står för Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

Varför är ACTA dåligt?


Avtalet läckte ut under de hemliga förhandligarna

EFFs analys av det officiellt släppta avtalet

Den 22 april 2010 pblicerade EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) en analys av det då officiellt släppta avtalet.

Vad händer nu?

Europaparlamentet planerar att rösta om ACTA i juni eller juli, ingen vet exakt när.

Motståndarna planerar flera protestaktioner, bland annat kommer det ske demonstrationer på många håll den 9:e juni.

Länkar att läsa vidare:

Amerikanska staten lämnar tillbaka beslagtagen website efter ett år

Detta är skälet till att lagar som SOPA/PIPA/CISPA och avtal som ACTA är dåliga. Om det blir så här med dagens möjligheter, hur blir det då när det finns ännu vidare möjligheter att stänga ner sidor?

Amerikanska staten beslagtar en website i över ett år på uppdrag av den privata organisationen RIAA. Några bevis som håller för en rättegång kommer aldrig och websiten lämnas tillbaka utan förklaring.

Federal authorities who seized a popular hip-hop music site based on assertions from the Recording Industry Association of America that it was linking to four “pre-release” music tracks gave it back more than a year later without filing civil or criminal charges because of apparent recording industry delays in confirming infringement, according to court records obtained by Wired.

The Los Angeles federal court records, which were unsealed Wednesday at the joint request of Wired, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the First Amendment Coalition, highlight a secret government process in which a judge granted the government repeated time extensions to build a civil or criminal case against, one of about 750 domains the government has seized in the last two years in a program known as Operation in Our Sites.

Apparently, however, the RIAA and music labels’ evidence against Dajaz1, a music blog, never came. Or, if it did, it was not enough to build a case and the authorities returned the site nearly 13 months later without explanation or apology.

Feds Seized Hip-Hop Site for a Year, Waiting for Proof of Infringement