[Cc-nz] Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement
anarchist at tracs.co.nz
Thu Sep 18 18:27:02 EDT 2008
> Apparently there was a period of public consultation
> on it, but somehow it got under our radar.
It slipped most people's radar, actually, by design. The powers that be
don't really want consultation on it, but just the appearance of
consultation. There is material at
it doesn't really say anything.
MED have also released a summary of the submissions they received in
response to the ACTA issue:
Submissions in favour of ACTA 7
Distilled Spirits Association of NZ
NZ Retailers Association
NZ Institute of Patent Attorneys
Cosmetic Toiletry and Fragrance Association of NZ
Recording Industry Association of NZ
Submissions not in favour of ACTA 11
Submissions I'm unsure about 1
So, the predictable split hows the true nature of the measure, which is
pro-business and anti-individual. I'm surprised to see Trade Me in the
pro camp - perhaps they haven't realised just how much policing they
would be required to do...
> That may be because of the euphemistic 'anti-counterfeiting' wording in
> the title, which makes it sound like it's about stopping currency
> forgery, rather than increasing surveillance and control over people's
> movements and communications.
Never really about currency, but about knock-off products like fake
RayBan sunglasses and stuff. The reality is that it's all about
"Intellectual Property" protection for the American corporates.
> The ACTA basically proposes to increase
> border control and enforcement, especially emphasizing control over free
> exchange of information over the net, to protect corporate 'IP' from
> unapproved sharing which they demonize with the euphemism "piracy".
The ACTA negotiators are pushing the line that ACTA is about harmonising
enforcement measure and making it easier for "rights-holders" to prevent
people copying their IP. How you do that without harmonising the
definition of IP or the acts of infringement across participating
countries has not been (publicly) addressed.
> My analysis is that this is the beating stick to go with the carrot of
> the WTO's TRIPs agreement:
Nup, this is an end run around TRIPS and the WTO altogether. It is not a
multi-lateral arrangement, but a plurilateral one, where a group of
countries get together, make up some rules and then tell the other
nations that they will only trade if the new rules are abided by. Unlike
the WTO, there appears to be no mechanism proposed to mediate disputes.
The reason it has been raised appears to be the deadlock in the WTO
(ref. Doha) that has a multiplicity of nations out-voting the US.
> Not sure what we can do about the ACTA at this stage, but certainly
> getting some public awareness, making it an election issue, and finding
> out all we can about the contents of the agreement would be good places
> to start.
Have a look at a wiki I put up at http://acta.lemming-brothers.com/
where I have posted my submission to MED on ACTA, and the run-around and
results (!) I got from an OIA request. Also some links to other sites.
There is no official draft text available at this time, though a
preliminary document made its way to Wikilinks a couple of months ago.
I'll be talking about ACTA at the Software Freedom Day barcamp in
Wellington on Saturday (www.softwarefreedomday.org.nz).
I have also emailed the main political parties (including Strypey's one
;-) to seek their position on ACTA and will be posting the results on
I do recommend your raise it with your local candidates and make a
reasoned argument about the dangers of excessive IP (and I use the damn
term reluctantly) legislation and enforcement.
Technology Research and Consultancy Services Ltd.
More information about the cc-nz