[Cc-nz] Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

Mark Harris anarchist at tracs.co.nz
Thu Sep 18 18:27:02 EDT 2008


strypes wrote:

 > 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 
http://www.med.govt.nz/templates/ContentTopicSummary____34357.aspx but 
it doesn't really say anything.

MED have also released a summary of the submissions they received in 
response to the ACTA issue:

http://www.med.govt.nz/templates/MultipageDocumentTOC____38575.aspx?epslanguage=EN

Submissions in favour of ACTA   7
NZFACT
Distilled Spirits Association of NZ
NZ Retailers Association
NZ Institute of Patent Attorneys
Trade Me
Cosmetic Toiletry and Fragrance Association of NZ
Recording Industry Association of NZ

Submissions not in favour of ACTA  11
Christopher Mills
Anthony Winter
TJ McKenzie
Steven Ashley
Peter Hewett
InternetNZ
Google Australia
Lesley Boardman
Colin Jackson
Mark Harris
NZOSS

Submissions I'm unsure about       1
Luis Vildosola

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:
 > 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreement_on_Trade-Related_Aspects_of_Intellectual_Property_Rights
 >
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 
the wiki.

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.

Cheers

Mark Harris
Technology Research and Consultancy Services Ltd.



More information about the cc-nz mailing list