ACTA Susta-report amendments
franz schaefer wrote:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/organes/inta/inta_20081013_1500.htm
i have read through the 107 amendments in the document above and rated them beween --- and +++
some things to note:
most amendments are bad. there are no amendments from GUE/NGL at all. even the green amendments are not always convincing.
we also have to note that where there are amendments that make the text slightly better, these often come with the implicit affirmation of the main-line of the argument. i marked those with a single "+" (i.e. that it is better to vote for them then to have nothing at all).
my comments on AMENDMENTS 1 - 107 To "Gianluca Susta" Draft "AM\739072EN.doc PE412.022v01-00"
(PE405.983v01-00 on the Impact of Counterfeiting on International Trade (2008/2133(INI))
sources of amendments:
a.) Tokia Saïfi + Jean-Pierre Audy
both french EPP members,
b.) Gianluca Susta
italian ALDE and author of the horrible pro-ACTA resolution
c.) Carl Schlyter, Greens/EFA
swedisch green
d.) Corien Wortmann-Kool
danish EPP
e.) David Martin
UK labour party
f.) Christofer Fjellner
swedish EPP
g.) Seyed Kamall
UK conservativ EPP
h.) Daniel Caspary
german EPP (CDU)
i.) Pervenche Berès
france, PSE
amandments: Ratings range from --- to +++
--- very bad -- bad - not recommended 0 rather neutral + not good but slightly better then nothing ++ good +++ very good
Am1 (audy): Rating: --
short: inclusion of "An Industrial Property Rights Strategy for Europe" COM(2008)0465 within the citations. the paper is mostly pro-IP hogwash.
Am2 (susta): Rating: --
identical with Am1
Am3 (susta): Rating: --
Am4 (schlyter): Rating: +
short: lessens scope to "systemically" infringements
which makes it slightly better but is still affirmative to the general
idea of IPR.
Am5 (susta): Rating: --
"counterfeiting not only luxury goods"
Am6 (susta): Rating: ---
short: mentioning the OECD report zillions of damage.
Am7 (schlyter): Rating: -
short: "considerable share of pirated goods originates within the EU"
Am8 (schlyter): Rating: +
slightly limiting the scope but general affirmation
Am9 (susta): Rating: ---
short: digital piracy is increasing (OECD)
Am10 (schlyter): Rating: 0
Am11 (wortmann-kool): Rating: 0
short: combating counterfeiting is expensive for SMEs
Am12 (schlyter): Rating: +
short: listen to consumer organisations when fighting against
counterfeiting
Am13 (schlyter): Rating: -
short: we need more public pro-IP propganda
Am14 (wortmann-kool): Rating: -
short: more propganda
Am15 (audy): Rating: -
short: even more repressiv action in case of helath risks
Am16 (schlyter): Rating: 0
short: no substantial change
Am17 (wortmann-kool): Rating: +
short: some countries already have effective laws to destroy
counterfeited goods. (we could argue that thus we could avoid ACTA)
Am18 (susta): Rating: --- short: Pro-IP hogwash from G8
Am19 (susta): Rating: ---
short: heiligendamm pro-IP
Am20 (d. martin): Rating: + slightly less agressiv wording,
Am21 (fjellner): Rating: 0 changed wrong date from 2007 to 2008
Am22 (susta): Rating: --- hogwash
Am23 (susta): Rating: --
to ".. developed countries;" he added the sentence:
"whereas, moreover, counterfeit medicines account for only part of
illegal medicines,"
maybe he wants to suggest that thus ACTA does not hurt the developing
countries??
Am24 (audy): Rating: - short: the internet is the distribution channel for all evil
Am25 (fjellner + kamall): Rating: ++ short: we already have IPRED (COM(2005)0276) and do not need that
process distrubed by outside decesion making
Am26 (fjellner + kamall): Rating: ++
short: limits to IPR-enforcement are necessary.
Am27 (fjellner + kamall): Rating: +
short: the EU already has balanced IPR
Am28 (schlyter): Rating: ++ short: TRIPS is an "agreed level" and not "minimum level"
Am29 (caspary): Rating: -- short: TRIPS is not protecting us good enough
Am30 (schlyter): Rating: + short: medicine for developing countries. comment: i am sick of this. why do people
agree that developing countries need access to medice but
at the same time ignore that they also need lots of other
technology and education and art etc.. as well??
Am31 (susta): Rating: + short: TRIPS flexibilties should be maintained.
(problem: limited to "public health" see above)
Am32 (d. martin): Rating: ++ short: be more "balanced"
Am33 (schlyter): Rating: ++ short: use WTO instead of ACTA
Am34 (d. martin): Rating: + delete pragraph 4 (asking for financial coverage)
Am35 (schlyter): Rating: + in paragraph 4: "consumer eductaion" instead of "fight against terror"
Am36 (susta): Rating: - pro-IP hogwash
Am37 (susta): Rating: - short: "creative industries are good for developoing countries" and for "sustainable development"
Am38 (audy): Rating: - short: protocal, equals counterfeiting with organised crime
Am39 (schlyter): Rating: + short: more networking amoung "consumer organisations" instead of "harmonisation of laws"
Am40 (audy): Rating: + slight change of scope
Am41 (susta): Rating: + safeguards against abuse of IPR
Am42 (audy): Rating: - more "Euro-Mediterranean Partnership"
Am43 (wortmann-kool): Rating: - 60% of counterfeiting comes from china: thus asks for
"action plan" ASAP.
Am44 (fjellner): Rating: 0 short: "plurilateral" instead of "regional" in paragraph 6
Am45 (schlyter): Rating: ++ short: "respect sovereignty and international treaties"
Am46 (schlyter): Rating: ++ short: use the already establish framework of WTO and do not
undermine it by ACTA
Am47 (d. martin): Rating: + short: "consider viewpoints of developing countries"
Am48 (fjellner): Rating: -- use "plurilateral" instead of "multilateral"
from wikipedia: "A plurilateral agreement is an agreement between
more than two countries, but not a great many, which would be multilateral agreement."
Am49 (schlyter): Rating: - ask for pro IPR-propaganda
Am50 (schlyter): Rating: ++ against "criminal sanctions"
Am51 (schlyter): Rating: +++ asks for "utmost transparency"
Am52 (d. martin): Rating: ++ asks for "open and inclusive debate" on ACTA
Am53 (audy): Rating: -- asks for "task force"
Am54 (schlyter): Rating: +++ ACTA is against EU-legislation
Am55 (schlyter): Rating: +++ distinguis "for personal use"
Am56 (audy): Rating: --- hardcore: "ambitious, exemplary and deterrent criminal sanctions"
Am57 (caspary): Rating: +++ ensure that ACTA does not allow "access to your private PC"
Am58 (d. martin): Rating: + include "emerging economies"
Am59 (schlyter): Rating: ++ more time for negotiations, fully include emerging economies
Am60 (audy): Rating: + adds "india"
Am61 (susta): Rating: - IPR helps to "attract foreign investment"
Am62 (schlyter): Rating: +++ inform parliament and ask before signing anything
Am63 (susta): Rating: + avoid contradiction and overlaping beween TRIPS and ACTA
Am64 (susta): Rating: - "calls on the chinese authorities"
Am65 (susta): Rating: 0 "cooperation with chinese customs"
Am66 (susta): Rating: -- threaten china
Am67 (susta): Rating: -- threaten turkey
Am68 (fjellner + kamall): Rating: ++ ACTA should not modify existin IPR in the EU
Am69 (fjellner + kamall): Rating: ++ delete paragraph 10
Am70 (schlyter): Rating: + avoid threatening developing countries
Am71 (d. martin): Rating: +++ recognize privacy concerns, avoid DRM
Am72 (fjellner + kamall): Rating: ++
ACTA should only concentrate on "enforcement" but not change IPR
Am73 (wortman-kool): Rating: - simplify IPR-enforcement
Am74 (fjellner + kamall): Rating: ++ delete paragraph 11
Am75 (audy): Rating: + slightly limits scope of paragraph 11 to "serious threat"
Am76 (fjellner + kamall + caspary): Rating: ++ transparancy, keep EP informed
Am77 (schlyter): Rating: + slightly limit scope: "alleged" IPR infringments
Am78 (susta): Rating: --- pro-IP hogwash
Am79 (schlyter): Rating: ++ deleted most of the bad stuff from paragraph 13
Am80 (schlyter): Rating: ++ removes some bas stuff from paragraph 14
Am81 (d. martin): Rating: + removes call for "harmonisation" from paragraph 14
Am82 (susta): Rating: + we have no definition for "counterfeiting and piracy"
Am83 (audy): Rating: -- pro-IP hogwash
Am84 (d. martin): Rating: + focus on existing legislation before ACTA
Am85 (wortman-kool): Rating: -- minimum sanctions within the EU in case of IPR-infringements
Am86 (audy): Rating: -- pro-IP hogwash
Am87 (audy): Rating: - training for customs
Am88 (susta): Rating: --- IP protects "Sport"
Am89 (wortman-kool): Rating: + investigate first to see if further measures are needed
Am90 (d. martin): Rating: + delete paragraph 16
Am91 (fjellner + kamall): Rating: + same as Am90: delete paragraph 16
Am92 (caspary): Rating: - against "mark of origin legislation" (which would probably be
slightly better then trademark legislation)
Am93 (d. martin): Rating: + delete paragraph 17
Am94 (fjellner): Rating: + same as Am93: delete paragraph 17
Am95 (wortmann-kool): Rating: 0 slightly changes paragraph 17
Am96 (audy): Rating: 0 replaces "authority" with "monitoring center" in paragraph 17
Am97 (audy): Rating: 0 wants statistical data from the commission
Am98 (berès): Rating: - wants data about internet counterfeiting
Am99 (wortmann-kool): Rating: - SME helpdesk for counterfeiting
Am100 (wortmann-kool): Rating: -- demands pro-IP indoctrination
Am101 (audy): Rating: -- use new technology for distinguish coutnerfeited products
Am102 (schlyter): Rating: + replaces "criminal measures" with "consumer eduction"
Am103 (audy): Rating: -- proposes "counterfeiting awareness day"
Am104 (d. martin): Rating: -- proposes "international counterfeiting scorebord"
Am105 (schlyter): Rating: ++ more central role for the parliament
Am106 (caspary): Rating: ++ "stresses that ACTA has to be ratified by the EP under the assent procedure;"
Am107 (d. martin): Rating: +++
"believes that in the spirit of the Lisbon Treaty, the EP should be fully associated
in the ACTA negotiations;"
