EP Resolution on ACTA

From La Quadrature du Net
Jump to navigationJump to search

Report on the impact of counterfeiting on international trade


Committee on International Trade

Rapporteur: Gianluca Susta

Source: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P6-TA-2008-0634&language=EN&ring=A6-2008-0447


Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement ACTA and other bilateral and regional EU initiatives

13. Calls on the Commission to continue its fight against counterfeiting and piracy, in parallel with the multilateral negotiations, also by means of bilateral, regional and multilateral agreements with a view to approximating and enforcing laws, and by providing for the establishment of efficient dispute settlement systems and penalties in case of failure to comply with the obligations underwritten;

14. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to negotiate ACTA under conditions of the utmost transparency towards EU citizens, especially with regard to the definitions of the terms "counterfeiting" and "piracy" and the criminal sanction measures foreseen; takes the view that the social impact of the agreement as well as the impact on civil liberties must be assessed; supports the establishment of a task force to examine the implementation of the agreement, by promoting this subject in dialogue between the European Union and third countries and as part of cooperation measures with those countries;

15. Considers that it is not yet certain whether the EC Treaty provides a legal basis for Community measures prescribing the type and level of criminal penalties and that, as a consequence, the Commission may not have competence to negotiate on behalf of the Community an international agreement which specifies the nature and level of criminal-law measures to be taken against trademark and copyright violators;

16. Stresses that in all intellectual property enforcement agreements foreseen, personal use, that is not for profit, must be distinguished from the fraudulent and intentional marketing of counterfeit and pirated goods;

17. Calls on the Commission to negotiate with third countries on the establishment of task forces to combat counterfeiting;

18. Asks the Commission to ensure that ACTA will not grant public authorities access to private computers and other electronic devices;

19. Welcomes the growing interest shown by a number of WTO countries in the ACTA, believes that efforts should be made to include emerging economies such as China, India, Brazil as well as regional trade blocs such as Mercosur, CARICOM and ASEAN, in order for them to take part in the negotiations of the agreement, inviting them from now to commit themselves to guarantee IPRs' respect in their territories;

20. Calls on the Commission to avoid the danger of contradictions and overlap between the ACTA, the TRIPS agreement and other international IPR treaties;

21. Calls on the Commission to ensure that ACTA only concentrates on IPR enforcement measures and not on substantive IPR issues such as the scope of protection, limitations and exceptions, secondary liability or liability of intermediaries;

22. Calls on the Commission to ensure that ACTA is not used as a vehicle for modifying the existing European IPR enforcement framework, but fully reflects the balance established by the different directives adopted by the European Parliament and Council in this field, and notably the provision of Recital 2 of the Directive 2004/48/EC;

23. Calls on the Commission and the Council to clarify the role and competence of the Article 133 Committee and the other committees involved in the negotiation of the ACTA;

24. Believes that the Commission should take into account certain strong criticism of ACTA in its ongoing negotiations, namely that it could allow trademark and copyright holders to intrude on the privacy of alleged infringers without due legal process, that it could further criminalise non commercial copyright and trademark infringements, that it could reinforce Digital Rights Management technologies at the cost of 'fair use' rights, that it could establish a dispute settlement procedure outside existing WTO structures and lastly that it could force all signatories to cover the cost of enforcement of copyright and trademark infringements;

25. In this context, calls on the Commission to ensure a continuous and transparent public consultation process, to support the benefits of such a process with all the negotiating countries, and to ensure that the Parliament is regularly and thoroughly informed about the state of play of the negotiations;

26. Recalls that the EC Treaty includes derogations where the negotiation and conclusion of agreements in the field of commercial aspects of intellectual property relates to trade in cultural and audiovisual services; points out that, in such instances, the negotiation and conclusion of agreements falls within the shared competence of the Community and its Member States; further points out that, in addition to a Community decision taken in accordance with the relevant provisions of the EC Treaty, the negotiation of such agreements requires the common accord of the Member States and agreements negotiated in this way must be concluded jointly by the Community and the Member States;

27. Reminds the Commission of, within the framework of ACTA negotiations, Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which concerns the protection of personal data, and Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data[1];

28. Takes the view that the public interest in disclosure of ACTA preparatory drafts, including progress reports, and of the Commission's negotiating mandate should not be overridden by Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents[2], and urges the Council to enforce Article 255 of the EC Treaty in such a way as to ensure the widest possible access to documents, provided that the necessary security measures are taken as required by data-protection law;

29. Notes with regret that IPR protection in Turkey does not yet meet EU standards and therefore needs to be reviewed; points out that Turkey will only become a credible candidate for accession when it is in a position to take on the Community acquis and guarantee full respect for IPRs within its boundaries;


  1. OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31.
  2. OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43.

See also EC_on_ACTA_Internet_Chapter