Against ACTA

From La Quadrature du Net
Revision as of 14:58, 10 October 2011 by 2a01:e35:2f43:b00:21e:64ff:fe22:6c34 (talk) (Created page with 'This page lists the different documents or public statements against the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement ([ AC…')
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

This page lists the different documents or public statements against the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA).

Brazil - October 2010 - ACTA threatens fundamental rights

A Brazilian official in charge of intellectual property in the Foreign Affairs Ministry says ACTA "by trying to speed up the fight against piracy, can endanger rights, privacy and freedoms online". He further points to the illegitimacy of ACTA, which was negotiated outside of multilateral arenas.

Prof. Korff - August 2011 - ACTA goes against fundamental freedoms

The Green group of the EU Parliament also commissioned an impact assessment of ACTA on fundamental freedoms which stresses that ACTA's provisions "either eliminate safeguards existing under international law or, after strengthening enforcement measures, fail to introduce corresponding safeguarding measures." The study also contradicts the Commission's claim that ACTA does not go beyond the acquis communautaire, stressing that ACTA "will directly or indirectly require additional action on the EU level".

EU Parliament study - July 2011 - Calls on MEP to refuse consent to ACTA

Link to PDF An independent study ommissioned by the Directorate-General for External Policies of the European Parliament recognizes ACTA's lack of safeguards for fundamental rights, while underlining that it is "difficult to point to any significant advantages that ACTA provides for EU citizens beyond the existing international framework." According to the study, "unconditional consent would be an inappropriate response from the European Parliament given the issues that have been identified with ACTA as it stands".

Senate of Mexico - June 2011 - ACTA is unconstitutional

The Mexican Senate approved a resolution calling on the government not to sign the anti-counterfeiting agreement ACTA. In its conclusions, it argues that the digital chapter could lead to privatized online censorship, with harmful effects on Net neutrality (and therefore freedom of expression), access to communications or access to culture.

EU IPR Academics - February 2011 - ACTA goes beyond EU law

In an opinion, leading European academics shows how ACTA clashes both with EU law and with the enforcement provisions of the TRIPS Agreement, particularly on border measures, damages, and lack of safeguards.

Brazil, China and India - October 2010 - Oppose ACTA during WTO meeting

During a TRIPS meeting at WTO, leading emerging economies voiced concerns with ACTA.

  • Brazil expressed its disagreement with ACTA, saying that "ACTA may affect the balance of rights and obligations embodied in the international intellectual property system between rights holders, on the one hand, and third parties who are users of protected goods and services, on the other".
  • China also criticized ACTA, stating that "excessive or unreasonably high standards for IPR protection could unfairly increase monopolistic profits of right holders, eating into the consumer surplus and further broadening the gap between the rich and the poor in the world".
  • India stressed that, ACTA includes "several elements which have far reaching implications for ACTA non-Members".

UN Rapporteur on the Right to Health - October 2010 - ACTA might violate international law

United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health, Anand Grover, commented during an October 28 public consultation on ACTA and the right to health, that the process for creating ACTA appears to violate international human rights obligations for ensuring participation in law making affecting access to medicines and other health issues.

75 US intellectual property scholars - October 2010 - ACTA harms the public interest

75 US intellectual property scholars wrote to President Barack Obama to criticize its administration for "negotiating a far-reaching international intellectual property agreement behind a shroud of secrecy, with little opportunity for public input, and with active participation by special interests who stand to gain from restrictive new international rules that may harm the public interest".