Oxfam said in a statement in The interests of big drug companies can not be put ahead of the needs of two billion people around the world who do not have access to essential medicines.
Yes, it is possible. It would also strike a heavy blow to the U. Simply put: there will be little difference than today. If you are caught illegally file-sharing, you may face trouble in your respective country, as you would do anyway. Because the agreement also covers piracy, individual file-sharers including those who use peer-to-peer networks and file-sharing sites like RapidShare were in the crosshairs.
It meant that college kids downloading music or movies could have faced fines, seizure of equipment, and even custodial sentences. But as the negotiation process went on, these measures were eventually eliminated from the final text.
In the U. Ultimately, it can result in extremely disproportionate fines for ordinary Web users. Though watered down, ACTA still pushes for statutory damages. ACTA will export the U. Just as the United States can lobby the Spanish government to implement SOPA-like laws by threatening to include the country on a trade sanctions list, it can also lobby other countries with smaller economies with similar sanctions.
Trade Representative draws up an annual intellectual property "naughty list", as described by Public Knowledge , which allows the U. Imagine an airport experience where your mobile phone or laptop was plugged in and its contents downloaded or analysed for infringing material.
ACTA allows such measures, but on a wider scale to include infringing material. The EU was critical of this, saying [ PDF ]: "EU customs, frequently confronted with traffics of drugs, weapons or people, do neither have the time nor the legal basis to look for a couple of pirated songs on an iPod music player or laptop computer, and there is no intention to change this.
But ACTA does allow exceptions to this, such as personal baggage. ACTA 'permits' this as an exception, rather than requiring one, making this an opt-out policy. The chances are the EU would opt-out, but other nations may not. It is possible. It was noted that the agreement's text has replaced the word "shall" with "may", but it does give governments "an excuse to do so".
Yes, and no. Though the language used in ACTA is often vague, difficult to comprehend, and often illegible to the ordinary citizen as is any other treaty, international agreement, or legal statute there is some hope.
It's like the passing of a nuclear hot potato. The levels of secrecy are even more stringent than that of ACTA, according to TechDirt , with some negotiating documents being kept secret for up to four years after ratification. The text of ACTA is available now, but during its drafting process it was completely inaccessible to most everyone, including the people you elected to do law-stuff for you.
The drafting committee was composed primarily of those who stand to lose by copyright infringement and counterfeiting pharmaseutical companies, the entertainment industry, etc. Those that patents and copyrights ideally aim to protect artists, content creators, scientists, etc were left out.
Another issue is vagueness. As mentioned before, the U. Inside of ACTA, there are all kinds of similar ambiguities. Like existing copyright law, ACTA is plagued by poor definitions and the impossible weight of trying to stretch a single view of intellectual property law across the entire globe. In order to keep itself from being entirely non-applicable in one country or another, it has to be almost impossibly vague in some cases.
Basically, because this issue is too broad for a single law or treaty, ACTA is trying to be vague enough to be several at once. Talk about self-defeating, right? Lastly, there have been a few flare-ups of attention to ACTA since its inception. ACTA was just signed by the E. They had three fake Apple stores within four blocks of each other. I thought that was the end of it, but no it wasn't there was twenty-two total fake stores shut down that were selling fake goods. Then a friend of mine said that was nothing.
China ignores business as long as they are not killing each other on the street or close to it. Chances are those same stores are probably running today in another town in China. They rarely go after them only if someone ruffles some feathers, then they act like "Oh NO! But unfortunately walk down a business district in China for every store you see about 60 percent sell fake goods, some of the stores sell nothing but fake goods. They don't hide this fact at some of the stores either.
My friend said if he can afford it he wants to go back to China and see if he can find those fake stores. He is not planning to go back until next year though. He did say if he owned a business that sold goods he would not ship to China. I myself don't think that would help if they want it bad enough they will get it. CJ profile , 24 Jan pm. This pdf is from What I want to point out though is I heard also from someone that has been there that it is three times as bad today from the year China is nothing but a bootleg Country.
They sell, trade, and ship overseas, and are the number one major player when it comes to pirated goods. Anonymous Coward , 25 Jan am. More than that I'm afraid, China is a developed country that is finding its foot again. They don't have huge special interests there that have organized yet so competition flourishes there and people can become rich, there is little to no red tape unless you mess with state business, they are what America was at the beginning of the 's.
They are also today the 1 player when it comes to any manufacturing legal or otherwise and are in a wealth growth cycle that is not impeded by legacy players because they had none before. About 11,, results. ChronoFish profile , 24 Jan pm. I'm anxious for the day when Apple can't sell any of it's products, Sony can't import Playstation, Artist can't record music for record companies, and drugs can't be made by anyone. When Fox Searchlight is kept from production because it's getting sued by Disney, when Pixar can't create new rendering techniques to show off in a new movie because they violate software patents, and the NFL can't be broadcasted over the air because it contributes to piracy.
That will be a good day. Because then all these media-moguls and patent abusers die. What will survive? The coming 3d desktop revolution, indie productions, and direct-to-consumer goods, services, and entertainment.
As soon as as the law favors copy-right holders to the extent that simply thinking that someone is infringing requires a take-down notice, the first thing I'm going to do is write a script to send take-down notices for everything Viacom produces, everything Clear-Channel broadcasts, everything Disney exploits, and everything Fox reports on.
Loki , 24 Jan pm. ACTA presents certain requirements for border patrol agents in determining what is and what is not infringing.
Then all we need is some new law classifying TSA as part of border control and we can all be royally and officially buggered. And new scans set up to automatically detect infringing materials on or in your person. What do you mean that pacemaker isn't infringing in The Netherlands now get you ass behind that screen while our highly qualified paramedic Igor over there takes it out. Never mind the meat cleaver. It's a precision instrument in his hands! Idobek profile , 25 Jan am. Violated profile , 24 Jan pm.
One thing I don't get is why they are allowing them to steam-roll these laws or agreements? No assurances the Commission could give to the Parliament would change a legal text. Five parliamentary committees came out against ACTA. The legal affairs committee voted against a draft opinion recommending approval, while the industry committee and the civil liberties committees approved reports recommending rejection.
Although this committee was in charge of the dossier, it was given input by four other committees, namely the ones dedicated to legal affairs, civil liberties, industry and development. British Social-Democrat David Martin, who was responsible for steering the agreement through Parliament, called on his fellow MEPs to reject the agreement in his report.
The international trade committee approved the report on 21 June. On 10 May it referred the agreement to the European Court of Justice for a ruling on whether it is compatible with the EU's fundamental rights and freedoms.
ACTA is aimed at more effectively enforcing intellectual property rights on an international level. However, opponents are concerned that it will favour large companies' interests at the expense of citizens' rights. They also deplore the secrecy of the negotiations. Does ACTA pose a threat to civil liberties and developing countries' access to generic medicine? Many people oppose the controversial anti-counterfeiting agreement because of concerns over these two issues.
Find out how they think the treaty would have affected civil liberties and access to generic medicine. Dr Olivier Vrins, of Altius Lawyers, said ACTA states that its provisions should be transposed with respect to fundamental rights such as freedom of expression and freedom to have a fair trial. The idea of proportionality is particularly important because it is applied as well by the European Court of Human Rights when balancing out various fundamental rights which might be in conflict, here the right on property on the one hand and on the other the right of protection of private life, freedom of speech and freedom of access to information.
This preservation of fundamental rights means that not only that people would be able to say that certain acts do not infringe intellectual property, but parties must foresee certain exceptions and limits to intellectual property.
Rupert Schlegelmilch, of the European Commission's directorate-general for trade, said that the Commission took concerns over civil rights extremely seriously, but there was no real reason to be worried. Privacy and access to the net are just as important. We believe the treaty strikes a fair balance in that respect. ACTA does not impose a new standard. What will be imposed is what we have. Nothing new will be enforced. What is legal is legal, what is illegal is illegal.
ACTA is just about making sure that people do something about it. Dr Meir Pugatch, of the University of Haifa, argued that ACTA would not have an impact on access to generic medicine, as the agreement does not cover patents. The problem is counterfeited medicines and substandard medicines. If you end up using counterfeited medicine or substandard medicine, it could seriously damage your health.
Those who suffer the most from substandard medicines and counterfeited medicines are poor populations. Commission representative Mr Schlegelmilch later added: "Developing countries will be able to continue to buy the generic medicines that they need just as before. However, the British Social Democrat David Martin, who was responsible for steering ACTA through Parliament, said many questions still remained about how the treaty would have affected access to generic medicine. How will this operate?
Mr Martin said the workshop showed there was a need for more information, which is why it would have been good for the European Court of Justice to give a ruling on questions to be prepared by Parliament. The problem with ACTA is that the devil is in the lack of details.
We don't have enough information on many of the areas where in the end we will have to make a judgment on. International Trade Committee MEPs from all political groups wanted to know more about how the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement ACTA would be enforced before advising Parliament as a whole on whether or not to approve it, it emerged from the committee's first debate on it in early Mr Martin suggested that while the Court of Justice referral is being prepared, the time set aside for Parliament's assent to ACTA should instead be used to prepare an interim report setting out questions to the European Commission and EU Member States on how it is to be enforced.
He stressed that Parliament should prepare its own questions, rather than simply associating itself with the European Commission's parallel referral of ACTA to the court. Examples could include questions about how border control agencies would be expected to deal with counterfeit imports, or whether internet service providers would have to enforce ACTA against users, and if so what legislation would require them to do so. ACTA lacks detail. The main concern is how the text might be read".
For example, "There is no 'three strikes' rule in ACTA, but we do not know how internet service providers will interpret the tasks given to them and if they will feel that they have the duty to cut people off the internet".
I will not take your word for it. We need to scrutinize it". Mr Martin and other speakers objected to the "lack of transparency" in the ACTA negotiations to date and reiterated Parliament's many requests to be more closely involved, and not merely left with the option of accepting or rejecting the existing text. He also observed that if the aim now was to spread ACTA via bilateral agreements with countries not yet party to it, this would not be a democratic way to influence other countries.
Several MEPs said the Commission must accept its share of responsibility for civil society protests against ACT, since it had not kept people properly informed of the progress of negotiations. This might be a lesson to the future. We need to change things", said Mr Fjellner. In such circumstances you have to expect citizens to be afraid from the possible consequences", he said. Inese Vaidere EPP, LV , said the Commission had done too little to explain ACTA's benefits, even though there was much to be explained, such as the definitions of terms "counterfeiting" or "commercial scale".
I fear that we don't have much chance of reviving ACTA.
0コメント