G8 Pushes Anti-Piracy Trade Agreement
An Excerpt From: Torrent Freak
(Stay up to date with critical p2p news)
Written by J.J. King on July 10, 2008
During
their annual summit meeting in Japan, the G8 members agreed to get the
Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) ready for implementation by
the end of the year. The agreement, pushed by multimillion dollar
companies, will open the doors to a digital police state, much to the
pleasure of the MPAA and RIAA.
This May we already posted about the leaked ACTA proposal, and it now seems that the final agreement will be ready sooner than we had hoped. Fresh out of the G8 meetings ‘Declaration on the World Economy‘,
passages under the heading ‘Protection of Intellectual Property Rights’
suggest member states want the international anti-piracy agreement
ready for implementation sooner than some expected, as it reads:
We encourage the acceleration of negotiations to
establish a new international legal framework, ACTA, and seek to
complete the negotiation by the end of this year.
This date is consistent (surprise, surprise) with that which the US
Trade Representative has set as its own timetable for ACTA. Together
with some insider information that was obtained by TorrentFreak, this
doesn’t sound promising.
How will ACTA affect P2P users?
So what does this mean for P2P users? The honest answer is that it’s
hard to be sure. The degree of secrecy surrounding the ACTA
negotiations is astonishing, blocking attempts at a variety of levels
to develop a counter-strategy. The process is deliberately avoiding
both the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and World Intellectual Property
Organisation (WIPO), which now have enough member countries suspicious
of the “anti-piracy maximalist” agenda to make ACTA’s progress
impossible.
At a recent EU meeting following the June ACTA negotiations in
Geneva, a packed room of “stakeholders” — that is, industry
representatives — were desperately trying to get information on what
had made it into the June draft of ACTA while revealing as little as
possible, publicly, about what they themselves wanted in it. The
Commission — on first-name terms with these industry reps, showing only
too well how well regarded they are in this policy-forming process —
has basically indicated that no-one will see the text of ACTA until
it’s ready to sign.
Also at this EU meeting, it was made absolutely explicit that ACTA
is in large part about updating legal frameworks to take account of P2P
and developments on the Internet. The previous regime to deal with IP
and piracy, TRIPS was 12 years old, officials said, and the Internet
had ‘not existed in the same way’ when TRIPS was drafted. In this
respect, the hints we have about what might make it into ACTA from a
list of suggestions the RIAA obtained by Knowledge Ecology International
(which has been double checked for veracity) are very important. More
than any other lobby, of course, the RIAA is dealing with issues
specifically related to the Net. This gives some pointers of where ACTA
could go if the anti-piracy and IP lobbies get their way.
Getting your iPod though customs…
RIAA’s proposals for ACTA go well beyond U.S. law on the enforcement
of copyrights online. As earlier reported, they want ‘competent
authorities’ to be able to take action at borders over pirated copies
without the need for a complaint from a rights holder. An official at
the EU meeting ridiculed the ‘iPod search’ stories about ACTA, pointing
to the EU’s own border measures — but given U.S. border agents are
already retaining and searching large amounts of laptops at borders,
this is another burden for travelers who are already harassed by
ridiculous “security” measures in the Homeland and beyond. Those
dismissing such ideas as ‘merely’ the wish list of the rabid
anti-piracy lobbies take note: although there has only been one draft
of ACTA made so far (and no one outside the secretive gang involved has
been able to see it), reliable sources say there is text
relating to the border measures provisions. So at least one of the
RIAA’s wishes seems, in some form, to have already made it in.
The RIAA’s wish list for online enforcement of its ‘rights’ is also
of great concern, not least because it implies that they would get
access to private data from ISPs in order to be able to see what we’ve
been sharing. As the year goes, on it’s becoming clear that the P2P /
IP debate is merging with the surveillance and privacy debate in ways
that I think many people hadn’t forseen. We need to understand fast
that enforcement of copyright is one of the main levers being used to
drive a wedge into our data privacy at the international level.
RIAA and MPAA want to police the Internet
In general, what the RIAA want is ‘harmonization’ (read: extension
of US law over the whole world) of the tricky Grokster ‘inducement’
provisions that make providers of software liable if they can be seen
as inducing infringing behavior in users. As I know personally from
discussions with the RIAA about projects like VODO,
interpretations of what constitutes contributory liability are very
broad in the States. What the industry wants to do is chill the rapid
innovation that led to products like Napster and BitTorrent by
rendering entrepreneurs uncertain about the legal status of their
activities. The fact that BitTorrent is the most efficient media
reproduction and distribution system in history, used by hundreds of
thousands of producers to distribute their own work outside the
clutches of the corporate media cabals is, of course, not part of the
picture here. This is precisely about media conglomerates’ desire to
hang on to the tatters of their empire.
The RIAA’s ACTA would also continue the trend towards ISPs and
search engines to weed out infringing users. RIAA expects ISPs to
filter infringing materials and police offending P2Pers, cutting off
their access if necessary. Again this points to mass surveillance of
internet use that, in the light of the wiretapping controversy alread
raging in the States, is utterly unacceptable in Europe or anywhere
else.
How We Can Slam On The Brakes
So what can be done, and what hope do we have over ACTA? Well,
firstly, there are internal contradictions in the process that might
make its progress less than smooth. The inclusion of the ‘3 strikes’
rule for kicking P2P users from their ISP contract is a case in point —
the European Parliament is actually very suspicious of the 3 strikes
rule and the UK government is reportedly desperately looking for
alternatives to this political hot potato, which only months ago was
portrayed as a fait accompli. This raises the possibility of a showdown between ACTA and the European Parliament.
Secondly, the European Commission has no mandate to implement
criminal sanctions on copyright matters - this is down to the
individual member states who will be very wary about antagonizing their
electorates. Since these criminal sanctions are seen by players like
the RIAA as a key ‘virtue’ of ACTA - without which it would be a ‘dodo’
- the shakiness of the legal base for inclusion of criminal sanctions
is a big issue.
Thirdly and relatedly, the secrecy around ACTA is a potential
pitfall. A mandate should have been obtained from the Commission to
negotiate the Treaty, but if it exists it has been declared too secret,
or at least ‘confidential’ to bring out. Since this document would very
likely have to include a rationale for allowing the Commission to
negotiate beyond its power on criminal sanctions, it may be rather
suspect. European TorrentFreak readers should immediately
write to your MEP in your Member State and ask them to request a copy
of the mandate, so that we can get a copy of it online and look at how
the EU justifies negotiating an ACTA that includes criminal measures.
Since the US wants ACTA to be signed before Bush leaves office, a
derailing tactic like this has a good chance of working.
ACT against ACTA before it’s too late…