We learn, although not from the website of Karel De Gucht, but from La Quadrature du Net, that the EU trade commissioner has written a letter to the members of the Committee on International Trade (INTA) in the European Parliament, accusing civil society campaigners against ACTA of misinformation or misrepresentation and telling the the MEPs why ACTA is such a great achievement (plus 10 myths about ACTA and ACTA arguments 25.01.2012 to give them courage).
No bridge-building from a belligerent De Gucht. A mixture of irritation and arrogance is perhaps the best description of how the trade commissioner views the worries and resistance from the citizens he is supposed to serve.
This has been the attitude from the beginning, and it looks like the way it is going to continue.
De Gucht speaks about the netizens, but not with them. They are wrong or worse. Period. He expects the European Parliament to do its duty by giving its consent to the Anti-Counterfeiting (and much else) Trade Agreement.
Indeed, many wild assertions have been made about ACTA, but the propaganda bulldozer demonstrates an astonishing lack of sensitivity and understanding of legitimacy.
On these grounds alone, ACTA needs to fail.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Between global issues and the national level, the European Union shapes our digital future and freedoms. Multilingual Bloggingportal.eu aggregates the new posts from more than 900 euroblogs – for you.
Thursday, 2 February 2012
Monday, 30 January 2012
ACTA text in 22 languages - Soon a million protesting online
The Anti-Counterfeiting (and much else) Trade Agreement #ACTA is a hot subject on Twitter and the online public sphere in general. Different campaigns aim at defeating the treaty. A short while ago @Avaaz had reached 963,079 online signatures on a global petition for the European Parliament to reject the treaty negotiated between the European Union and the governments of a number of states. (Thousands were added during the writing of this blog entry.)
In the United States a petition to submit ACTA to the Senate for approval had gathered 4,699 signatures, but a total of citizens 25,000 are needed by 21 February 2012 to qualify for an official response.
Some of the assertions made about ACTA, the final text signed and open for signatures, are pretty wild. On the other hand, governments stubbornly excluded the public and built a vast pool of distrust and resentment. Official information has tended to be one-sided, highlighting only positive effects.
Yesterday I collected links to a number of my blog posts in Finnish, Swedish and English about information society legislation issues, including ACTA and copyright, in one Grahnlaw entry. ACTA raises fundamental questions about the relationships between (democratic) governments and the governed.
If you wade through the #ACTA Twitter stream you can find useful assessments, even real gems, regarding the content and effects among the more hyperbolic assertions.
ACTA text in 22 languages
Getting the facts straight would be a good start for those who are still open to reasoned arguments. Beacause of the international character of the debate, one helpful place to go to is Eur-Lex, the legal portal of the EU, where you find 22 language versions of the ACTA proposal and treaty.
Here is the English version:
Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION on the conclusion of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Mexican States, the Kingdom of Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Singapore, the Swiss Confederation and the United States of America
As the depository, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Japan offers a note on the signatories to date, as well as other information about its efforts to protect intellectual property internationally.
Through the Legislative Observatory of the European Parliament Oeil you can follow the procedure 2011/0167(NLE) at European level.
The IPEX register with national procedures in EU member states is not very helpful, so here other information sources are needed: media, activists and official.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator of euroblogs, is the hub for the national and thematical blogospheres at the European level, including issues about the information society and online media.
In the United States a petition to submit ACTA to the Senate for approval had gathered 4,699 signatures, but a total of citizens 25,000 are needed by 21 February 2012 to qualify for an official response.
Some of the assertions made about ACTA, the final text signed and open for signatures, are pretty wild. On the other hand, governments stubbornly excluded the public and built a vast pool of distrust and resentment. Official information has tended to be one-sided, highlighting only positive effects.
Yesterday I collected links to a number of my blog posts in Finnish, Swedish and English about information society legislation issues, including ACTA and copyright, in one Grahnlaw entry. ACTA raises fundamental questions about the relationships between (democratic) governments and the governed.
If you wade through the #ACTA Twitter stream you can find useful assessments, even real gems, regarding the content and effects among the more hyperbolic assertions.
ACTA text in 22 languages
Getting the facts straight would be a good start for those who are still open to reasoned arguments. Beacause of the international character of the debate, one helpful place to go to is Eur-Lex, the legal portal of the EU, where you find 22 language versions of the ACTA proposal and treaty.
Here is the English version:
Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION on the conclusion of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Mexican States, the Kingdom of Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Singapore, the Swiss Confederation and the United States of America
As the depository, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Japan offers a note on the signatories to date, as well as other information about its efforts to protect intellectual property internationally.
Through the Legislative Observatory of the European Parliament Oeil you can follow the procedure 2011/0167(NLE) at European level.
The IPEX register with national procedures in EU member states is not very helpful, so here other information sources are needed: media, activists and official.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator of euroblogs, is the hub for the national and thematical blogospheres at the European level, including issues about the information society and online media.
Sunday, 29 January 2012
Information society, ACTA and copyright legislation
Here they are, in all their glory, the 22 language versions of ACTA, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. But, as we soon find out, the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Mexican States, the Kingdom of Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Singapore, the Swiss Confederation and the United States of America did not limit their ambitions to anti-counterfeiting.
If you look at the proposal, you soon find out that the aim of ACTA is ”to effectively combat the infringement of intellectual property rights (IPR)” in general, including by ”provisions on civil, criminal, border and digital environment enforcement measures, robust cooperation mechanisms among ACTA Parties to assist in their enforcement efforts, and the establishment of best practices for effective IPR enforcement”.
Intellectual property in ACTA refers to all categories of intellectual property that are the subject of Sections 1 through 7 of Part II of the TRIPS Agreement, including copyright.
Troubling questions
How should governments and parliaments legislate for the information society, where they easily seem to end up defending outdated models and particular interests against the digital natives (who are also citizens) and, perhaps, the general interest?
How important is trust and interaction between governments and the governed? Legitimacy?
When does legislation drive innovation, and when does it drive it away?
Infosoc roundup
These questions have cropped up in my latest blog posts, written in Finnish (FI), Swedish (SV) and English (EN).
Grahnlaw (EN): ACTA update (in part)
Grahnlaw (EN): ACTA in European Parliament committees: International Trade and Development
Grahnlaw (EN): ACTA in European Parliament committees: Legal Affairs (JURI)
Grahnblawg (SV): Framtiden online i Riksdagen
Eurooppaoikeus (FI): Tekijänoikeustoimikunta verkkopiratismia vastaan
Grahnlaw (EN): Information society, online media and Bloggingportal.eu
Grahnlblawg (SV): Upphovsrättskommissionen i Finland angriper nätpiratismen
Grahnlaw (EN): A communication disaster called ACTA
Grahnlaw (EN): ACTA signatures and content
Eurooppaoikeus (FI): ACTA ja fakta
Grahnblawg (SV): Lagstifta för den digitala världen, inte gårdagen – ACTA?
***
Getting the facts straight and the arguments based on evidence would help meeting the challenges of our common digital agenda.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator of euroblogs, joins the national and thematical blogospheres at the European level.
If you look at the proposal, you soon find out that the aim of ACTA is ”to effectively combat the infringement of intellectual property rights (IPR)” in general, including by ”provisions on civil, criminal, border and digital environment enforcement measures, robust cooperation mechanisms among ACTA Parties to assist in their enforcement efforts, and the establishment of best practices for effective IPR enforcement”.
Intellectual property in ACTA refers to all categories of intellectual property that are the subject of Sections 1 through 7 of Part II of the TRIPS Agreement, including copyright.
Troubling questions
How should governments and parliaments legislate for the information society, where they easily seem to end up defending outdated models and particular interests against the digital natives (who are also citizens) and, perhaps, the general interest?
How important is trust and interaction between governments and the governed? Legitimacy?
When does legislation drive innovation, and when does it drive it away?
Infosoc roundup
These questions have cropped up in my latest blog posts, written in Finnish (FI), Swedish (SV) and English (EN).
Grahnlaw (EN): ACTA update (in part)
Grahnlaw (EN): ACTA in European Parliament committees: International Trade and Development
Grahnlaw (EN): ACTA in European Parliament committees: Legal Affairs (JURI)
Grahnblawg (SV): Framtiden online i Riksdagen
Eurooppaoikeus (FI): Tekijänoikeustoimikunta verkkopiratismia vastaan
Grahnlaw (EN): Information society, online media and Bloggingportal.eu
Grahnlblawg (SV): Upphovsrättskommissionen i Finland angriper nätpiratismen
Grahnlaw (EN): A communication disaster called ACTA
Grahnlaw (EN): ACTA signatures and content
Eurooppaoikeus (FI): ACTA ja fakta
Grahnblawg (SV): Lagstifta för den digitala världen, inte gårdagen – ACTA?
***
Getting the facts straight and the arguments based on evidence would help meeting the challenges of our common digital agenda.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator of euroblogs, joins the national and thematical blogospheres at the European level.
Friday, 27 January 2012
ACTA signatures and content
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan has published a note on the signing of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Mexican States, the Kingdom of Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Singapore, the Swiss Confederation and the United States of America (ACTA) by the European Union and its member states.
At the first signing ceremony, 1 October 2011, ACTA was signed by Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore and the United States.
Yesterday, 26 January 2012, ACTA was signed for the EU (Council or Commission) and 22 of the 27 member states: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom.
In other words, Mexico and Switzerland have not signed yet. The EU member states which did not sign the agreement yesterday are expected to do so on the completion of respective domestic procedures. They are: Cyprus, Estonia, Germany, the Netherlands and Slovakia.
ACTA contents
The ACTA negotiations were conducted as a master class in undermining trust by and in governments and the European Union, but many of the public comments, for instance on Twitter #ACTA, give an impression that the contents of the agreement should be better known before being understood.
The proposal for a Council decision COM(2011) 380 exists in 22 official EU languages, with the agreement annexed. The English version is here.
INTA rapporteur and events
The ACTA rapporteur in the EP Committee on International Trade (INTA), Kader Arif, renounced his preparatory task as a protest move against the process (in French).
The Pirate MEP Christian Engström offers an orderly view of a chaotic situation. The text of the blog post is in Swedish, but the links lead to items in the original languages.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Follow events on Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator of euroblogs.
At the first signing ceremony, 1 October 2011, ACTA was signed by Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore and the United States.
Yesterday, 26 January 2012, ACTA was signed for the EU (Council or Commission) and 22 of the 27 member states: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom.
In other words, Mexico and Switzerland have not signed yet. The EU member states which did not sign the agreement yesterday are expected to do so on the completion of respective domestic procedures. They are: Cyprus, Estonia, Germany, the Netherlands and Slovakia.
ACTA contents
The ACTA negotiations were conducted as a master class in undermining trust by and in governments and the European Union, but many of the public comments, for instance on Twitter #ACTA, give an impression that the contents of the agreement should be better known before being understood.
The proposal for a Council decision COM(2011) 380 exists in 22 official EU languages, with the agreement annexed. The English version is here.
INTA rapporteur and events
The ACTA rapporteur in the EP Committee on International Trade (INTA), Kader Arif, renounced his preparatory task as a protest move against the process (in French).
The Pirate MEP Christian Engström offers an orderly view of a chaotic situation. The text of the blog post is in Swedish, but the links lead to items in the original languages.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Follow events on Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator of euroblogs.
A communication disaster called ACTA
During the negotiations of ACTA the participating states did their best to undermine public trust by secrecy and obstinate refusal to publish various documents (Techdirt). When the first batch of countries signed ACTA in October 2011, the EU Commission and Council ignored the occasion (Grahnlaw).
The going is still pretty wild on Twitter under the hashtag #ACTA after the new signing ceremony yesterday for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Mexican States, the Kingdom of Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Singapore, the Swiss Confederation and the United States of America.
The web pages of the European Parliament are accessible again. Actually it was ironic that Anonymous took down the EP pages (New Europe and European Voice), when ACTA was signed for the Council of the European Union and 22 member states (The Register).
How did the European Union inform about the signing?
DG Trade offers us a news archive with the latest items from the past two months – empty. Trade commissioner Karel De Gucht has nothing new on ACTA.
The signing of ACTA has not made it to the front page of the European External Action Service (EEAS), with the Delegation of the European Union to Japan equally dismal.
The Council of the European Union did not deem the ACTA signing in Tokyo worth a press release.
In other words, the EU Commission (DG Trade) and the Council have learnt nothing from their continuing communication disaster among internauts. As incompetent and insensitive as before, the EU institutions seem to act on the presumption that a majority in the European Parliament is (once more) going to do what the governments of the member states want it to do. Public trust is not essential.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Follow events on Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator of euroblogs.
The going is still pretty wild on Twitter under the hashtag #ACTA after the new signing ceremony yesterday for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Mexican States, the Kingdom of Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Singapore, the Swiss Confederation and the United States of America.
The web pages of the European Parliament are accessible again. Actually it was ironic that Anonymous took down the EP pages (New Europe and European Voice), when ACTA was signed for the Council of the European Union and 22 member states (The Register).
How did the European Union inform about the signing?
DG Trade offers us a news archive with the latest items from the past two months – empty. Trade commissioner Karel De Gucht has nothing new on ACTA.
The signing of ACTA has not made it to the front page of the European External Action Service (EEAS), with the Delegation of the European Union to Japan equally dismal.
The Council of the European Union did not deem the ACTA signing in Tokyo worth a press release.
In other words, the EU Commission (DG Trade) and the Council have learnt nothing from their continuing communication disaster among internauts. As incompetent and insensitive as before, the EU institutions seem to act on the presumption that a majority in the European Parliament is (once more) going to do what the governments of the member states want it to do. Public trust is not essential.
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Follow events on Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator of euroblogs.
Wednesday, 25 January 2012
Information society, online media and Bloggingportal.eu
What can you expect from a three year old? I decided to see if the new posts on Bloggingportal.eu are good for other people than those interested in how many EU institutions can dance on the head of a pin.
Instead I opted for one or more policy areas related to the European information society (tag: infosoc) and online media (tag: media) during the last 24 hours or so.
Here is what I registered:
Eurooppaoikeus: Tekijänoikeustoimikunta verkkopiratismia vastaan
Grahnblawg: Framtiden online i Riksdagen
The IPKat: Congress 1, Public 0 – the U.S. Supreme Court's Big Decision in Golan v. Holder
The IPKat: Gambling on appeal? Seeing Red over 32
Europolice: EU surveillance
Mathew Lowry's Tagsmanian Devil: Dear Sony, so much for .eu
FT Brussles blog, Stanley Pignal: Steelie Neelie takes on the Hungarians
Google, European Public Policy Blog: Promoting small businesses and economic growth in Europe
TheIPKat: When reporting ”trumps” copyright: the sad case of Declan Hainey
Waltzing Matilda: Tools Tuesday: The Archivist
Groenlinks: ACTA rampzalig voor ontwikkelingslanden
Erkan's Field Diary: anti France imagery after the genocide bill in Turkish twittersphere
Eva en Europa: Hungría y el liberticidio se topan con la Unión Europea
Netzpolitik: ACTA: Kontaktiert den EU-Entwicklungsausschuss
Recent developments in European consumer law: EU data protection reform
Public Service Europe, Sabine Wils: Electronic waste – Europe living beyond its means
Rhein on Energy and Climate, Eberhard Rhein: EU is going ahead with stricter recycling of electric and electronic Waste
Comment
Not bad, I would say, for a day and a night. Theoretically Bloggingportal.eu has 904 euroblogs listed, but blogs come and go, so some are now inactive. However, during the last seven days close to 250 blogs have published one or more blog posts, which is quite impressive.
If I look at the information society themes, such as copyright, e-commerce, piracy, entrepreneurship, data protection etc., as well as matters related to online media, I feel that you can keep fairly well up to date by following all new posts on Bloggingportal.eu, not only the editors' choice (front page).
However, many of the best European tech and policy blogs have not yet found their way to Bloggingportal.eu, even if the EU is an important hub for the ITC issues debated both at global and at national level.
You can propose both individual articles and new blogs to Bloggingportal.eu. Perhaps you have a few policy oriented examples you could share, because the future of Europe is online.
Ralf Grahn
Instead I opted for one or more policy areas related to the European information society (tag: infosoc) and online media (tag: media) during the last 24 hours or so.
Here is what I registered:
Eurooppaoikeus: Tekijänoikeustoimikunta verkkopiratismia vastaan
Grahnblawg: Framtiden online i Riksdagen
The IPKat: Congress 1, Public 0 – the U.S. Supreme Court's Big Decision in Golan v. Holder
The IPKat: Gambling on appeal? Seeing Red over 32
Europolice: EU surveillance
Mathew Lowry's Tagsmanian Devil: Dear Sony, so much for .eu
FT Brussles blog, Stanley Pignal: Steelie Neelie takes on the Hungarians
Google, European Public Policy Blog: Promoting small businesses and economic growth in Europe
TheIPKat: When reporting ”trumps” copyright: the sad case of Declan Hainey
Waltzing Matilda: Tools Tuesday: The Archivist
Groenlinks: ACTA rampzalig voor ontwikkelingslanden
Erkan's Field Diary: anti France imagery after the genocide bill in Turkish twittersphere
Eva en Europa: Hungría y el liberticidio se topan con la Unión Europea
Netzpolitik: ACTA: Kontaktiert den EU-Entwicklungsausschuss
Recent developments in European consumer law: EU data protection reform
Public Service Europe, Sabine Wils: Electronic waste – Europe living beyond its means
Rhein on Energy and Climate, Eberhard Rhein: EU is going ahead with stricter recycling of electric and electronic Waste
Comment
Not bad, I would say, for a day and a night. Theoretically Bloggingportal.eu has 904 euroblogs listed, but blogs come and go, so some are now inactive. However, during the last seven days close to 250 blogs have published one or more blog posts, which is quite impressive.
If I look at the information society themes, such as copyright, e-commerce, piracy, entrepreneurship, data protection etc., as well as matters related to online media, I feel that you can keep fairly well up to date by following all new posts on Bloggingportal.eu, not only the editors' choice (front page).
However, many of the best European tech and policy blogs have not yet found their way to Bloggingportal.eu, even if the EU is an important hub for the ITC issues debated both at global and at national level.
You can propose both individual articles and new blogs to Bloggingportal.eu. Perhaps you have a few policy oriented examples you could share, because the future of Europe is online.
Ralf Grahn
Tuesday, 24 January 2012
ACTA in European Parliament committees: Legal Affairs (JURI)
After the roundup of ACTA blog posts in Finnish, Swedish or English on Grahnlaw Suomi Finland, IPR trade protection: ACTA controversy, I have published two recent updates about the agreement in the European Union:
Grahnlaw (EN): ACTA update (in part) (22 January 2012)
Grahnlaw (EN): ACTA in European Parliament committees: International Trade and Development (23 January 2012)
The Development Committee (DEVE) draft opinion by Jan Zahradil enthusiastically brushed aside all doubts regarding the anti-counterfeiting agreement.
Is it really this simple? Yesterday I found two new items to update my blog post. For your convenience, here they are again, with slight modifications:
La Quadrature du Net sees ACTA as the international counterpart of the SOPA and PIPA copyright bills in the USA. La Quadrature blogged about ACTA in the European Parliament both in English and in French.
European Digital Rights (EDRi) published a critical paragraph-by-paragraph assessment of what must be the DEVE committee draft opinion regarding ACTA.
Even if you do not buy the counter-arguments lock, stock and barrel, there are enough questions and references to merit serious thought.
JURI
The Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) is preparing an opinion for the committee responsible in the European Parliament, the Committee on International Trade (INTA), which offered us the timetable. If we look at the JURI minutes 19-20 December 2011, we find the following:
There is nothing specific about ACTA on the JURI draft agenda 25 and 26 January 2012.
Marielle Gallo MEP
Somehow the JURI committee, too, has managed to select a gung ho rapporteur. Marielle Gallo MEP is known for her unwavering support for holders of intellectual property rights.
The IP Policy Committee blog offers a background picture about the rapporteur in the previous committee discussion, as well as the legal and political doubts expressed by other participants: Shoving ACTA down the throat of the European Parliament.
There is a Spanish version of the article, published by the Asociación de internautas: Haciendo tragar con el ACTA al Parlamento Europeo.
Erich Moechel, on FM4 ORF.at, discussed the proposals of Marielle Gallo with regard to the customs enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR): ACTA wirft seine Schatten voraus.
Christian Engström, the Green (Pirate) MEP, wants the European Union Court of Justice (EUCJ) to scrutinise if ACTA is compatible with fundamental rights. He has blogged about the JURI discussion, as well as on several previous occasions about the anti-counterfeiting agreement both Swedish and English.
When Futurezone.at discusses the imminent signing of ACTA by Austria, the worries of internet service providers (ISPs) are highlighted, and these concerns are shared by the Green MEP Eva Lichtenberger.
***
The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) remains controversial, but the two rapporteurs we have looked at this far seem to be on auto-pilot to bulldoze through the agreement.
Ralf Grahn
Grahnlaw (EN): ACTA update (in part) (22 January 2012)
Grahnlaw (EN): ACTA in European Parliament committees: International Trade and Development (23 January 2012)
The Development Committee (DEVE) draft opinion by Jan Zahradil enthusiastically brushed aside all doubts regarding the anti-counterfeiting agreement.
Is it really this simple? Yesterday I found two new items to update my blog post. For your convenience, here they are again, with slight modifications:
La Quadrature du Net sees ACTA as the international counterpart of the SOPA and PIPA copyright bills in the USA. La Quadrature blogged about ACTA in the European Parliament both in English and in French.
European Digital Rights (EDRi) published a critical paragraph-by-paragraph assessment of what must be the DEVE committee draft opinion regarding ACTA.
Even if you do not buy the counter-arguments lock, stock and barrel, there are enough questions and references to merit serious thought.
JURI
The Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) is preparing an opinion for the committee responsible in the European Parliament, the Committee on International Trade (INTA), which offered us the timetable. If we look at the JURI minutes 19-20 December 2011, we find the following:
24. Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the EU and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the USA
JURI/7/06357
*** 2011/0167(NLE) COM(2011)0380
The following spoke: Marielle Gallo (rapporteur), Christian Engström, Alexandra Thein, Eva Lichtenberger, Antonio Caiola (Parliament Legal Service)
There is nothing specific about ACTA on the JURI draft agenda 25 and 26 January 2012.
Marielle Gallo MEP
Somehow the JURI committee, too, has managed to select a gung ho rapporteur. Marielle Gallo MEP is known for her unwavering support for holders of intellectual property rights.
The IP Policy Committee blog offers a background picture about the rapporteur in the previous committee discussion, as well as the legal and political doubts expressed by other participants: Shoving ACTA down the throat of the European Parliament.
There is a Spanish version of the article, published by the Asociación de internautas: Haciendo tragar con el ACTA al Parlamento Europeo.
Erich Moechel, on FM4 ORF.at, discussed the proposals of Marielle Gallo with regard to the customs enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR): ACTA wirft seine Schatten voraus.
Christian Engström, the Green (Pirate) MEP, wants the European Union Court of Justice (EUCJ) to scrutinise if ACTA is compatible with fundamental rights. He has blogged about the JURI discussion, as well as on several previous occasions about the anti-counterfeiting agreement both Swedish and English.
When Futurezone.at discusses the imminent signing of ACTA by Austria, the worries of internet service providers (ISPs) are highlighted, and these concerns are shared by the Green MEP Eva Lichtenberger.
***
The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) remains controversial, but the two rapporteurs we have looked at this far seem to be on auto-pilot to bulldoze through the agreement.
Ralf Grahn
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To Grahnlaw
Posts
All Comments
