EU Council gives fishy go-ahead for ACTA
- Author: Monica Horten
- Published: 18 December 2011
Haddock, whiting, hake, Norwegian lobster.... What do these harmless marine creatures have to do with Internet copyright?
The EU Council of Ministers yesterday gave the go-ahead for the EU to sign the controversial Anti-counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). ACTA is effectively an international copyright treaty, paving the way for a range of Internet blocking measures against allegedly infringing material online. The green light was given - not by the Ministers responsible for copyright - but by those in charge of fishing fleets.
The decision for signing ACTA was deemed an 'A' point, meaning that it had been pre-agreed. It was therefore put to the next available meeting, which happened to be the Fisheries Council. At this Fisheries Council meeting, fishing quotas were the hotly disputed matter. The ACTA authorisation was slipped in unnoticed beneath the never-ending fight between the British and the Spanish over how much cod they can net.
The Council's press release was notably bland:
The Council adopted a decision authorising the signing of an anti-counterfeiting trade agreement (ACTA) with Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States.
But it also contained some fishy language, claiming that ACTA is only intended for " actions against large-scale infringements of intellectual property". Those words can be read two ways. To address a single infringer who has a large-scale operation. Or to address infringements which multiply on a large scale - namely the millions of small infringements, such as those allegedly taking place over file-sharing networks.
The Council decision document contained a get-out clause on criminal measures. The Council is not authorising the EU signatories to accede to the criminal measures in ACTA - that will be left to the Member States to individually sign.
This is not however, the end of the matter. The European Parliament must give its consent before ACTA can be signed by the EU. The Parliament's consent is still pending and not expected before March next year.
PS. I also noted that the Fisheries Council sneaked in the authorisation of four varieties of GM food ... hmmmmmm?
You are free to re-publish this article under a non-commercial Creative Commons licence, but you must attibute the author and put a link back to iptegrity.com. Academics - please cite this article as Monica Horten, EU Council gives fishy go-ahead for ACTA , www.iptegrity.com, 16 December 2011 . Commercial users - please contact the author.
- Article Views: 15189
IPtegrity politics
- Online Safety and the Westminster honey trap
- Shadow bans: EU and UK diverge on user redress
- EU at loggerheads over chat control
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Whatever happened to the AI Bill?
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- EU puts chat control on back burner
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Creation of deep fakes to be criminal offence under new law
- AI and tech: Asks for the new government
- How WhatsApp holds structural power
- Meta rolls out encryption as political headwinds ease
- EU law set for new course on child online safety
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- MEPs reach political agreement to protect children and privacy
- Online Safety - a non-consensual Act
About Iptegrity
Iptegrity.com is the website of Dr Monica Horten, independent policy advisor: online safety, technology and human rights. Advocating to protect the rights of the majority of law abiding citizens online. Independent expert on the Council of Europe Committee of Experts on online safety and empowerment of content creators and users. Published author, and post-doctoral scholar, with a PhD from the University of Westminster, and a DipM from the Chartered Institute of Marketing. Former telecoms journalist, experienced panelist and Chair, cited in the media eg BBC, iNews, Times, Guardian and Politico.
Politics & copyright
A Copyright Masquerade: How Corporate Lobbying Threatens Online Freedoms
'timely and provocative' Entertainment Law Review
Online Safety
- Online Safety and the Westminster honey trap
- Shadow bans: EU and UK diverge on user redress
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- Online Safety - a non-consensual Act
- Online Safety Bill passes as US court blocks age-checks law
- Online Safety Bill: ray of hope for free speech
- National Crime Agency to run new small boats social media centre
- Online Safety Bill: does government want to snoop on your WhatsApps?
- What is content of democratic importance?
- Online Safety Bill: One rule for them and another for us
- Online Safety Bill - Freedom to interfere?