Europe's telcos call to open up ACTA
- Author: Monica Horten
- Published: 18 December 2009
ETNO calls for an open and transparent ACTA process. Concerns relate to disproportionate measures, freedom of expression, privacy and an Open Internet.
ETNO, the organisation which represents Europe's largest telecommunications companies*, has weighed in publicly to the debate surrounding the Anti-counterfeiting Trade Agreement, known as ACTA. The ACTA is known to contain measures for copyright enforcement on the Internet - measures which include network filtering and 3-strikes. The measures could also target ecommerce companies such as eBay.
ETNO is concerned that the ACTA** is being negotiated behind closed doors and is calling on Members of the European Parliament to raise
the issue publicly with the aim of opening up the process. It wants to see this happen before the ACTA negotiations are concluded, which could be as soon as this coming January.
ETNO's concern are that ACTA does not distinguish between counterfeiting and piracy, which are two entirely different issues. It is also worried that the ACTA will have a disproportionate effect on hi-tech industries, with resulting increases in costs for businesses and consumers.
It further expresses concern at the attack on the 'mere conduit' principle which underpins EU telecoms law, and has the de facto effect of protecting democratic speech and the open Internet. Imposing network filtering onto network operators to enforce copyright, represents a threat to fundamental rights of EU citizens.
There could be some interesting politics behind this. Perhaps the real point is not that ACTA is being negotiated behind closed doors, but that it is in rooms where ETNO members are not permitted to enter. And yet, political decisions are being taken in those rooms with serious implications for its members' businesses.
And ETNO's comments may seem somewhat disingenuous, given that two of its members lobbied hard in the Telecoms Package to be permitted to restrict users' access to Internet services and applications.
My feeling is that within ETNO there are divergent opinions, as there are within all telcos. Their problem is that they want it both ways. ETNO has quietly behind the scenes opposed graduated response and copyright measures in the Telecoms Package.
In the ACTA situation, ETNO has come out on the side of the angels. On the other hand, for a £260 billion organisation, an 'expert contribution' on a website amounts to little more than wagging its finger at the EU.
ACTA is forcing Europe's telcos to take a difficult decision. The very heart of their business is being dictated to and threatened by another industry, which sees only one issue. They can no longer have it both ways and will have to fight hard and fast. ETNO will need to do more than a bit of expert finger-wagging if it is to win any victories.
*ETNO members include BT, Deutsche Telekom, France Telecom, Telefonica, Telecom Italia. It claims to represent £264 billion in annual revenue to the European economy.
**ACTA is the Acnti-counterfeiting Trade Agreement being discussed secretly between trade representatives of the US, the EU, Japan, Canada, Australia and other governments. As a "trade agreement" it sits in a legal hierarchy above EU and national law and this is a key reason why it is of concern. Decision made in ACTA could be forced onto the EU and governments without the European or national parliaments having any say in it.
Details of ACTA have leaked, and they are known to include Internet copyright enforcement measures such as 3-strikes, and secondary liability for ISPs.
Read ETNO's 'expert contribution' on ACTA
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial-Share Alike 2.5 UK:England and Wales License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/uk/ It may be used for non-commercial purposes only, and the author's name should be attributed. The correct attribution for this article is: Monica Horten (2009) Europe's telcos call to open up ACTA http://www.iptegrity.com 18 December 2009.
- Article Views: 9475
IPtegrity politics
- 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
- Not a blank cheque: European Parliament consents to EU-UK Agreement
- UK border safety alert - mind the capability gap
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
- 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?
- Copyright-style website blocking orders slipped into Online Safety Bill
- 2 billion cost to British businesses for Online Safety Bill