gfxgfx
 
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
gfx gfx
gfx
76499 Posts in 13435 Topics by 2084 Members - Latest Member: MagixMark September 21, 2020, 11:59:20 am
*
gfx*gfx
gfx
WinMX World :: Forum  |  Discussion  |  WinMx World News  |  ACTA Negotiators Respond To Questions About ACTA
gfx
gfxgfx
 

Author Topic: ACTA Negotiators Respond To Questions About ACTA  (Read 329 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DaBees-Knees

  • WMW Team
  • *****
ACTA Negotiators Respond To Questions About ACTA
« on: June 29, 2010, 10:41:55 pm »
http://www.techdirt.com/

I am drawing your attention to an article that I don't intend to post in full. I have posted a few highlights.

Quote
From the you-won't-like-the-answers-though dept

Question: Will negotiators commit to continue releasing the text of the Agreement following completion of this week's negotiating round and subsequently until the completion (or abandonment) of negotiations?

Answer: On issue of public comments, this is a plurilateral process and each country will have to take that into account. It is not as if the ACTA group is a formal organization. For a plurilateral agreement, we have promoted a great deal of transparency already more than in other agreements.

I suppose it depends on how you define transparent.

Q: Criminal sanctions are being negotiated, which imply the usage of police & judiciary systems, as proven by the presence among the negotiators of the EU Presidency. How can you justify any legitimacy for criminal sanctions (which highly impact fundamental freedoms) being negotiated outside of any democratic frame, in the secrecy of what is much more than a "trade agreement"?

A: I think here it is important to point out that the ACTA negotiations are no different than other inter party negotiations. If at the end the agreement should contain additional obligations for a party compared to a country's laws, implementation of the ACTA will necessitate that it will adjust its national legal situation. For most countries, simply the approval of ACTA is dependent on parliamentary approval. Thus we very much do believe that the democratic process is being complied with. And this process of consulting with stakeholders is evidence of that commitment.

This is the point mentioned in the summary about admitting that some countries will have to change their laws. But, again, the answer is extremely misleading. It pretends that, after ACTA is signed, sealed and delivered, various countries might then choose not to implement parts of it via the democratic process. This (very much on purpose) ignores what these negotiators know happens in these situations, which is that the industry supporters, who wrote the trade agreement, then go on a massive PR/government relations campaign declaring how this or that country is "not living up to its international obligations," and highlights how that country is falling behind and damaging this particular industry because it won't change its laws to meet those "international obligations." It happens all the time. It's not a truly democratic process at all, because the scales are weighted so heavily that it's nearly impossible for countries not to agree.

Q: How do you guarantee that policies required to benefit from liability safe harbour for Internet service/access providers won't have the effect to force them to restrict fundamental freedoms -- such as freedom of expression and communication, privacy, and the right to a fair trial -- turning them, via contractual policies, into private copyright police/justice?

A: It is important to recall that ACTA parties have expressed concern about fundamental rights after Wellington. We are aware of the importance of this matter and we have made clear . . . It is clear that ACTA parties are bound by human rights declarations and their own constitutions. ACTA will obviously have to comply with those norms.

Q. It is companies that collect the information. You are encouraging the companies to use that information in ways that, if done by the state, would violate fundamental privacy protections. Is that promoting fundamental rights?

A (French): Is France a totalitarian state? Is it?

Some very strange answers there. You could be forgiven for thinking that ACTA is trying to avoid answers.  8)

Note, the full article is only for the dedicated reader as it contains material not related to the internet.

WinMX World :: Forum  |  Discussion  |  WinMx World News  |  ACTA Negotiators Respond To Questions About ACTA
 

gfxgfx
gfx
©2005-2020 WinMXWorld.com. All Rights Reserved.
SMF 2.0.17 | SMF © 2019, Simple Machines | Terms and Policies
Page created in 0.026 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi © Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!