About a month ago, we noted that EU ACTA supporters were hoping to rush through the signing of ACTA in the EU, despite serious concern from the EU Parliament, who wanted to review it to make sure it didn’t actually go against current EU law. It appears the push to get it signed quickly without review is ramping up. Glyn Moody points us to a report noting a quietly released document (pdf) from the Council of the European Union, that appears to support signing ACTA without further review. The document makes a number of highly questionable statements:

ACTA is a balanced agreement, because it fully respects the rights
of citizens and the concerns of important stakeholders such as consumers, internet
providers and partners in developing countries.

Almost none of that is true. There is no balance in the document. The document did not make much of an effort to “respect the rights of citizens.” And “consumers, internet providers and partners in developing nations” were kept out of the negotiations for the most part, and not shown the document for comment until it was already set in stone. Developing nations, including Brazil and India have come out squarely against ACTA, noting that it did not take into account their views at all.

Basically, the statement here appears to be entirely false. When you have to flat-out lie to explain why you should support ACTA, it really becomes clear how bad the agreement is.

Regarding the
signature and conclusion of ACTA, the Commission has opted not to propose that
the European Union exercise its potential competence in the area of criminal
enforcement pursuant to Article 83(2) TFEU. The Commission considers this
appropriate because it has never been the intention, as regards the negotiation of
ACTA to modify the EU acquis or to harmonise EU legislation as regards criminal
enforcement of intellectual property rights. For this reason, the Commission proposes
that ACTA be signed and concluded both by the EU and by all the Member States.

The wording here is a bit complex (perhaps on purpose), but it appears to basically be arguing that ACTA should be signed without the further reviews on the impact of it, because it’s not intended to make any serious changes to the law. That it actually does require changes to laws is really of no concern, apparently.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story