Welcome to Constantpad v1.1!

This pad text is synchronized as you type, so that everyone viewing this page sees the same text.  This allows you to collaborate seamlessly on documents!
  Nicolas Maleve - It is important we take res p onsibility because there is no mechanism in place to do so.

Felix Tréguer   - La Quadrature du Net http://www.laquadrature.net/

Preparatorial work (text we'll use as a startingpoint): http://pad.constantvzw.org:8000/ACTA

It is important to respond. We/you are users and producers, the way you use and distribute culture will be effected. 
EXG AE in Spain is a good example of artists + activists working on these issues. (I would like to talk about EXGAE strategies...) http://la-ex.net/

La Q started working on ACTA when the first drafts leaked through Wikileaks. It showed the US proposing a 3 strike action - if you share culture on the net and are caught 3 x you can be 'cut off'

History of ACTA
1995 - TRIPS agreement.
Global division of labour: Rich countries would do researh and development; manufacturing in 3rd world countries. 

ACTA wants to impose maximalist standards
2 main inter na tional bodies that make & deal with interantional law & copyright:
Emerging countries reacted on U S-EU -involvment, non-democratic participation in these organisations
Wanted to have tougher standards on IPR, but it did not work out. WTO and WIPO not democratic, but transparent. 

The US is one of the main propon ents of the ACTA. The aim is to be tougher than TRIPS with bilateral trade agreements between countries , bypassing parliaments / democratic / public negotiations

Countries behind the treaty:

Strategic decision to include developing countries - so called legitimizing.

"You are not transparent, you are bypassing democratic processes"

Negotiations were made secretly until 2009  by civil servants (no accountability of what they were negociating ) then a draft version leaked (via Wikileaks)

parenthesis  : image :  http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/04/praising-cursing-acta-reactions-roll-in.ars

Why react & what can we do

La Quadrature is very worried about the 'digital chapter' - legal pressure on 'technical intermediaries' (ISPs etc - all services we use as surfers + producers ).
All of these 'mediators' potentially help 'illegal' practices.

Ideally, 'technical media to rs' have no liabilty of the data traffic. this gives more freedom both to  the  users and the providers , and help them focus ing on developing & new services .

Spread mechanism on national levels - e xample s : 
Fr ance: Hadopi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HADOPI_law
Spain: Blocking for example foreign sites that infringe copyright
UK : 'Digital eco n o m y Act': act upon people sharing cu l ture online/downloading

Problems with ACTA:
* judge can pronounce injunctions
Telling providers what to do, if they do not respond they pay damage s to the 'victims' (so: not fines!). 

* Member states should make ISPs and right s holders (EMI, Sony...) to work together. 
ex. filtering Youtube, warnings before uploading material, warnings by emails after uploading of copyrighted material , internet access providers can slow down your connection if you're caught downloading...

Whole idea behind this automatized police is circumventing juridical procedu r es, prevents rights holders to go to court and get a bad image by sueing people (cf RIAA), letting the ISPs do the bad job.

Judges were sceptical, did feel it was violating fundamental rights (free speech). But the commission wasn't happy and want to be stricter on infringements. Now: IPs are not held responsible for what users do but are supposed to check up.

* generic medicines produced in India, going to mali, passing through Europe can be withhold at European/ACTA borders for patent infringement

James Love on ACTA: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-love/acta----a-patriot-act-for_b_345000.html

--> affects fundamental rights: freedom of expression, right to medicine, privacy

Planning
Nego t iations closed end of December 2010: ACTA is text that needs to be signed by nego t iating countries, and ratified nationally

Complicated: parts negotiated by individual countries, parts by the EU. 
Since Lisbon Treaty 2010 EU Parliament can say no to ratification
A EU proposal for how to ratify is being developed : fi r st through EU council (member of national countries), then Parliament (can still reject , without modifying ) . Criminal sections will be ratified by countries themselves, not by EU.

EU-decision making structure
EU council is con s titued of high level civil servants, repres e ntatives of the the respective 27 ministries of foregin affairs/european affairs. Debates are not publi c, difficult to inlfuence by civil organisations. Texts are then s ent to the parliament that may amend. To be checked: one sin g le member of EU-council may veto the ACTA 

If 1 member state in EU-council rejects ACTA, it might complicate the whole ratification process.. which leaves much room for discrete negotiations (lobby) accordin g to the countries respectives interests: if you vote for ACTA, we won't vote against agriculture, etc.

See also: 
http://events.ccc.de/congress/2009/wiki/Charter_for_Innovation,_Creativity_and_Access_to_Knowledge

http://fcforum.net/

http://www.lqdn.fr/actaanalysis

Question Nicolas: is Constant a provider, we host blogs?

Yes, most Medialabs are seen as ISPs because we install, provide services for others (blogs, wikis, galleries ...). If you have a server 

(1st / 2nd level providers?

In EU an ISP can mean:

IN US: ISP = internet access provider

http://pad.constantvzw.org:8000/ACTA

Introduction by Nicolas:
it's surprising to notice that the EU pushes copyrigh into the ACTA package