Nicolas Maleve - It is important we take responsibility 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. EXGAE 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 international bodies that make & deal with interantional law & copyright: *WTO (TRIPS) http://www.wto.org/ *WIPO (linked to UN) http://www.wipo.int/portal/index.html.en Emerging countries reacted on US-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 proponents 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: *US *Japan *New Zealand *Australia *Canada *Mexico *EU *Morocco 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 mediators' have no liabilty of the data traffic. this gives more freedom both to the users and the providers, and help them focusing on developing & new services. Spread mechanism on national levels - examples: France: Hadopi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HADOPI_law Spain: Blocking for example foreign sites that infringe copyright UK: 'Digital economy Act': act upon people sharing culture online/downloading Problems with ACTA: * judge can pronounce injunctions Telling providers what to do, if they do not respond they pay damages to the 'victims' (so: not fines!). * Member states should make ISPs and rights 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 procedures, 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 Negotiations closed end of December 2010: ACTA is text that needs to be signed by negotiating 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: first 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 constitued of high level civil servants, representatives of the the respective 27 ministries of foregin affairs/european affairs. Debates are not public, difficult to inlfuence by civil organisations. Texts are then sent to the parliament that may amend. To be checked: one single 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) according 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: *internet acces providers *hosting *providers *search engines *... 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