[LINK] ACTA trade agreement industry negotiating brief on Border Measures and Civil Enforcement

[David Boxall]

Increasing the socialised costs of enforcing private privileges. I 
particularly like the way some countries are "invited" to participate. 
Given the likely costs of failing to accept, is it an offer the invitees 
can afford to refuse?

-- 
David Boxall                    |  I have seen the past
                                 |  And it worked.
                                 |               --TJ Hooker

WIKILEAKS URGENT DOCUMENT RELEASE
Tue Jul 29 10:53:25 BST 2008

ACTA trade agreement industry negotiating brief on Border Measures and 
Civil Enforcement

The ACTA negotiations are scheduled for 29 to 31 July 2008 in Washington DC.

In 2007 a select handful of the wealthiest countries began a 
treaty-making process to create a new global standard for copyright, 
trademark and patent enforcement, which was called, in a piece of 
brilliant marketing, the "Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement".

ACTA is spearheaded by the United States, and includes the European 
Commission, Japan, and Switzerland -- which have large copyright and 
patent industries. Other countries invited to participate in ACTA's 
negotiation process are Canada, Australia, Korea, Mexico and New 
Zealand. Noticeably absent from ACTA's negotiations are leaders from 
developing countries who hold national policy priorities that differ 
from the international copyright and patent industry.

This document is the ACTA negotiating brief dated July 29, 2008, 
provided by the copyright/patent/trademark industry to negotiating 
countries; pages concerning customs enforcement and civil enforcement.

Under customs enforcement for example it proposes:

* Increased inspection of goods to detect potential shipments
* Customs to provide rights holders all relevant information for the 
purposes of their own private investigations and court action they are 
to be given a minimum of 20 working days to commence such actions.
* Seized counterfeit goods are to be destroyed or disposed at the rights 
holders pleasure. Removing a trademark will not cut it.
* Under civil enforcement rights holders will have more say on the 
damages involved as well as more compensation to cover their legal 
enforcement costs including "reasonable attorney's fees";.
* Rights holders to get the right to obtain information regarding an 
infringer, their identities, means of production or distribution and 
relevant third parties.

The exact composition of the business "side" is not known, which 
reflects the lack of transparency afflicting the ACTA process. Whether 
trade representatives can be forced to reveal the make-up to the press 
or policy groups remains to be seen.

See http://wikileaks.org/wiki/S4

_______________________________________________
News mailing list
News at lists.sunshinepress.org
https://lists.wikileaks.org/mailman/listinfo/news
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact