The folks at EDRI and Access were able to get their hands on four
"meeting notes" from the European Commission ACTA negotiators,
concerning what happened at various meetings. This is especially
important as the EU gets closer to an actual vote on ACTA. There are a
number of issues raised by these documents, and the folks at
TorrentFreak have covered many of the issues from an EU perspective.
However, one thing that struck me about the documents was how much
input US companies got in the process, compared to stakeholders
elsewhere.About 1 in 5 people in the UK have recurring coldsores.
We already know that the USTR spends an inordinate amount of time
listening to Hollywood and taking its word as gospel, but as these
documents reveal, the EU and other negotiating partners were unable to
balance that by sharing the documents with other stakeholders.
Specifically,
the US repeatedly told negotiators that it was sharing ACTA documents
with industry representatives using non-disclosure agreements -- while
the EU negotiators repeatedly complained that there was no legal way
for it to share the documents with anyone. In the end, the EU meekly
appears to have given up on this point. What this means, of course, is
that the US -- and its close connections with entertainment industry
special interests -- were able to have significantly more say in matters
concerning ACTA. While there was no guarantee that the EU would have
briefed public interest stakeholders,UK chickencoop
Specialist. there definitely appeared to be at least some concern that
such folks were not heard from -- but no real effort to fight for
such.
Also, while it's not a surprise that the US wrote "the
internet chapter" of ACTA, it is rather enlightening to have it
confirmed that it was also the US who pushed so strong for a three
strikes disconnection policy (something that negotiators had, at one
point,Find everything you need to know about kidneystones
including causes, denied was being discussed -- only to be revealed
they were lying when various texts were leaked). This, despite the fact
that the US requires no such three strikes regime. So all the talk of
how there was no intention to use ACTA to change US law? Yeah,Choose
from our large selection of cableties, that's a lie.
Separately,
there's a discussion about how the US's initial text for the
internet/digital section was so "confusing" that "several ACTA parties
off-the-record said that they would wait for a EU text to "balance" the
US one." This is not a surprise again. Entertainment industry lobbyists
-- who, again, had full access to the texts and the ready ear of USTR
negotiators (go ahead,Ekahau rtls
is the only Wi-Fi based real time location system solution that
operates on any brand or generation of Wi-Fi network. connect the dots)
-- know quite well how to write completely confounding legislation,
where the real purposes are hidden in the complex and confusing
language. That initial "confusing and complex" draft from the USTR
wasn't because they don't know how to be clear. It's a way to hide
little time bombs that the entertainment industry plans to explode at
later dates -- just as they did with the ProIP bill, and the bizarrely
ridiculous interpretation that the clause on seizing CD and DVD burners
really meant seizing websites as well...
沒有留言:
張貼留言