More Countries React To ACTA; Brazil Says ACTA Is Illegitimate

from the act-now dept

We've already covered how the EU Parliament is skeptical of ACTA. Ditto the Mexican Senate. In the US, which will undoubtedly sign the agreement, at least some politicians are asking questions about the document. Now news is coming out in a few other countries as well. Down in Australia, unlike in the US, they're planning to go through a full scrutiny process involving the Parliament and the public. On the flipside, it sounds like Singapore can't sign the document fast enough.

Of course, what may be most interesting is how countries who are not a part of the negotiations feel about this. Many people feel that the whole ACTA process was set up outside of WIPO and the WTO in order to avoid having to deal with the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China), which are all developing rapidly, and have a very different viewpoint on intellectual property than the countries involved in the negotiations. So, it's interesting to see that Brazil has already slammed the agreement (Google translation from the original Portuguese). A Brazilian official said that the agreement was not legitimate, negotiated by a closed group without considering all of the issues at play.

ACTA negotiators have said that they hoped, after their own countries agreed to sign onto ACTA, that the BRIC countries would follow down the road. Of course, if they wanted that to happen, perhaps they should have asked them to join the discussions. But, what would that accomplish, since the goal appears to have been to keep many stakeholders out of the negotiations, rather than being inclusive.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 14th, 2010 @ 9:30pm

    ACTA is not about finding common ground is about creating the perfect conditions to force others to fallow and the U.S. wonders why nobody like to do business with them.

    But the funny part is that the Asian nations involved really want this agreement because they are confident they will murder the competition coming out from the U.S., they will turn this agreement into something every American will regret even the rich.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    icon
    fogbugzd (profile), Oct 14th, 2010 @ 9:41pm

    Doesn't matter

    I don't think it matters if the only two signers end up being the US and Singapore. The IP industry will still insist that we need to meet our international obligations and pass draconian laws.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 14th, 2010 @ 10:09pm

    China wants this law badly in order to ensure it can pass anti western laws like the one that made google leave china. The entire system is built on the fact that they steal everything from the US and only protect there own.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 14th, 2010 @ 10:39pm

    I guess we missed a real opportunity many years ago to involve all stakeholders when we failed to extend an invitation to the USSR to participate in the negotiations leading to the formation of NATO.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 14th, 2010 @ 11:54pm

    Re:

    Ah, yes, the copyright industry does think it is at war with anyone who disagrees with them, so I suppose your stupid analogy (at least it wasn't about a car) has some useful meaning.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    abc gum, Oct 15th, 2010 @ 5:27am

    ACTA = anti trade agreement?

    What is the C for ?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 15th, 2010 @ 6:04am

    Re:

    Commerce.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Oct 15th, 2010 @ 7:44am

    Cool Beans ...

    "the whole ACTA process was set up outside of WIPO and the WTO in order to avoid having to deal with the BRIC countries"

    That by itself should make the whole thing invalid.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 15th, 2010 @ 8:05am

    @7

    no the whole purpose was to give the usa some kind of future economy in screwign the world over for a world wide tax on somehting they have no business doing.

    THUS you wont see it happen and even in this attempt i hope it cost the "industry" millions to gt no where

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Perplexed, Oct 15th, 2010 @ 11:34pm

    Re:

    In 2003, INTERPOL linked counterfeit goods to terrorist financing. The history and true reasoning behind the initial Name and goals of this whole proposal has been convoluted and twisted by RIAA, MPAA and their affiliates. to gain control over the internet and be able to invade not only privacy but to also limit the freedom of the internet.

    Original Interpol report >The links between intellectual property crime and terrorist financing http://www.interpol.int/public/ICPO/speeches/SG20030716.asp

    Note the Recommendations at the bottom have now been totally twisted to not be reacting for Terrorist funding but now to be able to go after any one for any even slight violation Thanks to RIAA, MPAA, and other such special interest groups.

    Here is an article also from 2004 http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000528473 Showing the Hollywood Report and both MPAA and RIAA/s presidents responses.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    icon
    Christopher (profile), Oct 16th, 2010 @ 10:48am

    Re: Doesn't matter

    There is no such thing as 'international obligations' other than making murder, physically attacking someone else, forcible rape and actually STEALING PHYSICAL PROPERTY illegal.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 19th, 2010 @ 4:41am

    Re: ACTA

    Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This