Rewind: Mexico Surprises Everyone, Signs ACTA

from the hmm dept

Just yesterday we pointed out that reports coming out of Mexico suggested that ACTA was dead there and had no chance of being signed and ratified. And then, just hours later, the news comes out that Mexico’s ambassador to Japan signed on to ACTA without anyone knowing about it. Bizarrely, that particular news report claims that in signing this agreement, Mexico joins with others, including the European Union. Yet, of course, as anyone who’s been paying attention knows, the EU loudly rejected ACTA just last week.

Also, I’m a bit confused. One of the reasons that Mexico did not sign way back in October when many others signed, was that the legislature had also rejected ACTA, and reports had said that the executive branch had to get the Mexican Senate to ratify the agreement. So, to have a representative just suddenly up and sign ACTA seems… very, very strange. If they could just do that, why didn’t they do it back in October with most other signatories?

To be honest, I’m now curious if this sudden surprise signature has anything to do with the US inviting Mexico to join in the TPP negotiations. It may be cynical, but Mexico has wanted in to TPP negotiations for a while and had been kept out. It seems entirely possible that a “deal” was struck, whereby Mexico would sign ACTA in exchange for getting in on TPP.

Of course, if you’re the Mexican legislature, or a Mexican citizen who spoke out against ACTA (and there were many), it seems that your government just sold you out completely and signed what is otherwise a dead treaty. Bizarre.

Filed Under: , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Rewind: Mexico Surprises Everyone, Signs ACTA”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Rikuo (profile) says:

I’m curious about this theory of obeying a law.
Here we have Mexico’s legislature rejecting it, many Mexican citizens rejecting it and protesting against it, and then out of the blue, a sole Ambassador to Japan (can we get clarification on that please? I thought ambassadors didn’t have authority to sign treaties that are binding on their governments, something like that needs a Minister, although I am not an expert on political matters).
So, we have one guy signing a piece of paper. Does that mean the entirety of the Brazilian population is now beholden to this law? A law that none of the common people actually want? Come on, people, I challenge you to come up with a reason why the average Brazilian citizen should obey ACTA!

Violated (profile) says:

Re: They're just following our example

Yes but it shows great disrespect to the whole Democratic process, and the will of the people, to just sign up without putting it through the US Congress and Mexican Senate.

The only good point in all this is that no country including the United States have yet tried to ratify ACTA. They are simply waiting to see how this one goes and how many of their cities break out in riots or better yet peaceful protest.

This is all like a game of chess where each side make their move and counter-move. You can rest assured that even if Mexico did sign up to ACTA today that there will be many people in Mexico today who are deeply unhappy. I can only ask… What are you going to do about it?

Well I am someone who usually likes Mexican food but today that seems quite unappetizing.

gorehound (profile) says:

Re: They're just following our example

Just like the Toilet Paper Pact being pushed.
I have no intention of ever allowing the Big Content Industry a way into my wallet.They are truly Censored from what income I have.
And as far as Obama goes he won’t be getting my Vote and neither will Romney.I hate both the main Parties and will “Waste” my Vote on some other person who will not stand a chance.
I really dislike both the Current Time Democrats and Republicans.

mikey4001 says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Toasters won’t just be computerized, they’ll have proprietary software that can’t be fixed by anyone without a proprietary toaster fixin’ license, and anyone who sells coathangers and Sterno in the same shop will get sued for patent infringement. Which reminds me, how many times can I say “toaster” before I get sued by the makers of Battlestar galactica?

Jay (profile) says:

Re: Re:

I believe it has to do with Pena Nieto being president. This is the same party that ruled for over 70 years with massive corruption going on. He has essentially bribed people in Mexico with food through grocery stores as well as had a 7 point marginal lead which is being recounted. Further, there’s heavy collusion with the media for him to be the president.

So imagine when Biden went down to Mexico during their elections to tell him about the ACTA as well as the TPP to continue the status quo.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

PRI is the party that have most of the control in Mexico, if ACTA is pased, we are going to lost Internet because most of could breack ACTA laws, then we will lost the Information freedom in Internet, this means that PRi can buy television and will TOTALLY control the country’s media, will be like a Dictadure. and we will back to the 20 Century

mikey4001 says:

If the last few years worth of headlines can be believed, I would think Mexico had much bigger problems than IP enforcement. Or is it the DVD pirates and purveyors of fake Gucci bags that are littering the countryside with headless and mutilated corpses?

Be warned, Mexico: If you illegally download copyrighted footage of chainsaw decapitations, they’ll send the law after you.

An actual Mexican says:

It is as Jay said up there in the comments. I was happy that the Senate had rejected ACTA. However, given the large rejection of Pe?a Nieto’s “triumph” on the elections (with more and more proof that there was vote-buying, corruption of electoral judges/institutions, results that don’t pass any statistical test, etc. A way to distract the attention from all that stuff affecting both the current president and the “winner” from the elections is to distract the people. Here we only get news about Bird Flu, and none of all the great outcry and gatherings of people who don’t want Pe?a Nieto as a president and have evidence of fraud. And yes, Mexico has a lot of problems more important than counterfeits or online piracy. we don’t have a democracy, and if ACTA is ratified by the new senate next year, we will never have it

Javier Delgado (profile) says:

Bizarro y loco

Ya agree this is very birraze.

No only the senate rejected acta, it was rejected almost unanimously, and by the three parties: PAN, PRD and PRI.

Not even President Calderon Party Supported and the senate forbid Calderon to continue any negotiations.

So this was signed against the senate by direct order from the president to the ambassador.

Elections are over, and a new Senate has been elected, so the old one can not act against a outgoing president.

But there is no chance the new senate approves the treaty, since it has already been rejected, and the new senators had already announced they will reject ACTA.

So this is an empty gesture, maybe after ACTA was rejected by the EU, they needed someone to sign it and somehow (?$$$?)put pressure on President Calderon…

I have no other explanation.

Javier Delgado says:

Re: Re: Bizarro y loco

First, no the PRI has no majority, currently none of the parties has majority, a second senate?s from PRI also reject it.

ACTA was supported only by some members of PAN, and by the IMPI. But currently PAN rejects it.

As strange as it seems, the only issue where PRI, PAN and PRD seem to agree is that they reject ACTA.

That is why is so weird that President Calderon ordered to sign it.

Currently there is only way to aprove it.

The mexican law of treaties from 1992, says that all international Treaties must be ratified by the congress. But treaties by institutions, do not need congress ratifications.

So Calderon has to argue this is not an international treaty, but in that case, the congress has no obligations to create o modify laws in order to implement it, so it would be usseles.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...