by Mike Masnick

Filed Under:
acta, eu, negotiations, transparency

Not Very Transparent: EU ACTA Negotiators Present To EU Parliament In Secret

from the where's-the-latest-draft dept

The EU Parliament made it quite clear back in March that it was not happy with what EU negotiators were pushing for within ACTA, and also not happy about the serious lack of transparency in the process. In response, ACTA negotiators finally released the text, but hinted that this was a one time deal, and now we're back to secrecy. Indeed, after the latest negotiations, no new text was released. Hell, it wasn't even mentioned.

Now, even more disappointing are reports that the EU negotiators have gone to discuss the matter with the EU Parliament, but would only do so in secret, forbidding those in attendance from telling anyone what was discussed. In other words, for all the talk of openness and transparency, it appears it was all a bluff. They showed one (incomplete) draft, and went right back to secrecy. It's as if they thought that people asking for transparency could be fooled by a quick glimpse.

It turns out that there were actually two separate meetings held for MEPs, with the first one being secret, and the second one being open. Some of what happened in that second meeting is now being reported in the press, with the EU negotiators insisting they won't fall for "US hypocrisy," within ACTA (whatever that means) -- but refusing calls by MEPs to make the draft public again. It's still not at all clear what was said in the first meeting.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  • identicon
    FUTURE ACTA ENFORCER, 13 Jul 2010 @ 4:19pm


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

    • identicon
      Bender, 13 Jul 2010 @ 4:52pm


      You can kiss my shiney metal ass

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

    • icon
      Jay (profile), 13 Jul 2010 @ 6:30pm


      Yar, boyo! We be fixin' ya right good with a walk on de plank!

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

    • icon
      Hephaestus (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 7:36am



      You are to funny, and I know you are joking. ACTA can not be enforced, if they attempt to, it will lead to a backlash along multiple paths. All the paths make the people pushing for ACTA less relevant. It will also speed their businesses failures. While there is not a clear consensus on finer points of how to push back, there is a general design that is being added to every day.

      As some one in this thread said "On the internet we have them outnumbered" that is the key point that makes ACTA un-enforcable. In another blog (it requires a authentication so I am not supplying the link) someone mentioned that there are 7-8 times as many people infringing as there are drug users in the US. In South Korea, Spain and Sweden the numbers were much higher. In all countries these numbers are rising and in most cases have already passed the critical threshold needed for it to be irreversible.

      From a legal perspective they can get ACTA passed. From the practical, tactical, and numeric perspectives its a non-starter.

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

  • identicon
    Username1, 13 Jul 2010 @ 4:36pm

    When I see DRM stories , I know to ignore them , because DRM doesn't matter to me , by the time the product
    reaches me , it no longer has the DRM in it.
    So it does not matter how strong a protection it has , since it has none by the time I get to it.

    At the same level , I know these stories , while entertaining , have no real value to me , as an end user ,
    because it will only matter to people who are enslaved by their masters laws.

    I am not enslaved by their laws , therefore I do not care.

    On the internet we have them outnumbered , laws are enforced through force of will , violence , or being outnumbered.
    In our situation , we have numbers on our side. And for those strong enough , like the pirate bay guys , and other sites and people who refuse to go along with the slave masters , then we have force of will on our side as well.

    Their laws mean nothing and their actions will be counteracted.

    As long as the real world is unfavorable to their business model , they will forever be at war.
    I just ignore them like a big dog ignoring a little barking dog.

    You can't stop them , you can't control them , but since their laws don't matter in the end , you can ignore them.
    Let them bark.

    Only their slaves will listen.

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

    • identicon
      robin, 13 Jul 2010 @ 4:59pm

      Re: the time the product reaches me , it no longer has the DRM in it.

      hehe....what are you going to do when the deer have guns?

      i'll agree, watching the old world in it's death throes, violently lashing out, is entertaining.

      i'll disagree though, to wit: you should care, as the power and violence of the old world order will take out innocents (that's you and me) on its way out.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 9:07am


      I have the same viewpoint, but I disagree with you on the point of it not mattering in the end..

      You are only fooling yourself if you truly believe "we" have them outnumbered on the Internet. You and I and some of the Internet population may be seeing the big picture, but the majority of the Internet is a bunch of goddamn idiots.

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

  • identicon
    RadialSkid, 13 Jul 2010 @ 4:57pm

    I'm guessing the whole "U.S. hypocrisy" thing is just random U.S. bashing to drum up support from the European people, since anti-Americanism is one of the few things that seems to unite Europeans.

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

  • icon
    Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 13 Jul 2010 @ 5:06pm

    U.S. Hypocrisy

    From the Article:

    "There is slight hypocrisy from the U.S. over the protection of geographical indications" he said, as the U.S. opposed that in ACTA, but was using trademarks to get the agreement through the back door. "We will not swallow it," he said of the E.U.'s position regarding negotiating with the U.S.
    Geographical indications generally apply to high-quality agricultural products and are a name or sign placed on a product that shows its place of origin.

    So the issue tainted by hypocrisy is Champagne and Scotch? Yes, that's clearly the most important issue on the table.

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

  • identicon
    Mr. Oizo, 13 Jul 2010 @ 5:53pm

    Join the gang ?

    Didn't I say a while ago that they (EU Parliament) wanted to join the clique ?

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2010 @ 8:36pm

    If you aren't doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to hide.


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

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Techdirt Logo Gear
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.