Public Knowledge Seeks Limits On ACTA Trade Deal

Public Knowledge outlined three principles that the United States Trade Representative (USTR) should observe before it signs the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA).

1. Public Knowledge said the trade office should make clear that ACTA would not require changes to U.S. law. Such a statement accompanying the treaty language would “prevent pressures on the US to change its laws to comply with ACTA.”
2. PK said that the US should not “coerce non-ACTA countries to accede to the agreement.” PK noted that ACTA does not have some of the flexibility built into existing intellectual property international agreements. While the USTR has said it would like developing countries to sign the ACTA agreement, it should also recognize that many developing countries “are likely to see ACTA as harmful to their domestic interests and are likely to resist pressures to accede to it.” Countries may not have the resources to invest in intellectual property enforcement, PK said, adding that insistence on signing the ACTA agreement could jeopardize or delay other trade-enhancing agreements that could boost U.S. exports.
3. PK said that the USTR negotiation of the pending Transpacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) should be more “open and inclusive” than were the ACTA talks. ACTA was “shrouded in excessive secrecy, permitting privileged access to a very limited set of interests,” PK said, adding that ACTA “focused excessively on protection of IP (intellectual property) owners to the detriment of other stakeholders.” ACTA “ignored the rights of the Internet and consumer electronics industries that rely on IP limitations and exceptions to make and market their products and services and citizens who rely on IP limitations and exceptions to exercise their free speech rights.”