[Advisors] Confirmed ACTA-like outrageous criminal sanctions in Canada-EU Trade Agreement

[michael gurstein]

I haven't seen this discussed or even mentioned anywhere but it looks =
like a
major assault by stealth.

Perhaps time for Canadian civil society with an interest in Internet =
related
issues to begin to mobilize?

M
=20
----- Themes: CETA, ACTA, COPYRIGHT, ENFORCEMENT, EU COMMISSION, KAREL =
DE
GUCHT

La Quadrature du Net =96 For immediate release

Permanent link:
https://www.laquadrature.net/en/confirmed-acta-like-outrageous-criminal-s=
anc
tions-in-ceta

Confirmed ACTA-like outrageous criminal sanctions in CETA!

*** Brussels, 10 October 2012 =96 The EU Commission has confirmed that
ACTA-like criminal sanctions are currently present in CETA, the =
Canada-EU
Trade Agreement. This attempt by the EU executive to impose repression =
of
online communications through the backdoor is unacceptable. La =
Quadrature du
Net calls on EU citizens to demand their governments remove copyright
provisions from CETA during the upcoming round of negotiations [1]; =
failing
to do so, the final text would have to be opposed as a whole. ***

The current attitude of the EU negotiators on CETA is an alarming =
repetition
of the blatant denial of democracy of the ACTA negotiations. Despite =
calls
from citizens and representatives, CETA remains confidential, both in =
the EU
and in Canada. In this context of non-transparency, Philipp Dupuis, the
European Commission negotiator, confirmed at a workshop held on October =
10th
2012 that ACTA-like criminal sanctions were still in the CETA draft. As
usual, the Commission declines responsibility for such measures by =
rejecting
it on the Member States' governments (and therefore the Council of the =
EU)
[2], and claims it advises them to withdraw these provisions.

Without a public draft, it is impossible to trust any of the CETA
negotiators, whatever they might say to calm understandably angry =
citizens.
All the more since the publication a few days ago of the partially
declassified transcript of discussions [3] of the 3rd round of ACTA
negotiations in October 2008 proves citizens were right about ACTA:
negotiators did in fact design criminal sanction clauses so they would
criminalize not-for-profit practices online (our emphasis):

    =93NOT DECLASSIFIED presented the text on criminal sanctions. The
formulation of this document is based on Article 61 of the TRIPS =
Agreement
[4], which it is designed to clarify and reinforce.

    NOT DECLASSIFIED announced that it wished to determine the
interpretation of the concept of commercial scale in Article 61 in order =
to
make clear that it includes large-scale counterfeiting *even if it is =
not
for commercial purposes*. Furthermore, it regarded (a) and (b) as =
possible
variations of the commercial scale concept.=94

This threat to the very existence of widespread social practices, such =
as
non-market sharing of digital works between individuals or remix, =
targets
the Internet in a global way, including technical actors of the Internet
[5]. If such criminal sanctions were to remain, imposed through the =
backdoor
by EU governments, the CETA text would be compromised and would have to =
be
rejected as a whole. EU Citizens must make their governments accountable =
and
urge them to remove any criminal sanction and copyright-related =
provisions
from CETA.

=93The only hard evidence on which we can base our analysis suggests the
worst: once again, the European Commission and the EU Member States
governments are trying to impose repressive measures against cultural
practices online. Broad criminal sanctions do not belong in a trade
agreement. If they appear in the final CETA text, the agreement will =
lose
all legitimacy and will have to be frontally opposed, like ACTA. This =
trend
of sneaking repressive measures through negotiated trade agreements must
stop.=94 declared J=E9r=E9mie Zimmermann, co-founder and spokesperson of =
the
citizen organisation La Quadrature du Net.

* References *

1. This coming October 15th to October 26th in Brussels.
2. Criminal sanctions are the competency of Member States, which =
therefore
negotiated them in ACTA through the presidency of the EU. The same thing =
is
currently happening with CETA.
3. =
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/08/st14/st14607-ex01.en08.pdf
4.
http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/analytic_index_e/trips_03_e.htm=
#ar
ticle61A
5. Access, hosting and service providers.