The Anti-Counterfeit Trade Agreement (ACTA): U.S. Dictating Canada’s Intellectual Property Laws
18
13
1
349
13
1
349
In March, the Canadian government introduced a bill
that would bring about sweeping changes to its copyright and trademark
laws. This includes giving more power to customs and border protection
agents without any judicial oversight. The move is intended to prevent
counterfeit goods from entering the country, but has been criticized for
being less about protecting Canadians and more about caving to American
demands. With the U.S. dictating global intellectual property
standards, the new legislation represents the return of ACTA and would
pave the way for Canada to ratify the controversial international
treaty.
Over the years, the U.S. has been critical of Canada’s
efforts in addressing trade in counterfeit goods and has been pressing
for intellectual property reform. In the 2009 United States Trade
Representative (USTR) Special 301 Report,
Canada was placed on a priority watch list of countries that do not
provide adequate intellectual property enforcement. As part of its 2013 Trade Policy Agenda, the USTR is now pushing Canada to comply with the Anti-Counterfeit Trade Agreement
(ACTA). The multinational treaty is designed to standardize
intellectual property laws around the world. Although it has been signed
by a number of countries, including Canada, so far only Japan has ratified ACTA. It was the result of public pressure associated with risks internet privacy and online freedom of speech which lead to ACTA being rejected
by the European Parliament in July of 2012. At the time, many assumed
that ACTA was dead, but it still remains a top priority for the U.S. and
they are attempting to revive the discredited agreement by trying to
get the six necessary ratifications for it to come into force. In an
effort to satisfy U.S concerns, Canada recently announced legislation
which is aimed at bringing them in line with ACTA.
Last month, the Conservative government introduced Bill C-56, also known as the Combating Counterfeit Products Act. Academic researcher and law professor Michael Geist
explained how the proposed legislation would, “ensure that Canada is
positioned to ratify ACTA by addressing border measures provisions. The
core elements of the bill include the increased criminalization of
copyright and trademark law as well as the introduction of new powers
for Canadian border guards to detain shipments and work actively with
rights holders to seize and destroy goods without court oversight or
involvement.” He emphasized that, “Customs officials are not copyright
and trademark experts, yet they may now be forced to assess infringement
cases including determining whether any copyright exceptions apply.” Mike Masnick
of techdirt acknowledged that, “For many years, Canada has strongly
resisted U.S.-style copyright laws, despite tremendous pressure to do
so. Watching them cave on ACTA is certainly a disappointment.” He went
on to say, “It shows a Canadian government who doesn’t seem to care
about what the public wants, but rather feels the need to kowtow to U.S.
entertainment and pharmaceutical lobbying interests.”
The Council of Canadians
have questioned whether the anti-counterfeiting bill, “is one of the
conditions the U.S. government put on Canada joining the Trans-Pacific
Partnership (TPP) trade negotiations.” The group is urging that
intellectual property rights be taken out of the TPP and the
Canada-European Union (EU) Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement
(CETA) talks. There have already been attempts to use CETA negotiations
to sneak in parts of ACTA.
Stuart Trew, trade campaigner with the Council of Canadians wondered
since, “The Harper government seems to have just collapsed in front of
U.S. demands for border enforcement of Hollywood’s intellectual property
rights despite the global controversy with ACTA. Can we expect Harper
to bend this easily to European demands in CETA and U.S. demands in the
TPP that will increase the price of drugs and undermine access to
affordable medicines?” ACTA also favours Big Pharma with patent
protections that would limit generic competition and would lead to
higher drug costs.
On March 20, the USTR officially notified
Congress of its intention to enter into negotiations with the EU on a
Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) agreement. In the
letter, they also outlined specific goals in different areas such as
intellectual property rights. As part of the transatlantic talks, the
USTR, “Seek to obtain, consistent with U.S. priorities and objectives,
appropriate commitments that reflect the shared U.S.-EU objective of
high-level IPR protection and enforcement, and to sustain and enhance
joint leadership on IPR issues.” A Civil Society Declaration
signed by European and U.S. groups is insisting that the upcoming
negotiations, “exclude any provisions related to patents, copyright,
trademarks, data protection, geographical indications, or other forms of
so-called intellectual property. Such provisions could impede our
rights to health, culture, and free expression and otherwise affect our
daily lives.” Some have warned that the TTIP could be used as a way to
implement ACTA through the backdoor.
ACTA is part of the international agenda of patent,
trademark and copyright lobbies. The agreement favours big businesses
over individual innovators and creators. It was designed to protect the
interests of multinational corporations at the expense of fundamental
civil rights. ACTA is being used by the U.S. to pressure other countries
into adopting a new global standard for intellectual property
enforcement. The supranational treaty would impose draconian laws which
threaten the sovereignty of member nations.
Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher.
He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as
other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com. Visit his blog at Be Your Own Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment