FYI Carlo -----Original Message----- From: Sean Flynn <sflynn@WCL.AMERICAN.EDU> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 11:46:47 -0500 Subject: US Trade on EU vote EU Parliament ACTA Resolution Opens Doors To Final Approval Posted: November 29, 2010 A majority of European Union Parliamentarians last week indicated their support for the Anticounterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) by passing a non-binding resolution that could pave the way for the Parliament's final approval of the agreement. The adopted resolution expressed general support of the ACTA as a good first step toward curbing counterfeiting, though the resolution notes that the agreement will not solve the complex and multi-dimensional problem. It sets no conditions for the final approval of the ACTA by the Parliament but asks the European Commission to “confirm that ACTA's implementation will have no impact on fundamental rights and data protection, on the ongoing EU efforts to harmonize IPR enforcement measures, or on e-commerce.” But it does not ask for an explicit report or “impact assessment” from the European Commission as would have been the case in an alternative resolution sponsored by left of center parties. The resolution passed by a 331- 294 vote on Nov. 24, and was tabled by the Parliament's center-right majority, which is represented by the Group of the European People's Party (EPP) and the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR). The alternative resolution that was not adopted had been tabled by the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D), the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats (ALDE), the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance (Greens/EFA), and the Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green Left (GUE/NGL). The resolution approved by the Parliament notes that the agreement will not violate the EU acquis communautaire, which is the body of legal rights and obligations to which member states are bound. To illustrate that point, the resolution notes that ACTA will not require personal searches for counterfeit goods nor a “three-strikes” policy that would obligate an Internet service provider to cut off access of a subscriber to the Internet after a certain number of alleged infringing activities are detected. EPP lawmakers, in a Nov. 24 press statement, also rejected allegations from left leaning political parties that the ACTA would lead to changes to the acquis. In a Nov. 24 statement, Greens member Eva Lichtenberger of Austria said that an impact assessment of ACTA on the acquis by the Commission would have given Parliament members “the opportunity to judge the agreement on a factual basis.” “Blind trust towards the commission has never been a good recipe,” she said. “Moreover, it does not reflect the new role of the European Parliament under the Treaty of Lisbon.” The treaty gave Parliament new powers to approve or reject trade deals negotiated by the commission. She noted that the majority for an approval of the ACTA is not guaranteed given the tight vote on the resolution last week. The resolution noted that the ACTA falls short on including a definition of “counterfeit geographical indications” in the section on general definitions and said this was “regrettable.” “This omission could create confusion or at least complicate the tasks of administrative and judicial authorities in the interpretation and enforcement of ACTA,” the resolution states. The EU had long pushed for coverage of geographic indications (GIs) in the ACTA, which it secured through the application of a broad-based scope of “intellectual property rights” in most sections. But this deviate d from the original EU demand that GIs be explicitly mentioned throughout the ACTA as an IPR covered by the agreement, which the U.S. strongly opposed. However, the resolution does acknowledge the efforts of the commission to include GIs within the scope of the ACTA. The ACTA will be the subject of a technical meeting this week in Australia, where countries will conduct a “legal scrub” of the agreement starting Nov. 30. The negotiating parties released a final text of the agreement on Nov. 15. The U.S., the EU, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, and Switzerland participated in the ACTA negotiations. Sean Flynn Associate Director Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property American University Washington College of Law 202 274 4157 www.pijip.org