Los comentarios de Michael Geist también son muy importantes: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5351/125/
-- ---------------------------------------------- NICOLAS PEREYRA MOLINAS [email protected] Paraguay - South America ---------------------------------------------- 2010/10/5 Nicolas Pereyra Molinas <[email protected]> > Más información en http://www.eff.org/issues/acta > > Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement What is ACTA? > > In October 2007 the United States, the European Community, Switzerland and > Japan simultaneously announced that they would negotiate a new intellectual > property enforcement treaty, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, or > ACTA. Australia, the Republic of Korea, New Zealand, Mexico, Jordan, > Morocco, Singapore, the United Arab Emirates and Canada have joined the > negotiations. Although the proposed treaty’s title might suggest that the > agreement deals only with counterfeit physical goods (such as medicines), > what little information has been made available publicly by negotiating > governments about the content of the treaty makes it clear that it will have > a far broader scope, and in particular, will deal with new tools targeting > “Internet distribution and information technology”. > > In recent years, major U.S. and EU copyright industry rightsholder groups > have sought stronger powers to enforce their intellectual property rights > across the world to preserve their business models. These efforts have been > underway in a number of international fora, including at the World Trade > Organization, the World Customs Organization, at the G8 summit, at the World > Intellectual Property Organization’s Advisory Committee on Enforcement, and > at the Intellectual Property Experts’ Group at the Asia Pacific Economic > Coalition. Since the conclusion of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Issues > of Intellectual Property in 1994 (TRIPS), most new intellectual property > enforcement powers have been created outside of the traditional multilateral > venues, through bilateral and regional free trade agreements entered into by > the United States and the European Community with their respective key > trading partners. ACTA is the new frontline in the global IP enforcement > agenda. > > To date, disturbingly little information has been released about the actual > content of the agreement However, despite that, it is clearly on a fast > track; treaty proponents want it tabled at the G8 summit in July, and > completed by the end of 2008. > Why You Should Care About It > > ACTA has several features that raise significant potential concerns for > consumers’ privacy and civil liberties, for innovation and the free flow of > information on the Internet, legitimate commerce, and for developing > countries’ ability to choose policy options that best suit their domestic > priorities and level of economic development. > > ACTA is being negotiated by a select group of industrialized countries, > outside of existing international multilateral venues for creating new IP > norms such as the World Intellectual Property Organization and (since TRIPs) > the World Trade Organization. Both civil society and developing countries > are intentionally being excluded from these negotiations. While the existing > international fora provide (at least to some extent) room for a range of > views to be heard and addressed, no such checks and balances will influence > the outcome of the ACTA negotiations. > > The Fact Sheet published by the USTR, together with the USTR's 2008 > "Special 301" report make it clear that the goal is to create a new standard > of intellectual property enforcement, above the current > internationally-agreed standards in the TRIPs Agreement, and increased > international cooperation including sharing of information between signatory > countries’ law enforcement agencies. The last 10 bilateral free trade > agreements entered into by the United States have required trading partners > to adopt intellectual property enforcement obligations that are above those > in TRIPs. Even though developing countries are not party to the ACTA > negotiations, it is likely that accession to, and implementation of, ACTA by > developing countries will be a condition imposed in future free trade > agreements, and the subject of evaluation in content industry submissions to > the annual Section 301 process and USTR report. > > While little information has been made available by the governments > negotiating ACTA, a document recently leaked to the public entitled > "Discussion Paper on a Possible Anti-counterfeiting Trade Agreement" from an > unknown source gives an indication of what content industry rightsholder > groups appear to be asking for – including new legal regimes to "encourage > ISPs to cooperate with right holders in the removal of infringing material", > criminal measures, and increased border search powers. The Discussion Paper > leaves open how Internet Service Providers should be encouraged to identify > and remove allegedly infringing material from the Internet. However the same > industry rightsholder groups that support the creation of ACTA have also > called for mandatory network-level filtering by Internet Service Providers > and for Internet Service Providers to terminate citizens' Internet > connection on repeat allegation of copyright infringement (the "Three > Strikes" /Graduated Response), so there is reason to believe that ACTA will > seek to increase intermediary liability and require these things of Internet > Service Providers. While mandating copyright filtering by ISPs will not be > technologically effective because it can be defeated by use of encryption, > efforts to introduce network level filtering will likely involve deep packet > inspection of citizens' Internet communications. This raises considerable > concerns for citizens' civil liberties and privacy rights, and the future of > Internet innovation. > What You Can Do > > Despite the potentially significant harmful impact on consumers and > Internet innovation and the expedited timeframe in which the treaty is being > negotiated, the citizens that stand to be directly affected by the treaty > provisions have been given almost no information about its real contents, > and very little opportunity to express their views on it. > > But there is still time to do something to change that! If you live in the > US, tell your Senators to demand more transparency in > ACTA<http://action.eff.org/site/Advocacy?id=383> > ! > > > -- > ---------------------------------------------- > NICOLAS PEREYRA MOLINAS > [email protected] > Paraguay - South America > ---------------------------------------------- > > > > > 2010/10/5 Pablo Castillo <[email protected]> > >> Freepress son otros que estan encima de este tema: >> http://www.freepress.net/ >> >> Cada tanto mandan a su mailing list los updates del tema por si quieren >> mas (tb esta obviamente la EFF) >> >> Pablo Castillo >> http://pablo.lnxsoluciones.com/ >> http://twitter.com/pabloacastillo >> http://github.com/pabloacastillo >> Asunción, Paraguay. Tierra, Tercero de Sol. >> Nube Interestelar Local, Burbuja Local, Cinturón de Gould, Brazo de Orión. >> Vía Láctea, Grupo Local, Supercúmulo de Virgo. >> Universo Local. >> >> >> >> 2010/10/5 Chepi Gimenez <[email protected]> >> >> *Update, from EFF's website:* the Senate Judiciary Committee postponed >>> the scheduled markup of the Internet censorship bill — a fantastic outcome, >>> given that the entertainment industry and their allies in Congress had hoped >>> this bill would be quickly approved before the Senators went home for the >>> October recess. Massive thanks to all who used the EFF Action Center to >>> write to your Senators to oppose this bill. >> >> >> >> ___________________________________________________________________ >> lista : Lista-sl >> direccion : [email protected] >> preferencias: http://www.linux.org.py/mailman/listinfo/lista-sl >> >> > > > >
___________________________________________________________________ lista : Lista-sl direccion : [email protected] preferencias: http://www.linux.org.py/mailman/listinfo/lista-sl
