PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Europaudvalget 2010-11 (1. samling)
EUU Alm.del Bilag 164
Offentligt

Europaudvalget

Til:

Dato:

Udvalgets medlemmer og stedfortrædere

6. januar 2011

Henvendelse vedr. ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement)

Hermed omdeles en pressemeddelelse fra Foundation for a Free Information

Infrastructure (FFII), som er fremsendt til alle medlemmer af COSAC - og

dermed Europaudvalgets medlemmer.

Henvendelsen drejer sig om ACTA-aftalen (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agree-

ment), som skal fastlægge grundlæggende regler for distribution af indhold på

internettet.

Med venlig hilsen

Signe Riis Andersen

Udvalgssekretær

1/5

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Dear Members of COSAC,

Please find below the FFII press release: FFII requests

proof ACTA's criminal measures are essential.

Yours sincerely,

Ante Wessels

FFII

[ ACTA / Economy / Innovation ]

=========================================================

FFII requests proof ACTA's criminal measures are essen-

tial

=========================================================

Brussels, 5 January 2011 -- The Foundation for a Free In-

formation Infrastructure (FFII) requests proof that the

Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement's criminal measures

are essential. The EU can only harmonise criminal

measures if approximation of criminal laws and regula-

tions of its Member States proves essential to ensure the

effective implementation of a Union policy. The same is

true for harmonisation by way of trade agreement. The

FFII also requests documents which discuss the propor-

tionality of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement's

criminal measures.

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)'s criminal

measures criminalise ordinary companies and individuals.

ACTA can be used to criminalise newspapers revealing a

document, office workers forwarding a file and private

downloaders. A whistle blower or weblog author revealing

a document in the public interest, may easily be prose-

cutable, for instance if the webpage contains advertise-

ments. Remixers and others sharing a file are included if

there is an advantage. This advantage may be "indirect",

a concept the FFII believes to be too unclear to incorpo-

rate in criminal law: it may be fulfilled by others. ACTA

is not limited to large scale activity, as claimed earli-

er by the Commission. There is no de minimis exception

either.

FFII analyst Ante Wessels: "The criminal measures are in-

trusive. The Treaties demand proof that these measures

are essential, we want to see this proof. If the measures

are essential, the Commission should have negotiated

them. If they are not, the EU Commission and Parliament

cannot give consent to ACTA including criminal measures."

The Commission left the Parliament in the dark about the

criminal measures, it repeatedly answered questions with:

"The relevant provisions of ACTA were negotiated by the

2/5

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

rotating EU Presidency on behalf of the EU Member States.

Therefore, the Presidency is best placed to respond to

this question."

Ante Wessels: "The Commission is the guardian of the

Treaties, it has to take its responsibility and provide

proof the measures are essential. Without proof, the EU

cannot ratify ACTA's criminal measures."

=========================================================

FFII request

=========================================================

Dear Commission,

1. At the end of September 2007, the Commission launched

a questionnaire addressed to the Member States in order

to conduct a study on the situation of the intellectual

property legislation in the Member States. See Reply P-

0541/2008 from Commission

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?refe

rence=P-2008-0541&language=EN

I would like to receive the questionnaire, the answers

given by the Member States and study, conclusions, etc

and other documents relevant to this study.

2. I would like to receive documents which discuss wheth-

er approximation of criminal laws and regulations of the

Member States proves essential to ensure the effective

implementation of the Union policy with regards to intel-

lectual property rights. (Compare art 83.2 TFEU)

3. I would like to receive documents which discuss the

proportionality of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agree-

ment's criminal measures.

Yours sincerely,

Ante Wessels

=========================================================

Background information

=========================================================

Behind closed doors, the European Union, United States,

Japan and other trade partners are negotiating the Anti-

Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. ACTA will contain new in-

ternational norms for the enforcement of copyrights,

trade mark rights, patents and other exclusive rights.

The EU power to negotiate criminal measures in trade

agreements is not unlimited. The criminal measures in

3/5

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

trade agreements are limited by the same rules that limit

the power to make internal EU legislation. Art 207.6

TFEU: "The exercise of the competences conferred by this

Article in the field of the common commercial policy

shall not affect the delimitation of competences between

the Union and the Member States, and shall not lead to

harmonisation of legislative or regulatory provisions of

the Member States in so far as the Treaties exclude such

harmonisation."

The Treaty of Lisbon entered into force on 1 December

2009. The EU is competent to make criminal law. Criminal

IP measures have to be based on art 83.2 TFEU: "If the

approximation of criminal laws and regulations of the

Member States proves essential to ensure the effective

implementation of a Union policy in an area which has

been subject to harmonisation measures, directives may

establish minimum rules with regard to the definition of

criminal offences and sanctions in the area concerned.

Such directives shall be adopted by the same ordinary or

special legislative procedure as was followed for the

adoption of the harmonisation measures in question, with-

out prejudice to Article 76."

=========================================================

Links

=========================================================

FFII analysis ACTA's criminal measures:

http://acta.ffii.org/wordpress/?p=34

FFII general ACTA analysis:

http://action.ffii.org/acta/Analysis

FFII ACTA blog:

http://acta.ffii.org/wordpress/

Answers to Parliamentary questions:

P-9025/10EN

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?refe

rence=P-2010-9025&language=EN

P-8952/10EN

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?refe

rence=P-2010-8952&language=EN

P-8950/10EN

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?refe

rence=P-2010-8950&language=EN

Parliamentary questions:

http://en.act-on-acta.eu/20_October_Priority_Questions

Permanent link to this press release:

4/5

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

http://press.ffii.org/Press%20releases/FFII%20requests%20

proof%20ACTA%27s%20criminal%20measures%20are%20essential

=========================================================

Contact

=========================================================

Ante Wessels

ante (at) ffii.org

+31 6 100 99 063

FFII Office Berlin

Malmöer Str. 6

D-10439 Berlin

Fon: +49-30-41722597

Fax Service: +49-721-509663769

Email: office (at) ffii.org

http://www.ffii.org/

=========================================================

About FFII

=========================================================

The FFII is a not-for-profit association active in twenty

European countries, dedicated to the development of in-

formation goods for the public benefit, based on copy-

right, free competition, open standards. More than 1000

members, 3,500 companies and 100,000 supporters have en-

trusted the FFII to act as their voice in public policy

questions concerning exclusion rights (intellectual prop-

erty) in data processing.

5/5