IP = Internet Protocol

IP = Intellectual Property

Integrity = a quality we would like to see in politics



Iptegrity.com is released under a Creative Commons licence.

Please attribute the author when quoting or using it as a reference source.

The correct citation is shown on each article.

Don't miss iptegrity

Use Live Bookmarks in your browser to keep up to date with iptegrity.com (RSS feed)

Login / Comment

You will need to log in to make a comment on any of the Policy Matters articles.
Username

Password

Remember me
Password Reminder
No account yet? Create one
It is free to create an account. When you have created it, you will get an email, telling you how to activate it.

 Support IPTEGRITY

Iptegrity.com provides comment and news on EU Internet policy that is independent of all commercial and political interests. 


Your donation will help to keep it that way.

 

Home arrow Policy Matters arrow ACTA arrow ACTA: haunted by the Telecoms Package
ACTA: haunted by the Telecoms Package
Written by Monica Horten   
Mar 02, 2010 at 12:33 PM

The latst ACTA leak reveals provisions which are reminiscent of the Telecoms Package copyright amendments. But it also reveals that it presses much harder on the liability of the ISPs. Could ACTA make them use deep packet inspection?

 

The latest document to leak from the Anti-counterfeiting trade agreement ( ACTA ) discussions reveals active negotation over ISP liability.

 

Option 3, Paragraphs 3ter and 3quater on pages 30-31 reflect  concepts  addressed by certain of the Telecoms Package amendments. 3 quater reflects  the "co-operation" amendment [now Article 32a of the Universal

Services Directive (Harbour report).], that telecoms regulators should promote the co-operation between network operators and the sectors interested in the promotion of lawful content] . In ACTA, this provision  is being re-worded as "mutually supportive relationships between online service providers and rights holders"

 

And it is being extended, because these ‘mutually supportive relationships' are to "deal effectively with patent, industrial design, trademark" as well as copyright infringement.... And it is being specified that these could be  non-legislative, self-regulatory or voluntary arrangements: "  including encouragement of establishing guidelines for the actions which should be taken"

 

From an EU perspective, it is the extension of the provision to other forms of intellectual propoerty, and the implementation of the provision,  that is critical.

 

3 ter  reflects attempts in the Telecoms Package to weaken EU privacy law,  which did not succeed, and the recent comments by the European Data Protection Supervisor are relevant here.  

 

 

Other proposed provisions appear to increase the liabilty of ISPs. Option 3, points i  and ii, on p30 could have the effect of making ISPs liable to police their networks because it seems to say that they could be sued if it is a/ technically possible  to take measures  preventing   infringement, and b/ they have grounds to know that an infringement is occurring.

This proposal is very concerning. Its impact on the "mere conduit" provision,  would need to be closely examined.

 

I note that the ACTA negotiators are ‘dealing'  on the mere conduit provision, even though it is outside the scope of copyright law.  ( See also (Option 2 ( a )  i on page 26).

 

 Apart from the obvious concerns regarding the substance and implications, questions should be asked whether the European Commission has a mandate to renegotiate key principles of communications law, such as mere conduit. Note 23 on page 26 is relevant here.

 

Michael Geist has more extensive  analysis of this latest ACTA leak, including the other ACTA chapters and non-EU matters.

 

The actual leaked document is available online here

 

 

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial-Share Alike 2.5 UK:England and Wales License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/uk/ It may be used for non-commercial purposes only, and the author's name should be attributed. The correct attribution for this article is: Monica Horten (2010) ACTA:  haunted by the the Telecoms Package http://www.iptegrity.com March 2010

 

 


User Comments
Please login or register to add comments

Last Updated ( Aug 12, 2010 at 09:50 PM )
<Previous   Next>

 "We who love the Internet

say that user rights are

defined by what we use our

Internet subscriptions for.

We do not want to be

reduced to consumers so

that our rights are only 

what is in the subscription

agreement. "

Eva-Britt Svensson, MEP


Your Freedom to

 repeal the DE Act

 


La Quadrature du Net

La Quadrature du Net

Don't disconnect us!  

European Commission Creative Content Online consultation

AK Zensur

AK Vorrat

Open Rights Group

open rights group

Exgae

  Code

GetUp Action for Australia

 Campaign against Internet filtering in Australia

...AK Vorrat - against data retention

  AK vorrat