Acta: Controversial anti-piracy agreement rejected by EU

BBC News, 4 July 2012

Related Stories 

• MEP vote rejects piracy treaty
• European watchdog warns on Acta
• Top Euro MP condemns Acta treaty

The treaty had been heavily critcised
in the months leading up to the vote

The European Parliament has voted to reject the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (Acta).

The proposed agreement sought to curb piracy, but internet campaigners said it posed a threat to online freedoms.

The rejection vote followed a failed attempt to postpone the decision because of ongoing investigations into Acta by the European Court of Justice.

Euro MP David Martin said: "It's time to give [Acta] its last rites."

Twenty two EU member states, including the UK, had signed the Acta treaty - but it had not been formally ratified.

Outside the EU, the treaty also had the support of the US, Australia, Canada, Japan, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore and South Korea.

However, following significant protests, several countries chose not to back the treaty.

Wednesday's vote is seen by most observers as the final blow to the treaty in its current form. It means no member states will be able to join the agreement.

A total of 478 MEPs voted against the deal, with 39 in favour. There were 165 abstentions.

'Hello democracy'

EU Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht said work into tackling piracy would continue.

"Today's rejection does not change the fact that the European Commission has committed itself to seeking answers to the questions raised by the European public," he said.

"The European Commission will continue to seek the legal opinion of the European Court of Justice on whether this agreement harms any of the fundamental rights of European citizens - including freedom of speech.

"European citizens have raised these concerns and now they have the right to receive answers. We must respect that right."

As the decision was made, some of those in attendance held banners reading: "Hello democracy, goodbye Acta".

The UK's Pirate Party had campaigned against Acta since details of the treaty were first made public.

In a statement, leader Loz Kaye said he was pleased that politicians "listened to the millions" of people who had sent messages in protest.

"The European Parliament vote is a triumph of democracy over special interests and shady back-room deals," Mr Kaye said.

"Without this opposition, our representatives would have waved this agreement through. It is now clear that it is becoming increasingly politically poisonous to be 'anti-internet'."

The European Parliament has voted to reject the
Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (Acta)

Related Articles:

The 39 MEPs That Voted For ACTA

The Netherlands refuses to sign ACTA

The Netherlands refuses to sign ACTA

RNW, 26 June 2012

The Dutch cabinet will not be signing the ACTA treaty, in line with parliamentary wishes.

Photo: ANP

The anti-piracy bill for the internet ACTA, which is meant to be signed by European countries, the United States and Japan, has been under fire for some time. Its opponents fear it will be misused to prevent people illegally downloading films and music from the internet.

The Dutch Freedom Party submitted a motion urging the Dutch government not to sign. Green Left MP Arjan El Fassed asking the government to look into whether the treaty contravened civil rights, before deciding to sign. Both motions were supported by a majority of the House. The government has followed their lead.

Interior Minister Maxime Verhagen said the motions were “superfluous and premature”, because the government was waiting for a ruling by the European Court of Justice on the issue. The court is considering whether ACTA does indeed infringe on civil rights. However, the ruling is not expected before the end of the year.

Censorship Law

On 4 July, the European Parliament will debate the treaty. It’s expected to reject it. Four influential European Parliament commissions have already said no to ACTA. A majority of European MPs think the treaty infringes on internet freedom.

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is meant to harmonise international standards for the protection of the rights of producers of music, films, pharmaceuticals, fashion and various other products. Combatting piracy is just one side of the controversial treaty. Its opponents call it the “Censorship Law”, because it will drastically limit internet freedom.

Related Articles:

Dutch parliament opposes ratifying ACTA

Bulgaria refuses to ratify ACTA

ACTA: more than just an illegal download ban
Acta protests: Thousands take to streets across Europe

Loosen up copyright law, says Dutch government
Internet pirates winning the war on copyright with new software "Tribler"

Anti-piracy treaty falters in EU Parliament

Deutsche Welle, 21 June 2012

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) suffered another setback as an EU Parliament committee voted against the deal. While the agreement still has supporters, its detractors seem to be winning the upper hand.

Politicians only recognized how explosive ACTA was when thousands of Europeans took to the streets in protest. Several countries, Germany included, intend to ratify the treaty.

In Germany, Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger pointed out that there were "open questions" to address before enacting the agreement. After Thursday's vote in the EU Parliament's International Trade Committee, in which 19 parliamentarians opposed the agreement and 12 voted in favor, the same is happening in Brussels.

The vote brought ACTA a step closer to an early death as the committee recommended the EU Parliament reject the deal at a vote in July. The EU Commission has also already submitted a request to the European Court of Justice regarding the treaty's compatible with EU law.

An uncomfortable decision

ACTA, which has been negotiated over the last three years, can only go into effect if ratified by all EU member countries and approved by the European Parliament.

National governments have been restrained and largely left the decision on a controversial issue to be made in Brussels. But they have supported and watched the agreement closely over the years, Social Democratic Member of the European Parliament Bernd Lange told DW.

There have been several demonstrations against ACTA in Europe

"Now that civil society has discussed it, they say it is time for Europe to decide," he said while noting that some countries had pushed for the agreement.

ACTA's aim was to improve the protection of intellectual property by tightening customs controls to combat counterfeit goods from Asia, and to fight illegal downloading of music and videos.

Internet activists fear limitations

ACTA was drafted by countries most vulnerable to product piracy and violations of intellectual property rights, including members of EU, as well as Australia, Canada, Japan, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea and Switzerland.

These are the countries that would benefit the most from ACTA. For example, Europe loses 8 billion euros ($10 billion) to product piracy, according to the EU Communion. Despite countries agreeing on preventing counterfeit products, there is disagreement over the treaty's details and how the wording is interpreted.

Internet users have expressed fear that Internet service providers will monitor online activity and charge damages to right violators. Green Party MEP Jan-Philipp Albreacht opposed the treaty from the onset.

"Measures that are proposed for copyright are clearly oppressive to Internet users," Albrecht told DW.

He said he believes providers that violate copyright law ought to be pursued more aggressively than Internet users.

People feel that rights will be infringed on the Internet via data monitoring

Developing countries at a disadvantage

Another potential problem was that not every country was involved in the formulation of the trade agreement, Albrecht said.

"If you are drafting an agreement to combat piracy, every country needs to be involved, especially developing and emerging countries, because such violations tend to take place there," he said.

Also, developing countries have legitimate interests related to technology or generic exceptions, Albrecht added. Some aid agencies fear ACTA could impede trade in generic drugs, which tend to be cheaper than the originals. The medicines are essential to fighting diseases like AIDS and tuberculosis in poor countries.

But the agreement does still have supporters.

"ACTA is a milestone in the fight against product piracy," Christian Democrats MEP Daniel Caspary wrote in a statement on his website. 

People fear that the development of
generic drugs will be impeded by
ACTA

He said he believes developed countries and emerging countries are coming together to combat counterfeit products and brands. But not everyone is on board - the treaty has a limited number of signatories.

Back to the drawing board?

If the EU Parliament goes against its committee's recommendation and approves ACTA, the EU Council and the Council of Ministers would enact the agreement into law. If the EU parliamentarians do not endorse ACTA, it will be taken back to the drawing board.

Author: Ralf Bosen / csc

Editor: Sean Sinico

Related Article:

ACTA rejected by committee in crucial blow before final EU Parliament vote

Dead on arrival? Dutch Parliament kills ACTA before EU vote

RT.com, 29 May, 2012

Protesters wearing Anonymous Guy Fawkes masks take part in a
 demonstration against controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement
(ACTA) (AFP Photo/Jean-Philippe Ksiazek)

Lawmakers in Holland have voted to strike down the international Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), slammed by many as a free speech and information access choker. Dutch MPs have also ruled the government will never sign any such agreement.

The Dutch parliamentarians have opted not to wait for the EU’s vote on ACTA which is set for June, with consultations kicking off already this Thursday.

"The treaty should be taken off table, whatever the decision the European Parliament should take," said MP Kees Verhoeven, a major sponsor of Tuesday’s motion in the Dutch Parliament.

Lisa Neves Goncalves, a spokeswoman for the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation, said the government had earlier this year stated it would not sign off on the treaty until it was clear it did not breach the Dutch or EU constitution.

As the controversial bill is making its slow way through the EU Parliament, the UK Pirate Party, the Open Rights Group (ORG) and the French La Quadrature Du Net are calling for more anti-bill rallies.

"The votes this Thursday, in three of the Committees responsible for offering 'Opinions' on the treaty, will really affect whether the European Parliament ultimately rejects ACTA or not. It is important that your MEP understand people's concerns. And calling your MEP will help make this happen," says the Open Rights Group in a blog post.

ACTA is an international agreement aimed at protecting intellectual property. It somewhat resembles the US’s Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), which was shelved by lawmakers after protests.

The European Union suspended efforts to ratify the treaty in February amid a storm of protest from activists who say the agreement would stifle free speech and access to information. 

Thousands demonstrated across the EU against giving big firms the power to ban people from using the Internet for illegally swapping files. Twenty-two countries in the bloc signed up to the agreement, with a vote on its ratification due this summer in Brussels.

The US, most of the EU, Australia, Canada, Japan and several other countries have signed the ACTA treaty, but none of these signatories' parliaments have yet ratified it. This last step would make the agreement viable. As soon as ACTA is ratified by any six nations, the convention will come into force.

Related Articles:

ACTA rejected by EU Parliament committees in crucial vote

Neelie Kroes backs ACTA protests

Anti-piracy ACTA treaty referred to EU high court

Acta protests: Thousands take to streets across Europe

Marchers in London gathered outside British Music House,
home to several major rights holders

New threat to internet freedom

RNW, 15 May 2012, by Willemien Groot

 (Vladimir Kazanevsky)

        

Out of public view, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), a UN agency, is working on a proposal to give governments more control over the internet. The effort is supported by a number of countries including Russia, Brazil and China, and if it’s successful it could mean the end of internet freedom.

After the WikiLeaks-affair and the Arab Spring, an increasing number of countries would like to ‘democratise’ the internet. China India, Brazil and South Africa all use the ITU as a platform to advance their plans, says Dieuwertje Kuijpers from the Telders Foundation, a research agency connected with the pro-market VVD party.

“It’s a useful platform for them, enabling them to set rules about what is and is not allowed on the internet.” That includes rules for both acceptable behaviour and internet regulation.

Trivial

Russia and China were the first UN members to propose setting up the International Code of Conduct for Information Security. The code lists the rights and responsibilities of states when it comes to the web. The rules also make it possible to fight internet criminals and extremists attempting to undermine the ‘economic and political stability of the state’ - in other words, bring order to the chaos. The first thing was to get rid of ‘trivial’ aspects like the right to anonymity and privacy on the web. The proposal was considered somewhat laughable in US and Europe but the controversial code of conduct is now getting a second chance.

India, Brazil and South Africa are calling for the creation of a new UN organisation to monitor and protect equal access to the internet. The UN Committee for Internet-Related Policies (CIRP) would consist of 50 member states, along with four advisors from the business world and society. Many people don’t realise that this committee would mean the end of the so-called multi-stakeholder principle that everyone has a say in the internet. The 50 countries represented would decide how around 6 billion people are allowed to use the internet.

Control

Dutch Green Left MP Arjan El Fassed believes that restraint is necessary:

"The growth and development of the internet is possible precisely because it belongs to everyone and no one. Many different groups would like to control aspects of the internet, from the entertainment industry to governments. The danger is that regulation will be used to disguise attempts to take control. That’s bad for everyone.”

The United Nations is the last body that should be dealing with this issue, according to Dieuwertje Kuijpers: "The UN is too bureaucratic and opaque. That makes it almost creepy.” It’s also impossible to make this kind of agreement on the basis of consensus.

The ITU has proven its usefulness in the past. The agency facilitated the liberalisation of the internet in the late eighties, guaranteeing access for everyone without restrictive international frameworks. National governments are responsible for the rules of usage. Independent organisations such as ICANN ensure the technical standards and stability of the internet.

Radical

It’s unclear exactly what the proponents of government control actually wish to accomplish. Clearly, cyber security, privacy and data storage concerns are part of their agenda, but so far the draft text has not been released to the public. Given the radical nature of the proposal, the public has a right to know more about the plan.

Arjan El Fassed thinks the Netherlands should refuse to continue negotiating until the ITU proposal is made public:

"The majority of users will benefit from an open internet, not from more control. The problem with these proposals is that civil society has almost no say. The Netherlands should have the courage to stand up for those users, like other European countries.”

"Member States shouldn’t wait for ratification, they must have a say now,” says Dieuwertje Kuijpers. "This process started back in 2005. There is no earthly reason to be taken by surprise if the proposal is presented at the end of this year at the telecom conference in Dubai.”

Picnic

The ratification of the controversial anti-piracy law ACTA has already demonstrated that politicians have little idea what these agreements entail. Specialists in the field of civil rights and internet freedom had to explain what ACTA means to computer illiterate MPs and civil servants. They cannot afford to be that ignorant this time around, says Kuijpers:

"ACTA was a picnic compared to what the ITU is planning.” 

See also: The Economist - In Praise of Chaos

Related Articles:

Neelie Kroes backs ACTA protests

Anti-piracy ACTA treaty referred to EU high court

Acta protests: Thousands take to streets across Europe

Marchers in London gathered outside British Music House,
home to several major rights holders

Neelie Kroes backs ACTA protests

RNW, 4 May 2012

Neelie Kroes, the European Commissioner for Digital Agenda, says she appreciates the protests against the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). Speaking at an internet conference in Berlin, the Dutch politician said she thought it unlikely that either the ACTA international anti-piracy agreement or the US Stop Online Piracy Agreement (SOPA) would come into force.

Neelie Kroes, the European
Commissioner for Digital Agenda

ACTA has met with fierce protests in various European countries over the past months. Opponents argue that the part of the agreement aimed at combating illegal downloading endangers internet freedom. The European Parliament’s International Trade Committee is expected to vote on ratification of the agreement in July.

“We have recently seen how many thousands of people are willing to protest against rules which they see as constraining the openness and innovation of the internet,” Mrs Kroes said. “This is a strong new political voice. As a force for openness, I welcome it, even if I do not always agree with everything it says on every subject.”

Mrs Kroes, a member of the Dutch free-market liberal VVD party, described the internet as “the new frontier of freedom”. She said that crime constituted a “tiny minority of online activity”, adding that legislators should avoid an overreaction and “balance liberty and security”. Mrs Kroes went on to argue in favour of “net neutrality”, or openness of access to internet services.

The anti-piracy proposals have prompted protests
across Europe 

Related Articles:

Acta unlikely to be ratified in Europe, says Kroes

European Data Protection Official Criticizes ACTA Treaty

Alliance of Liberals and Democrats in EU parliament rejects ACTA

Anti-piracy ACTA treaty referred to EU high court

ACTA: more than just an illegal download ban

Megaupload Trial May Never Happen, Judge Says

Acta protests: Thousands take to streets across Europe

Marchers in London gathered outside British Music House,
home to several major rights holders

Cispa cybersecurity bill opposed by Obama administration

Hillary Clinton adviser reiterates president's opposition to Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act ahead of vote

guardian.co.uk, James Ball, Tuesday 24 April 2012

Alec Ross Senior Advisor for Innovation to Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton Photograph: Ramin Talaie/Corbis

A senior State Department official has stressed the Obama administration's opposition to a controversial cybersecurity bill ahead of a vote in the House of Representatives later this week.

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (Cispa) is intended to facilitate sharing of information on online threats across different federal agencies and private companies. It has been criticised by both activists and politicians of both Democrats and Republicans for vague wording and insufficient safeguards.

Ahead of the bill coming in front of the House of Representatives alongside three other cybersecurity bills, Alec Ross, a senior adviser for innovation to Hillary Clinton, reiterated the administration's opposition to the proposals in more explicit language than previous statements from officials.

"The Obama administration opposes Cispa," he told the Guardian. "The president has called for comprehensive cybersecurity legislation. There is absolutely a need for comprehensive cybersecurity legislation.

"[But] part of what has been communicated to congressional committees is that we want legislation to come with necessary protections for individuals."

Ross refused to be drawn, however, on whether the White House would consider vetoing the bill were it to pass through Congress

Ross's comments came as Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul set out his own strident opposition to Cispa.

"Cispa permits both the federal government and private companies to view your private online communications without judicial oversight provided that they do so of course in the name of cybersecurity," he said on Monday.

"Simply put, Cispa encourages some of our most successful internet companies to act as government spies, sowing distrust of social media and chilling communications in one segment of the world economy where Americans still lead."

The open internet group EFF has warned that Cispa's broad wording could class many routine internet activities, such as using encryption on emails or enabling anonymity using a service called TOR, as potential threats. The act could also indemnify companies acting for security purposes from civil and criminal liability, including violating a user's privacy, provided these were not intentional, the group warned.

Despite the opposition, Mike Rogers, the chairman of the house intelligence committee and primary sponsor of the bill, remains confident it will be passed by the House of Representatives this week.

"I feel pretty confident that we'll close out the bill," he told the Talking Points Memo blog on Monday. Rogers also reportedly told the site he was not aware of a final stance from the Obama administration regarding his bill, and said he had met with some advocacy groups and modified Cispa as a result.

"There's some people who aren't interested in having any bill happen," Rogers told TPM. "But we've had an open and transparent dialogue with everyone who has chosen to engage with us, and there's been major progress made. This has always been a collaborative effort."

Three other cybersecurity-related bills are passing through the house this week – the Data act, which creates more oversight on security of federal computer systems and data; the Cybersecurity Enhancement Act, aimed at targeting federal cybersecurity research, and a third computer research and design bill.

Related Article:

Cispa will give US unprecedented access, internet privacy advocates warn

European Data Protection Official Criticizes ACTA Treaty

PC World, by Jennifer Baker, IDG News, Apr 24, 2012

SIMILAR ARTICLES:

• Anti-Piracy Concerns Spread to Europe
• EU Parliament to Vote on ACTA Without Waiting for a Court Decision
• European Commission to Refer ACTA Treaty to EU's Highest Court
• We Saw Where You Went: App Traces Workers' Steps Abroad
• More Criticism for Anti-piracy Agreement in Europe
• MegaUpload Founder Could Get His Property Returned

Europe's top data privacy watchdog has strongly criticized the international anticounterfeiting trade agreement (ACTA), warning that it could lead to widespread monitoring of the Internet and breaches of individuals' right to privacy.

The agreement is poorly worded, lacks precision about what measures could be used to tackle infringement of intellectual property rights online and could result in the processing of personal data by ISPs that goes beyond what is allowed under E.U. law, the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) said in a 16-page opinion published Tuesday.

The opinion also says that ACTA does not contain "sufficient limitations and safeguards, such as effective judicial protection, due process, the principle of the presumption of innocence, and the right to privacy and data protection." It also warns that many of the measures to strengthen intellectual property enforcement online could involve "the large scale monitoring of users' behavior and of their electronic communications" including emails, private peer-to-peer file sharing and websites visited.

ACTA aims to enforce intellectual property rights and will enter into force after ratification by six signatory states of the total 11 -- the European Union, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the U.S. It was signed by the European Commission and 22 E.U. member states in January, but before it can become E.U. law it must be approved by the European Parliament.

However, the international antipiracy pact has failed to win favor with parliamentarians. And following large civil protests throughout Europe, many E.U. countries are back-pedaling on their decision to sign the agreement. Most have suspended ratification.

In an effort to placate critics, the European Commission, the body responsible for negotiating the agreement on behalf of the E.U., has asked the European Court of Justice to rule on whether the deal is compatible with the E.U. Charter of Fundamental Rights. But since the court will not evaluate the effectiveness or proportionality of the measures within the agreement, nor the potential outcome, anti-ACTA activists see it as nothing more than a time-wasting exercise.

The Parliament is expected to vote in June without waiting for the court ruling. It seems that it will vote against the agreement, after the parliamentarian charged with evaluating it, David Martin, recommended rejecting it.

The EDPS' opinion puts a further nail in ACTA's coffin. In February 2010, the independent supervisory authority, gave his first opinion on the treaty, which at the time was being negotiated in secret. That opinion raised privacy concerns, but Tuesday's document goes into more detail on the now public text.

ACTA includes permission for countries to create laws whereby an online service provider may be ordered by a "competent authority" to disclose the identity of a subscriber to a right holder. The EDPS points out that the "competent authority" is not defined. There is likewise no definition of "commercial scale" mentioned elsewhere in the text.

Article 23 of ACTA appears to create new categories of criminal offenses without providing for any legal definition of what they are, he continued. Generalized monitoring of Internet users could affect millions of individuals irrespective of whether they are under suspicion.

In short, according to the EDPS, ACTA raises huge privacy concerns.

The anti-piracy proposals have prompted protests
across Europe 

Related Articles:

Alliance ofLiberals and Democrats in EU parliament rejects ACTA

Anti-piracy ACTA treaty referred to EU high court

ACTA: more than just an illegal download ban

Megaupload Trial May Never Happen, Judge Says

Acta protests: Thousands take to streets across Europe

Marchers in London gathered outside British Music House,
home to several major rights holders

Anti-piracy ACTA treaty referred to EU high court

Deutsche Welle, 22 February 2012

The European Commission said Wednesday it would present the controversial ACTA treaty on copyright and counterfeiting law to the European Court of Justice, to rule whether it violates the fundamental rights of Europeans.

The EU Commission has asked the European Court of Justice to rule on the legality of the controversial ACTA treaty which regulates counterfeiting, copyright and Internet freedom and has been fiercly opposed around Europe.

EU Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht said the court could adjudge independently on whether the treaty was "incompatible one way or another with the fundamental rights and freedoms of the European Union."

"This debate must be based upon facts, and not upon the misinformation and rumour that has dominated social media sites and blogs in recent weeks," De Gucht told a news conference in announcing the decision.

He said the agreement "aims to raise global standards for intellectual property rights" and said ACTA "will help protect jobs currently lost because counterfeited, pirated good worth 200 billion euros ($264 billion) are currently floating around."

Critics of the ACTA treaty have argued that it restricts Internet freedom. Recent weeks have seen mass demonstrations around Europe against the treaty, which has already been agreed to at the EU level but must still be ratified by individual member states.

Germany has refused, for now, to sign the international online anti-piracy treaty. The German government had already agreed in principle, but appears to be wavering in the face of public protest. Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger has suggested that the government was not prepared to give the treaty the green light. The United States, Japan and Canada are also among signatories.

dfm/ai (AFP, Reuters)

Related Articles:

EU court: Social networks can't be piracy brakes

Facebook and Twitter do not need anti-piracy software, says court

European Court of Justice rejects web piracy filter

ACTA: more than just an illegal download ban

Acta protests: Thousands take to streets across Europe

Loosen up copyright law, says Dutch government
Internet pirates winning the war on copyright with new software "Tribler"

Dutch parliament opposes ratifying ACTA

RNW, 14 February 2012

The Dutch Lower House has backed a motion from the Green Left party which says that the Netherlands should, for the time being, refrain from signing an international treaty designed to combat piracy and counterfeit trade on the Internet.

ACTA: more than just an illegal 
download ban  (Photo: The Javorac)

The motion says that there first needs to be clarity over whether the treaty threatens the rights and the privacy of Internet users.

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is a treaty between the 27 EU Member States and ten other countries including the US, Canada and Japan. Last weekend, tens of thousands of Europeans in cities across Europe demonstrated against ACTA. They fear it will limit the freedom of internet use.

Some EU Member States have already ratified the treaty but others, including the Netherlands and Germany, have not yet done so. The Bulgarian government says it prefers to wait until the EU has agreed a common position for all 27 members.

Read more about ACTA

Related Articles:

Bulgaria refuses to ratify ACTA

ACTA: more than just an illegal download ban
Acta protests: Thousands take to streets across Europe

Loosen up copyright law, says Dutch government
Internet pirates winning the war on copyright with new software "Tribler"

Acta protests: Thousands take to streets across Europe

BBC News, by Dave Lee, Technology Reporter, 11 February 2012

Marchers in London gathered outside British Music House,
home to several major rights holders

Related Stories 

• Germany delays Acta signing
• Acta protests spread over Europe
• Top Euro MP quits in piracy row

Thousands of people have taken part in co-ordinated protests across Europe in opposition to a controversial anti-piracy agreement.

Significant marches were held in Germany, Poland and the Netherlands against the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (Acta).

Around 200 protesters gathered in central London outside the offices of several major rights holders.

Demonstrators argued that Acta will limit freedom of speech online.

However the agreement's supporters insist it will not alter existing laws, and will instead provide protection for content creators in the face of increasing levels of online piracy.

The treaty has to date been signed by 22 EU members, including the UK, but has yet to be ratified by the European Parliament. A debate is due to take place in June.

On Friday, Germany delayed signing the agreement in order to, a spokesman said, "give us time to carry out further discussions".

'In secret'

Saturday's London demonstration was supported by the Open Rights Group, a vocal opponent to the treaty. The group's executive director, Jim Killock, argued that Germany's stance shows Acta negotiations were carried out "in secret" by EU "bureaucrats".

What is Acta? 

• The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement is an international treaty aiming to standardise copyright protection measures.
• It seeks to curb trade of counterfeited physical goods, including copyrighted material online.
• Preventative measures include possible imprisonment and fines.
• Critics argue that it will stifle freedom of expression on the internet, and it has been likened to the controversial Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa).
• Acta has been signed by 22 EU members, including the UK, but is yet to be ratified by the European Parliament.

"Three member states in Europe are now looking like they don't want to sign," he told the BBC.

"That shows that politicians are only really starting to look at this now. All of a sudden, the whole thing is breaking down."

Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia have already delayed the process after significant pressure from mostly young people.

"The point today is to say Acta is undemocratic," Mr Killock added.

"It's lacked scrutiny, it's setting up dangerous new pressures to censor the internet to remove users and put pressure on [Internet Service Providers] to start policing for copyright."

More demonstrations were held in other UK cities, including Edinburgh and Glasgow.

Anonymous hackers

The anti-Acta movement has also been widely adopted by members of the Anonymous activist collective, which has claimed responsibility for putting high-profile government websites out of action, including that of the Polish prime minister.

Speaking at the London protest Loz Kaye, leader of the Pirate Party UK, dismissed worries that aligning closely with Anonymous - whose members carry out various illegal activities online - was harmful to their cause.

"What we've seen is a whole wave of people coming out on the streets right across Europe," he told the BBC. 

The Open Rights Group's Jim Killock
called the agreement undemocratic"

"Some people have been called extreme, but equally, Amnesty International, Médecins Sans Frontières have spoken out. Even The Economist, which is hardly radical, has described the treaty as potentially draconian."

'Greater transparency'

The BBC contacted several key rights holders prior to the demonstration - all of which declined to comment.

The UK's Intellectual Property Office has maintained that Acta "should not" mean new laws relating to internet use.

In a statement, Baroness Wilcox, parliamentary under-secretary for Business, Innovation and Skills, told the BBC: "It was important for the UK to be a signatory of Acta as it will set an international standard for tackling large-scale infringements of [intellectual property rights], through the creation of common enforcement standards and more effective international cooperation.

"During the negotiations, we continually pushed for greater transparency as we believed that this would have led to a better understanding of the agreement by the public."

ACTA: more than just an illegal 
download ban  (Photo: The Javorac)

Related Articles:

Anti-ACTA day: Angry crowds take action (PHOTOS)

ACTA: more than just an illegal download ban

Acta: Germany delays signing anti-piracy agreement

Act on Acta now if you care about democracy and free speech

Anonymous calls for anti-ACTA rallies, Poland suspends bill


U.S. Senate sneaks in SOPA under a new name