EU Apparently Agrees That ACTA Should Be More Transparent
from the ok,-so-open-up dept
Via Jamie Love we learn that at an EU trade policy meeting, EU member states have agreed to push for more transparency with ACTA, including releasing the draft negotiation documents as soon as possible. Apparently, this position was driven by Sweden, who we already noted was unhappy with where ACTA was heading. Since this apparently includes all EU member states, does this mean that Denmark has backed down from its hardline position against transparency? And if this is the case, who is left arguing that the documents need to be kept secret? As far as I can tell from the earlier list, we're now down to Singapore, South Korea and the US. That's odd, because Singapore, South Korea and the US already have trade agreements of this nature. In fact, much of ACTA is actually based on the agreement between the US and South Korea -- which is already proving problematic for those in South Korea.Filed Under: acta, eu, transparency
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Good news, however it's amazing how these authorities are suddenly in favor of greater ACTA transparency only AFTER most of the documents they want to keep secret the most have already leaked. Where was this transparency sentiment before these documents leaked?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wrong, according to the U.S. they ARE being transparent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
The backpedaling the politicians and media executives have to do for the months following ACTA's transparency might constitute exercise.
definition : backpedal - modify one's opinion, make it less strong ... rinse lather repeat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
apparently murder is bad
Maybe we should....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: apparently murder is bad
B) WTF does that have to with this topic?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: apparently murder is bad
"B) WTF does that have to with this topic?"
It has to do with secondary liablity.
Your kid kills someone, you are held responsible and charged with murder ... secondary liability. (iffy)
Someone uploads a file to your site that infringes, you are fined ... secondary liability.
Someone uses your WiFi to download a file, you get your internet access shut off ... secondary liability.
ACTA has secondary liability built into it. It also has guilt based on accusations not proof, and your need to prove you didnt do what you are accused of (proving a negative in most cases is impossible).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: apparently murder is bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: apparently murder is bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: apparently murder is bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: apparently murder is bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
its about the sudden shift to wanting transpancy
out the deal completely NOW. or don't and suffer .....regime change.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]