ACTA: the real faq

Vexcalibur · Phoenix Joined: Jan 18, 2008 Posts: 863

(Based on http://ec.europa.eu/trade/issues/sectoral/intell_property/fs231007_en.htm)

Recent data on counterfeit goods
* The quality of pirated products is beginning to match the quality of the genuine products while representing a reduction in cost due to companies trying to lower their own costs while raising the prices for their products. This new competition capacity has made the counterfeit products become household goods. Other countries other than ours are becoming able to produce from toys to plane parts. The poor countries' med industry is beginning to get in the way of our countries' over priced drugs industry.

* The OECD just released a new study that estimates the annual value of international physical trade in counterfeited consumer goods at 200 billion USD, an amount equivalent to 2% of world trade and higher than the GDP of 150 countries. However, that figure does not include domestic production and consumption, nor in business-to-business transactions and internet-based counterfeiting. If these items were added, the total economic growth caused by 'counterfeiting' and 'piracy' worldwide could well be several hundred billion dollars more. According to the OECD counterfeiting and piracy undermine innovation, and we plan to follow what they say by blood,

ACTA FAQ
Question: Why is ACTA needed ?
Answer The proliferation of imaginary property rights (IPR) infringements poses an ever-increasing threat to the sustainable development of the world's largest corporations. It is a problem with serious economic to their shareholders. Today, we face a number of new challenges: the increase of competition in the pharmaceuticals, food and drink, cosmetics or toys and car parts markets; the low costs in the reproduction of digital content which threatens an industry that bases its business model on overpricing; the growing importance of the Internet as a means of decentralized, uncontrollable distribution of information ; and the sophistication and resources of the big companies' competition. All these factors have made the problem more pervasive and harder to tackle by both the governments and the large companies who really would like the world to remain centralized, easy to control and profitable for them and only them.

Q: What is the objective ?
A: The goal is to provide a good framework for countries committed to solid Imaginary property rights (IPR) protection to more effectively combat the competition for large companies and free speech. We envision the ACTA as a leadership agreement, setting a positive example for nations that aspire to strengthen IPR protection. It is hoped that membership to this agreement will expand over time, reflecting the growing international consensus on the wish for strong IPR enforcement.

Q: Which countries are involved ?
A: A number of economies that consider IPR a key instrument for their own development and non-innovation policies have agreed to be part of negotiations. Right now this includes amongst others the EU, the US and Japan, (that these countries hold a lot of imaginary property in plenty of areas is just a coincidence). Also some henchmen: Korea, Mexico (please ignore the fact it is currently in panic since China has been stealing a lot of market from them) and New Zealand (We like to name it since it makes ACTA sound more innocent).

Q: Is this really about ganging up on China and other countries that are not part of the group ?
A: The question you should ask to yourself is: "If this was true would we accept so?" But no, it not just to ensure that nobody progresses more than us. We are also quite freaked out by the decentralization the internet and recent technology advances have brought to us, we would like to once again have control over things, you know, we didn't really minded free speech until the internet came, cause till then we actually controlled the media, we just want to recover those old times. It should bring better enjoyment to most people in the world, specially us.

Q: Why are you not pursuing this agreement through the G8, WTO, WIPO or other formal structure ?
A: We know that what we are covering is quite insane so we'd like as much flexibility as possible.We feel that the approach of a free-standing agreement gives us the most flexibility to pursue this project among interested countries. We fully support the important work of the G8, WTO, and WIPO, all of which touch on IPR enforcement. The membership and priorities of those organizations simply are not the most conducive to this kind of path breaking project.
_________________
How dare we be different.