U.S. offers peek at proposed copyright treaty

After months of secrecy that has rankled public interest groups, the Obama administration is revealing limited information regarding a multilateral anti-counterfeiting treaty currently under negotiation.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative on Monday released a summary (PDF) of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, a treaty for which negotiations began in 2006 with the aim of setting standards for the enforcement of intellectual property rights.

"We look forward to taking more steps to engage with the public in our efforts to make trade work for American families, " U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk said in a statement that called the summary a testament to the Obama administration's commitment to transparency.

The administration last month said the trade agreement and related materials were classified in the interest of national security, a position first taken by the Bush administration.

The summary lays out a set of potential chapters in the agreement and the provisions that may be included in each chapter. It states, however, that "at this point in time, treaty delegations are still discussing various proposals for the different elements that may ultimately be included in the agreement. A comprehensive set of proposals for the text of the agreement does not yet exist."

It does, however, indicate there have been discussions of holding Internet service providers liable for infringing material.

The countries negotiating the treaty: the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Switzerland, the 27 EU nations, Morocco, Australia, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and New Zealand.

The summary includes these potential sections:

• Intellectual property rights enforcement in the digital environment. The parties involved intend to include a chapter in the agreement clarifying the "role and responsibilities of Internet service providers in deterring copyright and related rights piracy over the Internet." The summary gives no further details, saying that the treaty negotiators are still collecting information to develop a common understanding of how to address these issues.

• Civil enforcement. This section would include how to determine IP infringement damages, judicial authority to hand down injunctions requiring a party to desist from an infringement, and the process for destroying counterfeit goods.

• Border measures. This section would address whether border measures should only apply to imports or to exports as well, giving travelers permission to carry goods for their personal use, procedures for right holders to request customs authorities to suspend at the border goods suspected to infringing on IP rights, and authority for customs to initiate such suspension of their own volition.

• Criminal enforcement. This section would, among other things, clarify the scale of infringement necessary to qualify for criminal sanctions; clarify the scope of criminal penalties, particularly in cases of video recording motion pictures and in cases of trafficking counterfeit labels; clarify in which cases the relevant authorities could take action against infringers on their own initiative; and dictate the authority to search or seize suspected infringing goods or the assets derived through infringing activity.

• International cooperation. There will likely be a chapter to recognize the need for cooperation among the competent authorities, for providing technical assistance for improving enforcement, and for sharing relevant information such as statistical data and information on best practices, in accordance with international rules and related domestic laws that protect privacy and confidential information.

Gigi Sohn, president of the nonprofit public interest group known as Public Knowledge, said the summary is a first step in increasing the treaty negotiation's transparency.

"The dissemination of the six-page summary will help to some degree to clarify what is being discussed," she said in a statement. "At the same time, however... it would have been helpful had the (U.S. trade representative) elaborated more clearly the goals the United States wants to pursue in the treaty and what proposals our government has made, particularly in the area of intellectual property rights in a digital environment."

Some entertainment industry representatives have told Congress that the U.S. should consider using Internet service providers to prohibit the flow of stolen content, as some European countries are doing.

[shootthecops]

civil law becomes criminal, warantless wiretapping becomes kosher.

can we burn the constitution now?

[pmfjoe]

The constitution is only for show and to make us feel good, other than that it is hardly worth the paper it is written on.

[russkeller]

The Constitution was burned when Social Security got upheld. These are just the ramifications ignoring the constitution for the greater good instead of rewriting it.

[darfjono]

everybody get packed up we're going to the moon

[talonius]

More and more I'm afraid that sentiment is correct. Corporations rule the world much as the Lords of old did. When will the peasants learn that they're granting the control, and rise up and rebel?

[storrey]

Without China and Russia does it matter anyhow?

[iptofar]

If gov't didn't make money of copyrights, this would not happen.

Copyright law was intended to benefit the society, not extract every possible dime from it.

[umbrae]

How long before the next Boston tea party?

[Michichael]

I love how they're trying to make ISP's enforce copyright. They're not cops nor under judicial authority. They don't have to do any such thing thanks to net neutrality. Then again, big media wants to kill net neutrality, doesn't it...

[Sausagebiscuit]

Sadly so. Let the ISPs do what they (hopefully) do best. Provide internet service. Leave the law to the boys in blue.

[BtmnHatesRbn]

Won't matter after Taitz gets through with Obama.

[pithenumber]

lets watch this treaty crash and burn

its not going to be successful unless you can places where there are LOTS of pirates to sign on
like Vietnam or Zimbabwe

[unknown unknown]

Considering they've only given large copyright holders any input into the process, this will probably end up as another gift to the entertainment industry and other large copyright holders at the expense of everyone else.

Considering the way Obama staffed the DOJ with RIAA Lawyers and his defense of Bush policies that he railed against during the campaign, I wouldn't expect anything but approval from his administration for even the most draconian and ill conceived provisions. The man is a Chicago politician and former member of congress, which means he's a liar and has no problem selling out to the highest bidder.

[cohaver]

support groups and software that protects your privacy. Support groups that believe in fair use copyrighted Media. you know that little paypal symbol make a donation to protect your rights and privacy

[Maccess]

I see very little here in terms of the rights of companies and individuals to release their work under copyleft and creative commons licenses. There is also substantial abuse in this area--other companies and individuals taking these CL and CC works and either claiming it as their own, or imposing charges on others' work, or using open source software for devices without disclosing such.

There have also been substantial restrictions on technologies used to distribute CC and CL works in the guise of protecting Intellectual property, e.g. Industry groups have lobbied for the criminalization of optical media, P2P software, etc in several countries, even though these technologies also have legitimate purposes.

Maybe it's not piracy, but the garage band and midnight programmer that distributes their work on the net that they're really worried about.

[man_w_balls]

Good point. We must watch to see if the underlying framework could make it harder for independent artists to distribute their work. That is obviously something the big record labels and studios are worried about, since the public departures of big names like Radiohead and NIN.