[A2k] Key US senators sent letter expressing concern with ACTA

[Judit Rius Sanjuan]

Intellectual Property Watch: Key US Senators Warn Bush Administration
On ACTA
By William New
Source: http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=3D1255

The leaders of the powerful United States Senate Judiciary Committee
on Thursday warned US trade negotiators to rein in the scope of
negotiations on an international treaty against counterfeiting, and to
make the process more transparent. At the same time, they chided the
Bush administration for failing to support the senators=92 legislative
efforts to strengthen domestic protection for intellectual property
rights.

At issue is the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), which the
United States has been trying to push through by year=92s end.

=93We are concerned =85 that the ACTA under consideration will prescribe
rules for protection so specifically that it could impede Congress=92s
ability to make constructive policy changes in the future,=94 Senators
Patrick Leahy (Democrat, Vermont) and Arlen Specter (Republican,
Pennsylvania) said in a 2 October letter to US Trade Representative
Susan Schwab.

The letter is available here: http://ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=3D1254

In particular, the senators raised concern that if ACTA is too
inflexible it will hamper Congress=92s ability to make =93appropriate
refinements=94 to US intellectual property law in the future, a concern
they said was raised in relation to the US-Peru Free Trade Agreement.

In addition, they urged USTR not to permit the agreement to address
liability for internet service providers or technological protection
measures, as they issues are under debate in the courts and Congress.
=93As technology is not static, Congress must have the ability to tailor
the law as developments warrant without concern that a change may run
afoul of ACTA,=94 they said.

They said they =93applaud=94 the administration=92s efforts to raise the
importance of intellectual property protection, but posed the concern
about the breadth, specificity, transparency and speed of the talks.

And they made clear their wish to get administration support for a
bill they sponsored and modified to meet administration opposition
that Congress passed this week and sent to the President for
signature. That bill, S 3325, the Prioritizing Resources and
Organization for Intellectual Property (PRO-IP) Act of 2008, would
create an intellectual property =93czar=94 in the White House, among other
things (IPW, US Policy, 1 October 2008).

=93We are disappointed that the administration has been resistant to
this [legislative] effort and has opposed additional enforcement
authority, such as civil enforcement in copyright cases where the
violation rises to the level of criminal activity,=94 they wrote.

The letter is likely to be taken into account, as any US treaty
negotiated by the Executive branch normally must be subjected to
Senate approval, and their committee is primary on criminal matters.

=93We urge you not to rush into a new, broad Anti-Counterfeiting Trade
Agreement that may have a significant impact on intellectual property
protection at home and abroad and which can take effect without formal
congressional involvement,=94 they said. =93We encourage you to limit the
agreement to improved coordination among nations and robust, but
flexible standards for civil, criminal, and border enforcement.=94


AND:
Pro-IP senators concerned anti-counterfeiting treaty may be too broad
CNET
Source: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10057100-38.html
Posted by Stephanie Condon

Two senators known for their support of stringent intellectual
property enforcement expressed concern on Thursday that an anti-
counterfeiting treaty currently being drafted may be too far-reaching.

Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Arlen Specter (R-Penn.) sent a letter
on Thursday to U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab saying that the
Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement currently under negotiation "could
limit Congress's ability to make appropriate refinements to
intellectual property law in the future."

The speed of the negotiations and their lack of transparency compound
the risk that the treaty will unnecessarily constrain Congress, the
letter says.

Leahy and Specter authored the recently passed Prioritizing Resources
and Organization for Intellectual Property Act. Before the legislation
was approved by Congress, it was stripped of a controversial provision
opposed by the Bush administration that would have given the Justice
Department authority to pursue civil copyright infringement cases.

"We are disappointed that the Administration has been resistant to
this effort and has opposed additional enforcement authority, such as
civil enforcement in copyright cases where the violation rises to the
level of criminal activity," the letter says.

As chair and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the two
senators also support funding to assist foreign countries in combating
U.S. intellectual property infringement.

Even though they applaud the USTR's efforts to bolster intellectual
property protection, the senators said, they were concerned "about the
breadth of the issues" the trade agreement could cover "and the
specificity with which it could be written."

The USTR tried to allay concerns over the treaty at a public forum
last month that gave some indication of what would be included in the
agreement. Representatives of the USTR emphasized that the treaty
would focus on the enforcement of policies already in place, rather
than creating new, substantive policy agreements with other countries.

However, many at the forum still expressed their misgivings over the
agreement. A representative from Google said the treaty should not
include any provisions regarding Internet policy, since U.S. Internet
policy is still in its nascent stages. The senators' letter mirrored
those sentiments.

"Regarding the potential breadth of ACTA, we strongly urge you not to
permit the agreement to address issues of liability for service
providers or technological protection measures," it said. "The
contours of the law and liability exposure in these areas continue to
be debated in the courts."


Judit Rius Sanjuan
Attorney
Knowledge Ecology International / Essential Information
www.keionline.org / www.cptech.org
Phone: +1.202.332.2670, x18