[A2k] HAI, TACD, KEI press release on Brussels enforcement meetting

[James Love]

http://bit.ly/dOTvY

Intellectual property enforcement initiatives threaten consumer rights
and public health
By Anne-Catherine Lorrain | June 12, 2009

PRESS RELEASE - June 12th, 2009

The TransAtlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD), Health Action International
(HAI) and Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) hosted a public meeting
on the issue of intellectual property rights enforcement in Brussels on
Wednesday, June 10th.

Everyday we hear about counterfeiting and piracy and about
anti-counterfeiting and new enforcement initiatives of governments and
industry. HAI, KEI and TACD presented two panels that challenged the
direction and rationale of several of these intellectual property rights
initiatives, including EU regulation 1383 on border measures and the
proposed =E2=80=9CAnticounterfeiting=E2=80=9D trade agreement (ACTA). The e=
nforcement of
private intellectual property right claims is a complex and important
area of public policy that touches on issues such as personal privacy,
civil rights, freedom, social and economic development, among others.

European Union leaders and the United States government are currently
engaged in efforts to shape global norms for the enforcement of
copyright, trademarks, patents and other intellectual property rights.
These discussions are taking place in multilateral, plurilateral,
bilateral and unilateral fora. Such policies raise concerns because of
the delicate balance between on the one hand rights and exceptions, put
in place by the international copyright and patent law =E2=80=9Cacquis=E2=
=80=9D, and on
the other hand public health principles such as access to medicines.

Speakers at the event represented consumer and public health
organisations from both sides of the Atlantic: M=C3=A9decins Sans Fronti=C3=
=A8res
(MSF), KEI, Essential Action, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), HAI,
The European Consumers Organisation (BEUC) and the Brazilian Permanent
representation to the European Union, as well as respondents from
DG-Trade and DG-Internal Market & Services. The diverse audience
included representatives from pharmaceutical, seed, and software
companies, the US Chamber of Commerce, academic experts, European
Commission officials, members of the European Parliament, journalists,
public health groups, consultants, business and civil society
organisations.

Selected quotes by the speakers:

Alexandra Heumber, MSF

=E2=80=9CPatent infringement should be excluded from the EU regulation 1383=
/2003
in order to avoid seizures of legitimate generic medicines in transit.=E2=
=80=9D

=E2=80=9CRegulation 3295/94, the law preceding 1383/2003, was much narrower=
 in
scope. Rather than including all violations of intellectual property, it
focused on counterfeit and pirated goods, which are generally seen as
trademark issues. The updated, broader law is problematic as we have
seen no justification for the extension to this area and no impact
assessment of the effects.=E2=80=9D

Eddan Katz, EFF

=E2=80=9CAt a time when carefully considered public policy is critical for
protecting the growth of the knowledge economy, the ACTA negotiations
brazenly obscure decision-making in secret meetings outside of public
debate and without legislative accountability. The leaked provisions
reveal a global information customs regime with radically broad powers
for border officials and a grab bag of multi-national corporate
lawmaking. As the Internet section is in the process of being mapped
onto this border customs pact, the urgency of meaningful public debate
demands a release of this ill-considered text.=E2=80=9D

Anne-Catherine Lorrain from TACD announced at the meeting that the
French Constitutional Court censored the graduated response proposal.
The French Court echoed =E2=80=9CAmendment 138=E2=80=B3 of the Telecoms Pac=
kage voted by
the European Parliament, saying that cutting access to the Internet is a
sanction that can only be imposed by the judicial authority, taking into
account the rights of defense and the presumption of innocence.

James Love, Knowledge Ecology International

=E2=80=9CIn a plethora of settings, publishers and pharmaceutical companies=
 are
pushing an aggressive new agenda to expand and enforce intellectual
property rights. The proposals are often advanced in undemocratic and
non-transparent fora, such as the top secret and highly classified ACTA
negotiations. This is big government and big business at its worst,
creating rules without input or sensitivity to the concerns of
consumers, overriding civil rights, undermining privacy, increasing
prices to consumers. The topics under review are not simple technical
issues or directed at organized crime, they are big sweeping changes in
our basic freedoms, and underhanded attempts to give lobbyists rules
they can=E2=80=99t get in a normal democratic setting.=E2=80=9D

Peter Maybarduk, Essential Action

=E2=80=9CMany new worldwide measures aggressively protect pharmaceutical
monopolies under the guise of fighting counterfeits - blocking
competition and jeopardizing global access to medicines in the process.
For example, the secret, so-called Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement -
which in fact focuses on ratcheting-up patent, copyright and trademark
protection, with little if any attention to drug quality - deliberately
misrepresents its contents to consumers, and is therefore itself
counterfeit. Counterfeits are a subset of a much larger drug quality
issue. The enforcement agenda fails to address broader quality concerns,
and indeed may divert much-needed public health resources away from
strengthening drug regulatory authorities. Rather than investing
taxpayer dollars enforcing private rights, public bodies should promote
price-lowering competition, drug quality and affordable access to
medicines.=E2=80=9D

Henrique C. Moraes, Brazilian Permanent representation to the EU

=E2=80=9CThere are =E2=80=98TRIPS Plus=E2=80=99 initiatives emerging in for=
a where these kind of
discussions are not expected. Public Interest organisations should be
aware of this.=E2=80=9D

Kostas Rossoglou, BEUC

=E2=80=9CBEUC calls on decision makers in Brussels not to give in to the wi=
sh of
the content industry to control the Internet. There remains confusion -
whether deliberate or not - between consumers and organized operations,
whereby consumers are blamed for copyright infringements. Clarification
is needed: applying the same enforcement measures to both commercial
scale infringers operating for profit and to individual citizens is, at
a minimum, disproportionate. While consumers have been actively engaging
with the technology and what they can do with it, it is disappointing
that many producers and owners of content in the creative industry
sector have seen the technology as a threat rather than a business
opportunity.=E2=80=9D

A Swedish participant at the meeting referred to a quote by MP Johan
Linander, Legal affairs spokesperson of the Swedish Center Party, saying
=E2=80=9CIf any of the other negotiating countries still would choose to pu=
t a
stop to openness, Sweden and the EU will have to seriously consider
stopping the negotiations altogether=E2=80=9D. This quote is thought to be =
in
reaction to the recent success of the Pirate Party in the European
elections.
--
James Love, Director, Knowledge Ecology International
http://www.keionline.org | mailto:james.love at keionline.org
Wk: +1.202.332.2671 | US Mobile +1.202.361.3040 | Geneva Mobile +41.76.413.=
6584