ACTA: harmless or horror?

25.03.2010
Is the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) a harmless attempt to quietly harmonise intellectual property laws and enforcement around the world, or a threat to civil liberties that will require fundamental legislative changes to implement?

The views of officials and lobby groups differ widely on what ACTA entails, as was evident in Wednesday's briefing in Auckland, organised by InternetNZ. Speaking on background at the briefing was a Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) negotiator who leads the New Zealand team at the ACTA talks.

ACTA is an attempt to update earlier intellectual property regimes such as the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) from 1994 and is aimed at large, commercial counterfeiters and copyright infringers, MFAT says.

ACTA won't impact on the activities of ordinary New Zealanders, the spokesman says, nor is treaty is not designed to be intrusive or to have an impact on consumers' ability to purchase and use legitimate goods. Parallel importing and access to generic medicines will still be available under ACTA, he says.

According to the ministry, the negotiations won't change existing intellectual property rights standards as set out in TRIPS and the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO). Also, it won't change existing consumer rights or interfere with the Privacy Act or the Bill of Rights Act.

However, InternetNZ's senior research fellow in cyberlaw, Jonathon Penney, intellectual property lawyer Rick Shera of Lowndes Jordan and independent technology consultant and media commentator Colin Jackson also spoke and warned of the potential consequences of ACTA.