Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Copyright Law Blogs -> Michael Geist
OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Copyright Law
: Michael GeistU.S.: No ACTA Transparency Unless Other Countries Cave on Substance
By Michael Geist
ADVERTISEMENTS
The U.S. Trade Representative issued a release just prior to the launch of the New Zealand round of ACTA negotiations that has left no doubt that the U.S. is the biggest barrier to official release of the ACTA text. The full text of the release is couched in terms of improving transparency, but is really a thinly-veiled shot at the European Union's public demands for release of the text. The U.S. statement:"In this upcoming round of ACTA negotiations, the U.S. delegation will be working with other delegations to resolve some fundamental issues, such as the scope of the intellectual property rights that are the focus of this agreement. Progress is necessary so that we can prepare to release a text that will provide meaningful information to the public and be a basis for productive dialogue. We hope that enough progress is made in New Zealand in clearing brackets from the text so that participants can be in a position to reach a consensus on sharing a meaningful text with the public."
Note what the U.S. is actually saying - resolving scope of the treaty (the E.U. is seeking a broader scope that includes patents) and removing square brackets (the sources of disagreement) is needed to reach consensus on sharing text with the public. Yet there is no reason to link ACTA transparency with the substance of the treaty. The text of the treaty can be released without regard for the level of agreement on substantive issues. Yet unlike most other ACTA countries that have called for transparency without condition, the U.S. has set conditions that effectively seeks to trade its willingness to release the text for gains on the substance of the text. The only thing needed to reach consensus on sharing the text with the public is for the U.S. to give the go-ahead. This statement indicates they will only do so for a price.
Full post as published by Michael Geist on April 11, 2010 (boomark / email).
Lawsuits and Settlements
Bayer CropScience AG
alleging farmers suffered economic losses after Bayer's biotech Liberty Link rice was released into the food supply and countries banned US rice.
Related Searches
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.

No ACTA Deal Yet As EU Parliament Seeks Narrower Scope, More Transparency (IP-Watch)
Dutch ACTA Leaks Shows What Nations Back Transparency
Blogging ACTA Across the Globe: CIPPIC's David Fewer on What ACTA Means for Canadian Citizens
No ACTA Deal Yet As EU Parliament Seeks Narrower Scope, More Transparency
Canada Favours Early Release of ACTA Text (Geist)
ACTA Talks May Open Up, Slightly








