Original news and analysis on international IP policy
The recently completed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is not fully consistent with European Union law and goes beyond international law in some of its aspects, concluded a group of intellectual property law experts from universities in Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, France and Spain.
For many experts in internet governance the future of the multi-stakeholder model is the top issue in 2011. The participation of governments, technical experts, industry and civil society in discussions about how best to organise - and regulate - society on the net is at stake.
The proposed European Union-India free trade agreement was one of the top issues at the 11th EU-India Summit held in Brussels today. But two sides of the story are being told about who will benefit or lose.
Civil Society and industry stakeholder groups are up in arms against a decision by the bureau of the United Nations Committee on Science and Technology for Development to task only governments with the decision on improvements for the Internet Governance Forum.
What would happen if the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) received an application for a .wikileaks top level domain name (TLD) next year, under its new system of opening up the internet for domains? It could make an interesting example of how well the complex system to apply for new TLDs works and how much political intervention is possible in the system. At the 39th ICANN meeting in Cartagena, Colombia this week, the self-regulatory body is trying to finalise issues in the published Final Applicant Guidebook - and it is governments and trademark owners that are calling for more time and more procedures.
Negotiating partners today released the final text of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) after another week of what they called “legal scrubbing” which in fitting form was once again was performed behind closed doors, this time in Sydney.
A first proposal on the future mandate of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is on the agenda this week at the ongoing 65th session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York. A proposal prepared by the Group of 77 and China opts for another five-year mandate for the IGF to discuss internet public policy related issues and embraces the so-called multi-stakeholder principle.
After three weeks of negotiations, member countries and the secretariat of the United Nations International Telecommunication Union hailed the consensus and success of the 2010 Plenipotentiary Conference, which sets the ITU work programme for the next four years. But even through the final rounds of applause, the tensions about how much the internet features in the core mandate of the Union remained audible.
Five years after the tale began in Athens, the United Nations Internet Governance Forum returned to Europe last week to ask itself what has been achieved. The answer was encouraging enough to prompt a range of internet stakeholders to suggest continuation of the group, this time with a greater focus on concrete outcomes.
European Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht today told the plenary of the European Parliament in Strasbourg that it has become clear the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) could only be concluded by sticking to a minimum consensus. But this might result…
Everyone you ask this week about the Anti-Counterfeiting Agreement (ACTA) tells you that they’re just about to work their way through the new draft version to understand the implications of changes made during the recent negotiation round in Washington, DC. Massive changes to the text have been revealed by yet another leak of the draft treaty text being negotiated by 10 countries and the EU 27 member states.
European and Indian business not only have privileged access to information on the planned EU-India free trade agreement, they even set the agenda for this negotiation from the start. That is the conclusion of a study by the Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) and India FDI Watch published this week in Brussels and Delhi. Both organisations intend to appeal directly to the European Commission and the Indian government to stop negotiations as long as there is no access to negotiating positions and documents for all affected parties.