Michael Geist on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

by on March 29, 2010 · 2 comments

Last week there was another leak of the secretly negotiated Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). This time it was a copy of the of the entire latest draft. It seems to dispel some of the initial worries bloggers had written about, including customs searches of your iPod at the border, but also stokes other concerns. For one thing, the U.S. seems to be pushing for protocols to cut off copyright violators from their internet access.

In the most recent episode of the Surprisingly Free Podcast, I talk with Prof. Michael Geist of the University of Ottawa, who has been following ACTA more closely than anyone else. He explains that not only is the content of ACTA troubling, but the fact that it’s being negotiated in such secrecy.

Listen to other episodes and remember to subscribe to the podcast using RSS or iTunes.

  • http://srynas.blogspot.com/ Steve R.

    This is one of those cases of be very careful of what you ask for. Rob Pegoraro wrote: “In the U.S. government, however, ACTA seems to remain a priority. President Obama praised the agreement by name in a speech delivered days after the European Parliament vote.” So we get ACTA; and it turns out that future “intellectual property” is being created in other countries; not here.

    Sound far fetched? I didn't think of this scenario till I read some reader comments in a New York Times article lamenting the loss of manufacturing jobs in the US. One reader responded that the transference of manufacturing jobs overseas will eventually lead to research and development moving overseas too. So if we make a really big fuss about protecting our so-called intellectual property while we are “on-top”, we may find ourselves on the losing end when other countries begin to out-compete us on intellectual property development and then claim that we owe them money for our use of their “property”!!!!

  • http://srynas.blogspot.com/ Steve R.

    This is one of those cases of be very careful of what you ask for. Rob Pegoraro wrote: “In the U.S. government, however, ACTA seems to remain a priority. President Obama praised the agreement by name in a speech delivered days after the European Parliament vote.” So we get ACTA; and it turns out that future “intellectual property” is being created in other countries; not here.

    Sound far fetched? I didn't think of this scenario till I read some reader comments in a New York Times article lamenting the loss of manufacturing jobs in the US. One reader responded that the transference of manufacturing jobs overseas will eventually lead to research and development moving overseas too. So if we make a really big fuss about protecting our so-called intellectual property while we are “on-top”, we may find ourselves on the losing end when other countries begin to out-compete us on intellectual property development and then claim that we owe them money for our use of their “property”!!!!

Previous post:

Next post: