ACTA: more than a glimpse

Having no means to verify whether this is genuine, since its content has been kept secret and far, far away from his curious eyes, the IPKat hesitates to draw the attention of his readers to this link to what purports to be an informal, predecisional/deliberative draft, dated 18 January 2010, of the consolidated text of ACTA, the Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. The document is 56 pages in length and reaches him via La Quadrature du Net. Thank you, Hugo Cox, for drawing the Kat's attention to this link.
ACTA: more than a glimpse ACTA: more than a glimpse Reviewed by Jeremy on Wednesday, March 24, 2010 Rating: 5


  1. Of course, since this document is marked US CONFIDENTIAL, viewing it/storing it in the US or from a computer owned by a US Corporation is likely to run counter to US law...

  2. This piece of legslation needs careful tracking and scrutiny. We could embark into the unknown world of customs policing all IP rights for international trade at their borders. The tensions are already apparent in that some countries cleary distinguish between TM and CR infringement as being "counterfeiting" and other countries EU, US and JP wanting to put all IPR into the framework.

    I think that we all agree that TM and CR counterfeiting is usually clear cut, but if patent infringement is brought in then how will the Customs officer be aware if the Nokia phone has a chip set that infringes the RIM patent on data compression?

    I would rather the officer be more concerned about narcotics, people trafficking, smuggling rather than policing the patent portfolios of corporations. Kick it into the long grass, please!

  3. Interesting post. Australian lawyer Kim Weatherall has also given her incisive comments on the upcoming negotiations at
    Would love to hear your comments


All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.