The Final ACTA

Responses to ACTA's final text are likely to be mixed ...
Via a Tweet from the invaluable Michael Geist comes what looks rather like the final text of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement.  Described as being Subject to Legal Review and given today's date, this text runs to 24 sides of A4. Something guaranteed to annoy at least someone is Article 6.6 which states that
"This Agreement shall be signed in the English, French and Spanish languages, which shall be equally authentic".
. For the record, participating States in the negotiation are
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Morocco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United Mexican States, the United States, and the European Union.
The IPKat hasn't had time to check out this version against the previous, somewhat more tentative draft (on which see the AmeriKat's posts here and here), but he thought he'd better spread the word so that his readers can get busy with their thoughts and comments.

Michael Geist's blog can be accessed here.
The Final ACTA The Final ACTA Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, November 15, 2010 Rating: 5

No 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.