<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div id="article-header">
<div id="main-article-info">
<h1>Acta goes too far, says MEP</h1>
<p id="stand-first" class="stand-first-alone">Kader Arif, the
lead Acta negotiator in the European Parliament, says Acta
potentially cuts access to lifesaving generic drugs and
restricts online freedom</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="content">
<ul class="article-attributes b4">
<li class="byline">
<div class="contributer-full"> <a class="contributor"
rel="author"
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/charlesarthur">
Charles Arthur</a> </div>
</li>
<li class="publication"> <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/">guardian.co.uk</a>,
<time datetime="2012-02-01T14:39GMT" pubdate="">Wednesday 1
February 2012 14.39 GMT</time> </li>
<li style="display: list-item;" class="history"> <a
class="rollover history-link"
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/feb/01/acta-goes-too-far-kader-arif?newsfeed=true#history-link-box">Article
history</a> </li>
</ul>
<div id="article-wrapper">
<div id="main-content-picture"> <img
src="cid:part1.01040902.03050508@gmail.com" alt="Kader Arif"
height="276" width="460">
<div class="caption">French MEP Kader Arif says Acta threatens
online freedom and access to the use of generic versions of
drugs for treating illnesses. Photograph: Lionel
Bonaventure/AFP</div>
</div>
<div id="article-body-blocks">
<p>The French MEP who resigned his position in charge of
negotiating the international Anti-Counterfeiting Trade
Agreement (Acta) has said it "goes too far" by potentially
cutting access to lifesaving generic drugs and restricting <a
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/internet"
title="More from guardian.co.uk on Internet">internet</a>
freedom.</p>
<p>In an exclusive interview with the Guardian, Kader Arif – a
member of the European parliament's international trade
group, who was the lead negotiator over Acta – said that
despite talks over the agreement having begun in 2007, "the
European parliament, which represents the rights of the
people, had no access to this mandate, neither had it
information of the position defended by the commission or
the demands of the other parties to the agreement".</p>
<p>Arif resigned in protest on 26 January as the EU signed the
treaty, saying that he wished to "denounce in the strongest
manner the process that led to the signing of this
agreement: no association of civil society [and] lack of
transparency from the beginning".</p>
<p>He said that it now threatens online freedom, access to the
use of generic versions of drugs for treating illnesses, and
could potentially mean that someone crossing a border who
has a single song or film on their computer could face
criminal charges.</p>
<p>Asked what he thought European citizens should do, Mr Arif
said: "Showing that there is interest and concern about this
agreement is the best way of creating a real public debate,
which was never possible until now because of the lack of
transparency on this dossier. Especially if the timeframe is
short, raising awareness of members of parliament will be
crucial. And because Acta is a mixed agreement, it will have
to be ratified both by the European parliament and by every
member state of the union, so there is also an opportunity
to organise debates at the national level."</p>
<p>He says that it is now impossible to renegotiate the
agreement because the 11 key parties to it concluded their
discussions on 1 October 2011: "the European commission
negotiated it on behalf of the EU, on the basis of a mandate
given by the member states in 2007."</p>
<p>That means, he says, that "at this stage one can only
accept or reject the agreement – no change of the text is
possible. If the right wing of the European parliament had
not imposed such a tight calendar, the members of the
European parliament could have drafted an interim report,
which would have put conditionalities to the ratification of
the agreement, by giving recommendations to the commission
and member states on how to implement it. But this is no
longer a feasible option."</p>
<p>"The title of this agreement is misleading, because it's
not only about counterfeiting, it's about the violation of <a
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/intellectual-property"
title="More from guardian.co.uk on Intellectual property">intellectual
property</a> rights," he told the Guardian. "There is a
major difference between these two concepts."</p>
<p>Acta <a
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/jan/27/acta-protests-eu-states-sign-treaty"
title="">has triggered public protests in a number of
European and other countries</a>, as well as online
attacks by the hacking collective Anonymous. The US, EU
member states, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Japan and a
number of other countries have signed it, although none has
yet ratified it in national legislation.</p>
<p>The agreement would create an international framework and
set of standards for a voluntary legal regime to enforce
intellectual property rights across national boundaries.</p>
<p>Arif said one example illustrates this difference
particularly well – the case of generic medicines. "Generic
medicines are not counterfeited medicines; they are not the
fake version of a drug; they are a generic version of a
drug, produced either because the patent on the original
drug has expired, or because a country has to put in place
public health policies," he said.</p>
<p>A number of countries such as India and African nations
have sought to use generic versions of drugs for infections
such as HIV, which has often been resisted by pharmaceutical
companies. Under Acta, Arif fears such countries would not
have the same freedom to determine their own actions.</p>
<p>"There are international agreements, <a
href="http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/intel2_e.htm"
title="">such as the Trips agreement</a>, which foresees
this last possibility," he said. "They're particularly
important for developing countries which cannot afford to
pay for patented HIV drugs, for example.</p>
<p>"The problem with Acta is that, by focusing on the fight
against violation of intellectual property rights in
general, it treats a generic drug just as a counterfeited
drug. This means the patent holder can stop the shipping of
the drugs to a developing country, seize the cargo and even
order the destruction of the drugs as a preventive measure."</p>
<p>He thinks that is a key flaw: "Acta also limits the
flexibilities listed in the Trips agreements to support
developing countries in need of generic drugs. When the
question of finding the right equilibrium between protection
of intellectual property rights and protection of final
users is so crucial, Acta appears to be very unbalanced in
favour of patent holders. This is one of the major problems
with the agreement."</p>
<p>Internet freedoms could also be under threat if Acta is
ratified in its present form, he says. "The chapter on
internet is particularly worrying as some experts consider
it reintroduces the concept of liability of internet
providers, which is clearly excluded in the European
legislation." That could make ISPs, who provide internet
access, liable for users' illicit file-sharing.</p>
<p>Arif also expressed concern that there could be more
intrusive checks at borders to fight counterfeiting.</p>
<p>"I see a great risk concerning checks at borders, and the
agreement foresees criminal sanctions against people using
counterfeited products as a commercial activity," he said.</p>
<p>"This is relevant for the trade of fake shoes or bags for
example, but what about data downloaded from the internet?
If a customs officer considers that you may set up a
commercial activity just by having one movie or one song on
your computer, which is true in theory, you could face
criminal sanctions.</p>
<p>"I don't want people to have their laptops or MP3 players
searched at borders, there needs to be a clearer distinction
between normal citizens and counterfeiters which trade fake
products as a commercial activity. Acta goes too far."</p>
<p>The <a
href="http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/economy/i_property/pdfs/acta1105_en.pdf"
title="">text of the finalised treaty (PDF)</a> has now
been made public, and the European commission has begun to
try to explain how Acta would work. It has also published a
document called <a
href="http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/january/tradoc_148964.pdf"
title="">10 Myths about Acta</a>, asserting that the
public was informed "since the launch of the negotiations";
that it is drafted "in very flexible terms" and that
"safeguards and exceptions under EU law or under the Trips
agreement remain fully preserved".</p>
<p>It also insists that "Acta is about tackling large-scale
illegal activity … there is a provision on Acta specifically
exempting travellers from checks if the infringing goods are
of a non-commercial nature and not part of large-scale
trafficking".</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>