Media Report

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, or ACTA as it's also known, doesn't sound like a hot media topic, but its international negotiation process, led by the US, Japan and the EU, has sparked quite a deal of online interest and concern. The stated aim of the agreement is to provide a common international framework for the protection of intellectual property. Now a high level of secrecy has surrounded ACTA, and that secrecy has led to a large amount of web speculation about the actual intent of the treaty.

Transcript

This transcript was typed from a recording of the program. The ABC cannot guarantee its complete accuracy because of the possibility of mishearing and occasional difficulty in identifying speakers.

Antony Funnell: Today on the program we'll be talking text with linguist David Crystal, and we'll hear about the life of the late media baron, Ezra Norton.

But first up, let's start with a bit of mystery.

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, or ACTA as it's also known, doesn't sound like a hot media topic, but its international negotiation process, led by the US, Japan and the EU, has sparked quite a deal of online interest and concern.

The stated aim of the agreement is to provide a common international framework for the protection of intellectual property. And of course intellectual property and copyright issues are coming more and more to the fore in the age of online user-generated content and file sharing.

Australia is one of the lesser countries involved in the negotiations.

Now a high level of secrecy has surrounded ACTA, and that secrecy has led to a large amount of web speculation about the actual intent of the treaty.

That speculation heightened recently when a draft US document was leaked online, suggesting that negotiators were considering a range of new law enforcement initiatives, including authorizing border security guards to seize people's ipods and laptops on the mere suspicion that a person may have illegally downloaded a music file.

Professor Michael Geist is a specialist in internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa.

Michael Geist: The speculation has been rampant online and, if true, it's really scary in terms of some of the things that they're considering. In some ways it seems to me that it's in the interests not just of the public to provide some greater transparency and open things up here, but it's in the same interest quite frankly, of the government themselves. They've been subject to a lot of blog posts, in particular an online discussion about this, and some of the speculation may go beyond what they've actually got in mind. If they would open things up I think we'd be able to separate fiction from reality and focus on the actual provisions of whether or not they're appropriate, and focus on they might be improved or some of the concerns associated with them. By keeping everybody in the dark it has really in some ways fed these kinds of concerns, when we're not really sure what's included, but for some leaked documents that raised some really profound concerns.

Antony Funnell: Dr Michael Geist.

Now the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has confirmed that the latest round of negotiations on ACTA have just taken place. But once again, there are no details about what's being proposed.

Laura Simes is the executive director of the Australian Digital Alliance, a Canberra-based coalition.

Laura Simes: The Australian Digital Alliance is a member-based group that is composed of a whole lot of groups basically, libraries, schools, museums, galleries, some individuals, some private organisations as well; basically united by the belief that we need to see balanced copyright law in Australia. So the kinds of groups who are members of the Australian Digital Alliance are user groups, people who make use of copyright materials, and they sort of advocate for making sure that the balance is right, so there's adequate protection for people who are creating materials, but also adequate flexibility so that these kinds of institutions can continue to use materials for the public interest, so for research and all that sort of thing.

Antony Funnell: Now there are many groups who simply oppose all forms of copyright and the protection of intellectual property. You're not one of those groups, then?

Laura Simes: No, we're certainly not one of those groups. We see the value in copyright protection, and I suppose lots of people would recognise that but there's kind of a need to have some sort of protection in place so that creators do actually have that economic motivation to produce their work, so they have this period when they can exploit it themselves and try and make some money from their wares I suppose. Yes, we definitely wouldn't advocate getting rid of the whole scheme, but we certainly do think that sometimes it seems like the balance is tipped a little too strongly in favour of copyright owners, to the expense of public interest and that sort of thing.

Antony Funnell: Now in terms of this international counterfeit treaty, the latest negotiation sessions have now been held in Washington. Have you had any information about what's been decided, or where the negotiations are at?

Laura Simes: No, we haven't unfortunately. It appears that at the end of each negotiating round, it really takes quite a bit for anyone to reveal much about what the conclusions were. We have been in quite a lot of communication with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, asking for as much transparency as possible in what's coming out of these negotiations, and they have tried to put up what they can, but the problem is that all the parties negotiating here are kind of sworn to secrecy.

Antony Funnell: Because the Australian government did give you a commitment earlier this year to have ongoing consultation, didn't they, with stakeholders, that's what they said. And definitely your organisation is one of those stakeholders. So the dialogue hasn't been as frank as you would have hoped.

Laura Simes: No, not really. I mean I think to an extent the Australian government's hands are tied, but I suppose what we'd want them to do is to strongly advocate as part of the negotiations, for a more transparent process.

Antony Funnell: Now I know you believe there's a push on to speed up the finalisation of this treaty. If that's the case, who do you think is behind that push? Who wants it done quickly?

Laura Simes: Well I suppose it's the strong proponents who are really in favour of getting this treaty concluded and that would probably include Japan; and the US is a major proponent of the treaty.

Antony Funnell: And what do you think are the motivations though for America and Japan? Is that because that's where many of the major media producers are based?

Laura Simes: I think that is a big part of it, yes. You've got a lot of really large copyright owner groups, so you're not only talking about the creators of the material here, but really powerful owner groups like the Recording Industry Association of America and that sort of thing. Also we have to remember that the US basically sees that copyright material's a huge export. They have a commercial interest I suppose, in protecting all this intellectual property that comes out of Hollywood and all that sort of thing.

Antony Funnell: Now the rationale for this anti-counterfeiting treaty is to provide an international standard I guess you could say, for the protection of intellectual property rights. Is that a good thing to be aiming for, despite your reservations about the process?

Laura Simes: Well what we say about this agreement is we have no problem with an agreement that's actually seeking to address counterfeiting problems, particularly when it's counterfeits that are endangering consumer health or safety. The problem we have is that it's called the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, but we're concerned that it has a far broader scope and that a lot of these sort of board provisions might include increased powers for Customs officials, things like that, possible searchers of people's—I mean one of the worst case scenario provisions was this idea that you might be able to search someone's laptop or ipod for infringing content at the border or at the airport or something like that. Now we've got a pretty big concern with any kind of provisions that might be included that would actually end up interfering with people's rights. It's important to protect people's intellectual property, but you have to balance it, it has to hold true to the presumption of innocence and other civil rights like that.

Antony Funnell: Now there are some details on this treaty on the Department of Foreign Affairs website. And in that document they leave open the option of not becoming a signatory to this treaty if the Australian government disagrees with its final form. So I guess in a sense that has to be some sort of safeguard I would imagine, in your view?

Laura Simes: Yes, we're pretty pleased that they haven't committed themselves at this stage, so it is good that they're keeping their options open and can decide at the end of it whether they enter into the agreement or not. But something we've said from the start is that if Australia is going to participate they should try and play a pretty constructive role. So not just kind of sit back and see the negotiation of a pretty draconian treaty but maybe take a proactive approach to it, and try and make sure it actually is a kind of anti-counterfeiting treaty and not some treaty that seeks to increase powers to search people and all that sort of thing.

Antony Funnell: Laura Simes from the Australian Digital Alliance.

Guests

Dr Michael Geist
University of Ottawa

Laura Simes
The Australian Digital Alliance

Presenter

Antony Funnell

Producer

Andrew Davies

Radio National often provides links to external websites to complement program information. While producers have taken care with all selections, we can neither endorse nor take final responsibility for the content of those sites.