European Parliament Trade Committee Votes Against ACTA, Paving Way for Final Blow
The European Parliament should refuse consent to the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, the International Trade Committee (INTA) said Thursday. It voted 19-12 to approve the draft report by David Martin, of the U.K. and Socialists and Democrats, nixing an amendment that would have pushed back the final vote until the European Court of Justice (ECJ) rules on European Commission questions about whether the pact violates fundamental rights. The decision by the lead committee follows its rejection by all of the other committees vetting ACTA. A plenary vote dealing the final death blow is expected July 4. Civil liberties groups were elated.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The EC’s position ahead of the plenary vote is to urge lawmakers “to await the clarity of an opinion” from Europe’s highest court before making a decision, John Clancy, spokesman for Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht, told us. That opinion will clarify whether the agreement will harm people’s fundamental rights, and only the ECJ can answer such legitimate worries, he said.
ACTA received more scrutiny in Parliament than any other issue he can remember, Martin said at a press briefing after the vote. Six committees examined it in great detail and came to a balanced view, he said. It’s interesting that no one voted in favor of the pact, he said. The options were either to delay the vote pending the ECJ decision or to reject the treaty, he said.
Martin stressed that the vote wasn’t anti-intellectual property, but was based on ACTA’s content. Lawmakers believe the text is too vague and left open too many questions about ISPs’ role in policing the Internet, the definition of “commercial” usage of copyrighted content, and the proportionality of sanctions for copyright breaches, he said. In the end, it came down to a question of intellectual property versus civil liberties, and the latter won, he said. The committee vote also showed that Parliament can no longer be ignored in trade negotiations, he said.
The INTA vote is “unprecedented,” said INTA member Niccolo Rinaldi, of Italy and the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe. Among its lessons are that “citizens’ voices matter,” he said. It’s a “victory for participatory democracy,” said Helmut Scholz, of Germany and European United Left/Nordic Green Left. The treaty is the wrong medicine for counterfeiting problems, he said. Amelia Andersdotter, of Sweden and the Greens/European Free Alliance, said she hopes the signal from Parliament will lead to further reforms of EU copyright law.
The European People’s Party regrets the no vote, said Daniel Caspary of Germany and the EPP. His group firmly believes that the agreement can in principle be the first step toward better protection of intellectual property rights and consumers who suffer from pirated goods, he said. The EPP has consistently said that the treaty needs improvement, but doesn’t want it rejected, he said. He urged lawmakers to try to cure the patient, not kill it.
De Gucht told INTA Wednesday that a negative vote won’t stop the EC from pursuing its action in the ECJ. If the court questions the conformity of the text with fundamental rights, the EC will assess what to do, he said. If the court upholds the validity of the treaty, he said, the EC is prepared to propose some clarifications, such as to the provisions on enforcement in the digital environment or by way of clarifying “commercial scale.” Once that’s done, De Gucht said, he'd ask Parliament again for consent.
If De Gucht had been willing to take lawmakers’ concerns into account months ago, instead of waiting until now, things might have been different, Caspary said at the briefing. If Parliament rejects the agreement in plenary, negotiations will have to start all over again, so legislators should think about whether they're really prepared to do that, he said.
Martin was asked why, if ACTA is so unpopular among lawmakers, they approved a resolution last month that regretted China’s absence from the treaty. Some believe China is still the biggest violator of intellectual property rights and that having it on board could have helped move it toward more respect for copyright, he said. But Martin said the view from his own Chinese contacts was that ACTA was seen as a threat that was pushing them away from European views on respecting copyright.
The vote paved the way for a “quick and total rejection of ACTA” by Parliament, said La Quadrature du Net spokesman Jérémie Zimmermann. He urged followers to “aim for this long-awaited victory and build our post-ACTA world!” but “let’s celebrate first!” “We WOOON!” said European Digital Rights Advocacy Coordinator Joe McNamee.