Hi Kim, I will be happy to ask one of our junior attorney interns, Stephen, to do a short 1-2 page summary of ACTA. This may take about a week. BTW Stephen is a Wikipedian who has been providing significant and excellent support to me during the SOPA protest. Cheers, Geoff On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Kim Bruning <kim(a)bruning.xs4all.nl> wrote: -- Geoff Brigham General Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 149 New Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA 94105 +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6750 gbrigham(a)wikimedia.org *California Registered In-House Counsel* Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. www.wikimediafoundation.org *This message is confidential and may be legally privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone or email the sender and delete this message and any attachment from your system; you must not copy or disclose the contents of this message or any attachment to any other person.*

On 01/24/12 8:13 PM, Geoff Brigham wrote: One does well to follow Michael Geist's blogs on this [http://www.michaelgeist.ca/ here]. He has been on top of this issue since it started, and provides links to developments on his left sidebar. ACTA is probably more damaging outside the US than within because it imposes US views in other countries without any of the due process that would normally be available to US persons. The entire agreement is a trade agreement which only happens to have copyright as a major content element. It seeks to protect the interests of American business. By framing the issues in terms of "trade" and "enforcement", it ignores how seriously fucked-up copyright law has become. Ray

2012/1/25 Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki(a)gmail.com>om>: It was just a resolution for more transparent negotiation process - it does not mean that EU Parliament rejcted ACTA. -- Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29&title=tomasz-ganicz

On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 08:37:38PM +0100, Kim Bruning wrote: + thank you very much for your time, of course. :-) sincerely, Kim Bruning --

2012/1/27 Kim Bruning <kim(a)bruning.xs4all.nl>nl>: Yes. Exactly. Actually, from EU only Germany and Holland has not signed ACTA yet. Would be good to make a search on which stage there are formal discussions in these countries. In many countries - also in Poland, the ACTA formal discussion was made semi-secret - I mean, theoretically they were not secret, bo goverment made evrything to hide it from eyes of its own citizens. The ratification in EU Parliament was originally planned at June, but due to "strike" of Kader Arif it might be 1-2 months later. Before that there will be ratification debates in local EU-countries parliaments. -- Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29&title=tomasz-ganicz

Apparently the ambassador of the Netherlands did not get permission in time to sign the agreement. It seems nobody really knows yet why that was, but it is expected that the signature will follow. Also the signature of Spain, Slovenia and Cyprus seems to be missing yet. Source: http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/109330/nederland-mist-ondertekening-acta-verdrag… No dia 27 de Janeiro de 2012 09:08, Tomasz Ganicz <polimerek(a)gmail.com>escreveucreveu:

On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 8:08 PM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120124/14071517529/new-petition-asks-whi… 33,765 votes so far. https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petition/end-acta-and-protect-our-r… If I understand correctly, Obama has issued an executive order approving ACTA, but that executive order is suppressed as a state secret. And the administration hasnt given it a number because there are no gaps in the numbering of Obama's EO list..? https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:Barack_Obama/Executive_orders And in the EU, 'Kader Arif, the "rapporteur" for ACTA, has quit that role in disgust over the process behind getting the EU to sign onto ACTA.' http://www.blogrunner.com/snapshot/D/3/3/european_parliament_official_in_ch… -- John Vandenberg

As I understand it's rather called an "executive agreement", which is another word for "treaty"; so the president signing the treaty itself is enough and there's no need for an executive order, but I might be wrong. However, sen. Wyden has been questioning the constitutionality of signing ACTA without getting Congressional approval: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120126/01545117544/as-ustr-insists-acta-… Regards, -- Orionist On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 6:33 AM, John Vandenberg <jayvdb(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 8:08 PM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> > wrote: > > .. > > > > One does well to follow Michael Geist's blogs on this > > [http://www.michaelgeist.ca/ here]. He has been on top of this issue > since > > it started, and provides links to developments on his left sidebar. > > > > ACTA is probably more damaging outside the US than within because it > imposes > > US views in other countries without any of the due process that would > > normally be available to US persons. The entire agreement is a trade > > agreement which only happens to have copyright as a major content > element. > > It seeks to protect the interests of American business. By framing the > > issues in terms of "trade" and "enforcement", it ignores how seriously > > fucked-up copyright law has become. > > > http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120124/14071517529/new-petition-asks-whi… > > 33,765 votes so far. > > > https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petition/end-acta-and-protect-our-r… > > https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:Barack_Obama/Executive_orders > > And in the EU, > > 'Kader Arif, the "rapporteur" for ACTA, has quit that role in disgust > over the process behind getting the EU to sign onto ACTA.' > > > http://www.blogrunner.com/snapshot/D/3/3/european_parliament_official_in_ch… > > -- > John Vandenberg > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l >

On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Orionist <orion.ist(a)gmail.com> wrote: I have said before, that SOPA, PIPA and ACTA are smoke-screens for OPEN, which is a nasty beast like none of the other four. It is constitutionally sound under The First Article of the Constitution, but stands against everything the US has stood for after The Hague 1907 treaty. In fact, Ron Paui suggested that letters of marque be used against Al-whatever that terrorist oganisations spellin is. But he was denied. It would be a supreme irony that letters of marque would be used in defense of Mickey Mouse, but not the "homeland". -- -- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]