|
Size: 731
Comment:
|
Size: 1070
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 7: | Line 7: |
| The analysis moved here: http://action.ffii.org/acta/EU_Competence | The analysis moved here: http://action.ffii.org/acta/Analysis |
| Line 10: | Line 10: |
[http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/cfm/doclib_search.cfm?action=search Search Commission documents] [http://register.consilium.europa.eu/servlet/driver?page=Result&lang=EN&ssf=DATE_DOCUMENT+DESC&fc=REGAISEN&srm=25&md=400&typ=Simple&cmsid=638&ff_TITRE=%22133%22&ff_FT_TEXT=acta&ff_SOUS_COTE_MATIERE=&dd_DATE_REUNION= Council 133, acta] |
ACTA: draft analysis competence issues
Behind closed doors the EU, US and Japan negotiate an Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). According to the [http://ec.europa.eu/trade/issues/sectoral/intell_property/fs231007_en.htm European Commission's website], a "path breaking" agreement is foreseen. For this reason the Commission likes to work outside the normal formal structures.
An [http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Image:Acta.pdf ACTA discussion paper] was leaked. On this page we will discuss whether the agreement, as foreseen in the leaked discussion paper, falls within the the Community's competence.
The analysis moved here: http://action.ffii.org/acta/Analysis
See also: http://action.ffii.org/acta/
[http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/cfm/doclib_search.cfm?action=search Search Commission documents]