BETA


2011/0167(NLE) EU/Australia, Canada, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and United States Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)

Progress: Procedure lapsed or withdrawn

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead INTA MARTIN David (icon: S&D S&D) FJELLNER Christofer (icon: PPE PPE), RINALDI Niccolò (icon: ALDE ALDE), ANDERSDOTTER Amelia (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE), KAMALL Syed (icon: ECR ECR), SCHOLZ Helmut (icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL)
Committee Opinion DEVE ZAHRADIL Jan (icon: ECR ECR)
Committee Opinion ITRE ANDERSDOTTER Amelia (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE) Jens ROHDE (icon: ALDE ALDE)
Committee Opinion JURI REGNER Evelyn (icon: S&D S&D)
Committee Opinion LIBE DROUTSAS Dimitrios (icon: S&D S&D)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
TFEU 207-p4, TFEU 218-p6a

Events

2015/03/07
   EC - Proposal withdrawn by Commission
2012/07/04
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2012/07/04
   EP - Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The European Parliament adopted a legislative resolution on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Mexican States, the Kingdom of Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Singapore, the Swiss Confederation and the United States of America.

Parliament declines, by 39 votes to 478, with 165 abstentions, to consent to the conclusion of the Agreement.

This was the first time that Parliament exercised its Lisbon Treaty power to reject an international trade agreement. Its rejection means that neither the EU nor its individual member states can join the agreement.

Documents
2012/07/03
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2012/06/22
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The Committee on International Trade adopted the report drafted by David MARTIN (S&D, UK) in which it declines to consent to the conclusion of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States of America.

To recall, ACTA is a trade agreement which addresses commercial-scale counterfeiting and online piracy by coordinating global enforcement of existing copyright violation laws. It is purported by the Commission that it will not require European legislation to be changed, but will coordinate procedures at borders to deal with large-scale counterfeiting. Counterfeiting and piracy have increased substantially and continue to do so.

The consequences of the growth in these illegal activities range from economic losses to health and safety dangers. The European Union has much to lose without efficient and enforced global coordination in copyright protection.

According to Members, Europe cannot compete in the global economy without adequate protection for European fashion, car parts, films and music. In this regard, international agreements dealing with any aspect of criminal sanctions, online activity or intellectual property must clearly define the scope of the agreement and the protection of individual liberties, in order to avoid unintended interpretations of the agreement.

The report states that the unintended consequences of the ACTA text is a serious concern. On individual criminalisation, the definition of “commercial-scale”, the role of internet service providers and the possible interruption of the transit of generic medicines, Members maintain doubts that the ACTA text is as precise as is necessary. The intended benefits of this international agreement are far outweighed by the potential threats to civil liberties.

Given the vagueness of certain aspects of the text and the uncertainty over its interpretation, Members consider that the European Parliament cannot guarantee adequate protection for citizens' rights in the future under ACTA .

Therefore, the committee recommends that the European Parliament declines to give consent to ACTA. It hopes the European Commission will therefore come forward with new proposals for protecting IP.

Documents
2012/06/21
   EP - Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
2012/06/05
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2012/06/05
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2012/06/04
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2012/06/04
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2012/05/31
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2012/05/30
   all - Additional information
Details

For more information about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), please click on the link to the information note published by the European Parliament's DG Communication.

2012/04/12
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2012/03/16
   CSL - Debate in Council
Details

The Council took stock of the situation regarding the signature and ratification of the anti-counterfeiting trade agreement (ACTA) between the EU and Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States.

ACTA establishes an international framework for improving the enforcement of intellectual property right laws and creating improved international standards for action against large-scale infringements of intellectual property. Negotiations were concluded in November 2010 and the agreement was signed by the EU and 22 Member States in Tokyo on 26 January 2012.

On 22 February, the Commission decided to refer ACTA to the Court of Justice to verify its compatibility with the EU treaties and in particular with the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

Documents
2012/03/16
   CSL - Council Meeting
2012/02/29
   EP - Responsible Committee
2012/02/14
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2012/01/09
   EP - Committee Opinion
2011/12/05
   EP - Committee Opinion
2011/09/22
   EP - Committee Opinion
2011/08/23
   CSL - Document attached to the procedure
Documents
2011/08/23
   EC - Legislative proposal published
Details

PURPOSE: to conclude the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States of America.

PROPOSED ACT: Council Decision.

BACKGROUND: it is estimated that Europe is losing more than €8 billion annually through counterfeit goods flooding into its market. Statistics published by the European Commission in July 2011 show a tremendous upward trend in the number of shipments suspected of violating IPRs. Customs in 2010 registered around 80 000 cases, a figure that has almost doubled since 2009. More than 103 million fake products were detained at the EU external border. An OECD study on the global level of counterfeiting and piracy from 2009 estimates that international trade in counterfeit goods grew from just over USD 100 billion in 2000 to USD 250 billion in 2007. This amount is larger than the national GDPs of about 150 countries.

On 14 April 2008, the Council authorised the Commission to negotiate a plurilateral anti-counterfeiting trade agreement on behalf of the Union and its Member States. Those negotiations have been concluded and the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States of America was initialled on 25 November 2010 after 11 rounds of negotiations.

The European Parliament has also been kept regularly informed on developments via its Committee on International Trade (INTA) and on 24 November 2010, the European Parliament adopted a Resolution supporting ACTA .

IMPACT ASSESSMENT: no impact assessment was carried out.

LEGAL BASIS: the first subparagraph of Article 207(4), in conjunction with Article 218(6)(a)(v) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

CONTENT: this draft Decision aims to conclude, on behalf of the EU, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States of America.

ACTA aims to establish a comprehensive international framework that will assist the EU in its efforts to effectively combat the infringement of intellectual property rights (IPR). This infringement undermines legitimate trade and the EU's competitiveness with the subsequent negative repercussions on growth and jobs.

ACTA includes state-of-the-art provisions on the enforcement of IPR , including provisions on civil, criminal, border and digital environment enforcement measures, robust cooperation mechanisms among ACTA Parties to assist in their enforcement efforts, and the establishment of best practices for effective IPR enforcement.

Although ACTA does not modify the EU acquis , because EU law is already considerably more advanced than the current international standards, it will introduce a new international standard, building upon the World Trade Organisation's TRIPS Agreement (adopted in 1994). Thus, it will provide benefits for EU exporting rightholders operating in the global market who currently suffer systematic and widespread infringements of their copyrights, trademarks, patents, designs and geographical indications abroad.

ACTA will only address the way companies and individuals can enforce their rights in court, at the borders or via the internet. It will not create new IP rights, nor will it define their acquisition, duration, scope of protection, registration, etc. ACTA countries will enforce the rights as they are defined domestically.

At the same time, ACTA is a balanced agreement, because it fully respects the rights of citizens and the concerns of important stakeholders such as:

consumers, internet providers, partners in developing countries.

As regards medicines : ACTA does not prevent poor countries from buying cheap medicines. There are no provisions in ACTA that could directly or indirectly affect the legitimate trade in generic medicines or, more broadly, global public health.

As regards the Internet : ACTA is not about checking or monitoring private communication on the internet. It will not censor websites. It is not about how individual citizens use the internet. It will not lead to limitations of fundamental rights (e.g. control of laptops of air passengers at borders, monitoring of internet traffic). The respect of fundamental rights such as privacy, freedom of expression and data protection is expressively mentioned as a basic principle of the agreement.

Competence : ACTA contains a number of provisions on criminal enforcement that fall within the scope of Article 83(2) TFEU. Those parts of the agreement, in distinction to those parts falling under Article 207, fall under the area of shared competences (Article 2(2) TFEU). Where a matter falls under shared competence either the European Union or Member States may legislate and adopt legally binding acts. Regarding the signature and conclusion of ACTA, the Commission has opted not to propose that the European Union exercise its potential competence in the area of criminal enforcement pursuant to Article 83(2) TFEU. The Commission considers this appropriate because it has never been the intention, as regards the negotiation of ACTA to modify the EU acquis or to harmonise EU legislation as regards criminal enforcement of intellectual property rights. For this reason, the Commission proposes that ACTA be signed and concluded both by the EU and by all the Member States.

BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS: this proposal has no impact on the EU budget.

Documents
2011/07/11
   EP - Committee Opinion
2011/06/24
   EC - Initial legislative proposal published
Details

PURPOSE: to conclude an Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States of America.

PROPOSED ACT: Council Decision.

BACKGROUND: further to the adoption of the negotiating directives by the Council on 14 April 2008, negotiations were launched on 3 June 2008. The agreement was concluded on 15 November 2010 and the text was initialled on 25 November, after 11 rounds of negotiations.

The EU Member States were kept informed of the negotiations orally and in writing. The European Parliament has also been kept regularly informed on developments via its Committee on International Trade (INTA) and by Commissioner De Gucht in three plenary debates in 2010. On 24 November 2010, the European Parliament adopted a Resolution supporting ACTA .

IMPACT ASSESSMENT: no impact assessment was carried out.

LEGAL BASIS: Article 207 (4), 1st subparagraph, in conjunction with Article 218(6)(a)(v) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

CONTENT: ACTA aims to establish a comprehensive international framework that will assist the EU in its efforts to effectively combat the infringement of intellectual property rights (IPR) . This infringement undermines legitimate trade and the EU's competitiveness with the subsequent negative repercussions on growth and jobs.

ACTA includes:

state-of-the-art provisions on the enforcement of IPR, including provisions on civil, criminal, border and digital environment enforcement measures, robust cooperation mechanisms among ACTA Parties to assist in their enforcement efforts, the establishment of best practices for effective IPR enforcement.

Although ACTA does not modify the EU acquis, because EU law is already considerably more advanced than the current international standards, it will introduce a new international standard, building upon the World Trade Organisation's TRIPS Agreement (adopted in 1994). Thus, it will provide benefits for EU exporting right holders operating in the global market who currently suffer systematic and widespread infringements of their copyrights, trademarks, patents, designs and geographical indications abroad.

At the same time, ACTA is a balanced agreement, because it fully respects the rights of citizens and the concerns of important stakeholders such as consumers, internet providers and partners in developing countries.

Comptences : ACTA contains a number of provisions on criminal enforcement that fall within the scope of Article 83(2) TFEU. Those parts of the agreement, in distinction to those parts falling under Article 207, fall under the area of shared competences (Article 2(2) TFEU). Where a matter falls under shared competence either the European Union or Member States may legislate and adopt legally binding acts .

The Commission's position as regards ACTA and Article 83(2) TFEU is without prejudice to the position of the Commission on future exercise by the EU of the shared competences foreseen by Article 83(2) TFEU as regards other initiatives.

Conclusion and signature : regarding the signature and conclusion of ACTA, the Commission has opted not to propose that the European Union exercise its potential competence in the area of criminal enforcement pursuant to Article 83(2) TFEU. The Commission considers this appropriate because it has never been the intention, as regards the negotiation of ACTA to modify the EU acquis or to harmonise EU legislation as regards criminal enforcement of intellectual property rights. For this reason, the Commission proposes that ACTA be signed and concluded both by the EU and by all the Member States.

BUDGETARY IMPLICATION: this proposal has no implication for the EU budget.

Documents

Activities

AmendmentsDossier
97 2011/0167(NLE)
2012/05/07 ITRE 41 amendments...
source: PE-487.983
2012/05/10 DEVE 3 amendments...
source: PE-489.411
2012/05/21 LIBE 50 amendments...
source: PE-489.544
2012/05/31 INTA 3 amendments...
source: PE-489.406

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

activities
  • date: 2011-06-24T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0380/COM_COM(2011)0380_EN.pdf title: COM(2011)0380 type: Initial legislative proposal published celexid: CELEX:52011PC0380:EN body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/ title: Trade Commissioner: DE GUCHT Karel type: Initial legislative proposal published
  • date: 2011-08-23T00:00:00 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=ADV&RESULTSET=1&DOC_ID=12195%2F11&DOC_LANCD=EN&ROWSPP=25&NRROWS=500&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC type: Legislative proposal published title: 12195/2011 body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/ title: Trade Commissioner: DE GUCHT Karel type: Legislative proposal published
  • date: 2012-02-14T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2011-09-22T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: ZAHRADIL Jan body: EP shadows: group: PPE name: FJELLNER Christofer group: ALDE name: RINALDI Niccolò group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia group: ECR name: KAMALL Syed group: GUE/NGL name: SCHOLZ Helmut responsible: True committee: INTA date: 2012-02-29T00:00:00 committee_full: International Trade rapporteur: group: S&D name: MARTIN David body: EP responsible: False committee: ITRE date: 2012-01-09T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy rapporteur: group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia body: EP responsible: False committee: JURI date: 2011-07-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: REGNER Evelyn body: EP responsible: False committee: LIBE date: 2011-12-05T00:00:00 committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: DROUTSAS Dimitrios
  • body: CSL meeting_id: 3154 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3154*&MEET_DATE=16/03/2012 type: Debate in Council title: 3154 council: Foreign Affairs date: 2012-03-16T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting
  • date: 2012-05-30T00:00:00 body: all type: Additional information
  • date: 2012-06-21T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2011-09-22T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: ZAHRADIL Jan body: EP shadows: group: PPE name: FJELLNER Christofer group: ALDE name: RINALDI Niccolò group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia group: ECR name: KAMALL Syed group: GUE/NGL name: SCHOLZ Helmut responsible: True committee: INTA date: 2012-02-29T00:00:00 committee_full: International Trade rapporteur: group: S&D name: MARTIN David body: EP responsible: False committee: ITRE date: 2012-01-09T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy rapporteur: group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia body: EP responsible: False committee: JURI date: 2011-07-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: REGNER Evelyn body: EP responsible: False committee: LIBE date: 2011-12-05T00:00:00 committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: DROUTSAS Dimitrios
  • body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2012-204&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title: A7-0204/2012 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2011-09-22T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: ZAHRADIL Jan body: EP shadows: group: PPE name: FJELLNER Christofer group: ALDE name: RINALDI Niccolò group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia group: ECR name: KAMALL Syed group: GUE/NGL name: SCHOLZ Helmut responsible: True committee: INTA date: 2012-02-29T00:00:00 committee_full: International Trade rapporteur: group: S&D name: MARTIN David body: EP responsible: False committee: ITRE date: 2012-01-09T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy rapporteur: group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia body: EP responsible: False committee: JURI date: 2011-07-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: REGNER Evelyn body: EP responsible: False committee: LIBE date: 2011-12-05T00:00:00 committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: DROUTSAS Dimitrios date: 2012-06-22T00:00:00
  • date: 2012-07-03T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20120703&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2012-07-04T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=21786&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2012-287 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0287/2012 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2015-03-07T00:00:00 body: EC type: Proposal withdrawn by Commission commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/ title: Trade Commissioner: DE GUCHT Karel
commission
  • body: EC dg: Trade commissioner: DE GUCHT Karel
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
International Trade
committee
INTA
date
2012-02-29T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: MARTIN David group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
shadows
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
DEVE
date
2011-09-22T00:00:00
committee_full
Development
rapporteur
group: ECR name: ZAHRADIL Jan
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
date
2011-09-22T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: ZAHRADIL Jan group: European Conservatives and Reformists abbr: ECR
committees/1
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
INTA
date
2012-02-29T00:00:00
committee_full
International Trade
rapporteur
group: S&D name: MARTIN David
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy
committee
ITRE
date
2012-01-09T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia group: Greens/European Free Alliance abbr: Verts/ALE
committees/2
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
ITRE
date
2012-01-09T00:00:00
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy
rapporteur
group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Legal Affairs
committee
JURI
date
2011-07-11T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: REGNER Evelyn group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/3
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
JURI
date
2011-07-11T00:00:00
committee_full
Legal Affairs
rapporteur
group: S&D name: REGNER Evelyn
committees/4
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs
committee
LIBE
date
2011-12-05T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: DROUTSAS Dimitrios group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/4
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
LIBE
date
2011-12-05T00:00:00
committee_full
Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs
rapporteur
group: S&D name: DROUTSAS Dimitrios
council
  • body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Foreign Affairs meeting_id: 3154 url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3154*&MEET_DATE=16/03/2012 date: 2012-03-16T00:00:00
docs
  • date: 2011-08-23T00:00:00 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=ADV&RESULTSET=1&DOC_ID=12196%2F11&DOC_LANCD=EN&ROWSPP=25&NRROWS=500&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC title: 12196/2011 type: Document attached to the procedure body: CSL
  • date: 2012-04-12T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE486.174 title: PE486.174 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2012-05-31T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE489.406 title: PE489.406 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2012-06-04T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE480.574&secondRef=02 title: PE480.574 committee: LIBE type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2012-06-04T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE487.684&secondRef=02 title: PE487.684 committee: JURI type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2012-06-05T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE478.666&secondRef=03 title: PE478.666 committee: DEVE type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2012-06-05T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE483.518&secondRef=02 title: PE483.518 committee: ITRE type: Committee opinion body: EP
events
  • date: 2011-06-24T00:00:00 type: Initial legislative proposal published body: EC docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0380/COM_COM(2011)0380_EN.pdf title: COM(2011)0380 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=380 title: EUR-Lex summary: PURPOSE: to conclude an Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States of America. PROPOSED ACT: Council Decision. BACKGROUND: further to the adoption of the negotiating directives by the Council on 14 April 2008, negotiations were launched on 3 June 2008. The agreement was concluded on 15 November 2010 and the text was initialled on 25 November, after 11 rounds of negotiations. The EU Member States were kept informed of the negotiations orally and in writing. The European Parliament has also been kept regularly informed on developments via its Committee on International Trade (INTA) and by Commissioner De Gucht in three plenary debates in 2010. On 24 November 2010, the European Parliament adopted a Resolution supporting ACTA . IMPACT ASSESSMENT: no impact assessment was carried out. LEGAL BASIS: Article 207 (4), 1st subparagraph, in conjunction with Article 218(6)(a)(v) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). CONTENT: ACTA aims to establish a comprehensive international framework that will assist the EU in its efforts to effectively combat the infringement of intellectual property rights (IPR) . This infringement undermines legitimate trade and the EU's competitiveness with the subsequent negative repercussions on growth and jobs. ACTA includes: state-of-the-art provisions on the enforcement of IPR, including provisions on civil, criminal, border and digital environment enforcement measures, robust cooperation mechanisms among ACTA Parties to assist in their enforcement efforts, the establishment of best practices for effective IPR enforcement. Although ACTA does not modify the EU acquis, because EU law is already considerably more advanced than the current international standards, it will introduce a new international standard, building upon the World Trade Organisation's TRIPS Agreement (adopted in 1994). Thus, it will provide benefits for EU exporting right holders operating in the global market who currently suffer systematic and widespread infringements of their copyrights, trademarks, patents, designs and geographical indications abroad. At the same time, ACTA is a balanced agreement, because it fully respects the rights of citizens and the concerns of important stakeholders such as consumers, internet providers and partners in developing countries. Comptences : ACTA contains a number of provisions on criminal enforcement that fall within the scope of Article 83(2) TFEU. Those parts of the agreement, in distinction to those parts falling under Article 207, fall under the area of shared competences (Article 2(2) TFEU). Where a matter falls under shared competence either the European Union or Member States may legislate and adopt legally binding acts . The Commission's position as regards ACTA and Article 83(2) TFEU is without prejudice to the position of the Commission on future exercise by the EU of the shared competences foreseen by Article 83(2) TFEU as regards other initiatives. Conclusion and signature : regarding the signature and conclusion of ACTA, the Commission has opted not to propose that the European Union exercise its potential competence in the area of criminal enforcement pursuant to Article 83(2) TFEU. The Commission considers this appropriate because it has never been the intention, as regards the negotiation of ACTA to modify the EU acquis or to harmonise EU legislation as regards criminal enforcement of intellectual property rights. For this reason, the Commission proposes that ACTA be signed and concluded both by the EU and by all the Member States. BUDGETARY IMPLICATION: this proposal has no implication for the EU budget.
  • date: 2011-08-23T00:00:00 type: Legislative proposal published body: EC docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=ADV&RESULTSET=1&DOC_ID=12195%2F11&DOC_LANCD=EN&ROWSPP=25&NRROWS=500&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC title: 12195/2011 summary: PURPOSE: to conclude the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States of America. PROPOSED ACT: Council Decision. BACKGROUND: it is estimated that Europe is losing more than €8 billion annually through counterfeit goods flooding into its market. Statistics published by the European Commission in July 2011 show a tremendous upward trend in the number of shipments suspected of violating IPRs. Customs in 2010 registered around 80 000 cases, a figure that has almost doubled since 2009. More than 103 million fake products were detained at the EU external border. An OECD study on the global level of counterfeiting and piracy from 2009 estimates that international trade in counterfeit goods grew from just over USD 100 billion in 2000 to USD 250 billion in 2007. This amount is larger than the national GDPs of about 150 countries. On 14 April 2008, the Council authorised the Commission to negotiate a plurilateral anti-counterfeiting trade agreement on behalf of the Union and its Member States. Those negotiations have been concluded and the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States of America was initialled on 25 November 2010 after 11 rounds of negotiations. The European Parliament has also been kept regularly informed on developments via its Committee on International Trade (INTA) and on 24 November 2010, the European Parliament adopted a Resolution supporting ACTA . IMPACT ASSESSMENT: no impact assessment was carried out. LEGAL BASIS: the first subparagraph of Article 207(4), in conjunction with Article 218(6)(a)(v) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). CONTENT: this draft Decision aims to conclude, on behalf of the EU, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States of America. ACTA aims to establish a comprehensive international framework that will assist the EU in its efforts to effectively combat the infringement of intellectual property rights (IPR). This infringement undermines legitimate trade and the EU's competitiveness with the subsequent negative repercussions on growth and jobs. ACTA includes state-of-the-art provisions on the enforcement of IPR , including provisions on civil, criminal, border and digital environment enforcement measures, robust cooperation mechanisms among ACTA Parties to assist in their enforcement efforts, and the establishment of best practices for effective IPR enforcement. Although ACTA does not modify the EU acquis , because EU law is already considerably more advanced than the current international standards, it will introduce a new international standard, building upon the World Trade Organisation's TRIPS Agreement (adopted in 1994). Thus, it will provide benefits for EU exporting rightholders operating in the global market who currently suffer systematic and widespread infringements of their copyrights, trademarks, patents, designs and geographical indications abroad. ACTA will only address the way companies and individuals can enforce their rights in court, at the borders or via the internet. It will not create new IP rights, nor will it define their acquisition, duration, scope of protection, registration, etc. ACTA countries will enforce the rights as they are defined domestically. At the same time, ACTA is a balanced agreement, because it fully respects the rights of citizens and the concerns of important stakeholders such as: consumers, internet providers, partners in developing countries. As regards medicines : ACTA does not prevent poor countries from buying cheap medicines. There are no provisions in ACTA that could directly or indirectly affect the legitimate trade in generic medicines or, more broadly, global public health. As regards the Internet : ACTA is not about checking or monitoring private communication on the internet. It will not censor websites. It is not about how individual citizens use the internet. It will not lead to limitations of fundamental rights (e.g. control of laptops of air passengers at borders, monitoring of internet traffic). The respect of fundamental rights such as privacy, freedom of expression and data protection is expressively mentioned as a basic principle of the agreement. Competence : ACTA contains a number of provisions on criminal enforcement that fall within the scope of Article 83(2) TFEU. Those parts of the agreement, in distinction to those parts falling under Article 207, fall under the area of shared competences (Article 2(2) TFEU). Where a matter falls under shared competence either the European Union or Member States may legislate and adopt legally binding acts. Regarding the signature and conclusion of ACTA, the Commission has opted not to propose that the European Union exercise its potential competence in the area of criminal enforcement pursuant to Article 83(2) TFEU. The Commission considers this appropriate because it has never been the intention, as regards the negotiation of ACTA to modify the EU acquis or to harmonise EU legislation as regards criminal enforcement of intellectual property rights. For this reason, the Commission proposes that ACTA be signed and concluded both by the EU and by all the Member States. BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS: this proposal has no impact on the EU budget.
  • date: 2012-02-14T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2012-03-16T00:00:00 type: Debate in Council body: CSL docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3154*&MEET_DATE=16/03/2012 title: 3154 summary: The Council took stock of the situation regarding the signature and ratification of the anti-counterfeiting trade agreement (ACTA) between the EU and Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States. ACTA establishes an international framework for improving the enforcement of intellectual property right laws and creating improved international standards for action against large-scale infringements of intellectual property. Negotiations were concluded in November 2010 and the agreement was signed by the EU and 22 Member States in Tokyo on 26 January 2012. On 22 February, the Commission decided to refer ACTA to the Court of Justice to verify its compatibility with the EU treaties and in particular with the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
  • date: 2012-05-30T00:00:00 type: Additional information body: all summary: For more information about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), please click on the link to the information note published by the European Parliament's DG Communication.
  • date: 2012-06-21T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2012-06-22T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2012-204&language=EN title: A7-0204/2012 summary: The Committee on International Trade adopted the report drafted by David MARTIN (S&D, UK) in which it declines to consent to the conclusion of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States of America. To recall, ACTA is a trade agreement which addresses commercial-scale counterfeiting and online piracy by coordinating global enforcement of existing copyright violation laws. It is purported by the Commission that it will not require European legislation to be changed, but will coordinate procedures at borders to deal with large-scale counterfeiting. Counterfeiting and piracy have increased substantially and continue to do so. The consequences of the growth in these illegal activities range from economic losses to health and safety dangers. The European Union has much to lose without efficient and enforced global coordination in copyright protection. According to Members, Europe cannot compete in the global economy without adequate protection for European fashion, car parts, films and music. In this regard, international agreements dealing with any aspect of criminal sanctions, online activity or intellectual property must clearly define the scope of the agreement and the protection of individual liberties, in order to avoid unintended interpretations of the agreement. The report states that the unintended consequences of the ACTA text is a serious concern. On individual criminalisation, the definition of “commercial-scale”, the role of internet service providers and the possible interruption of the transit of generic medicines, Members maintain doubts that the ACTA text is as precise as is necessary. The intended benefits of this international agreement are far outweighed by the potential threats to civil liberties. Given the vagueness of certain aspects of the text and the uncertainty over its interpretation, Members consider that the European Parliament cannot guarantee adequate protection for citizens' rights in the future under ACTA . Therefore, the committee recommends that the European Parliament declines to give consent to ACTA. It hopes the European Commission will therefore come forward with new proposals for protecting IP.
  • date: 2012-07-03T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20120703&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2012-07-04T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=21786&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2012-07-04T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2012-287 title: T7-0287/2012 summary: The European Parliament adopted a legislative resolution on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Mexican States, the Kingdom of Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Singapore, the Swiss Confederation and the United States of America. Parliament declines, by 39 votes to 478, with 165 abstentions, to consent to the conclusion of the Agreement. This was the first time that Parliament exercised its Lisbon Treaty power to reject an international trade agreement. Its rejection means that neither the EU nor its individual member states can join the agreement.
  • date: 2015-03-07T00:00:00 type: Proposal withdrawn by Commission body: EC
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/ title: Trade commissioner: DE GUCHT Karel
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
Old
INTA/7/06356
New
  • INTA/7/06356
procedure/selected_topics
    procedure/subject
    Old
    • 3.50.15 Intellectual property, copyright
    • 6.20.01 Agreements and relations in the context of the World Trade Organization (WTO)
    • 6.20.02 Export/import control, trade defence
    • 6.20.05 Multilateral economic and trade agreements and relations
    • 7.30.30.10 Action against counterfeiting
    New
    3.50.15
    Intellectual property, copyright
    6.20.01
    Agreements and relations in the context of the World Trade Organization (WTO)
    6.20.02
    Export/import control, trade defence, trade barriers
    6.20.05
    Multilateral and plurilateral economic and trade agreements and relations
    7.30.30.10
    Action against counterfeiting
    activities/0/docs/0/celexid
    CELEX:52011PC0380:EN
    activities/0/docs/0/celexid
    CELEX:52011PC0380:EN
    activities/0/docs/0/url
    Old
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0380/COM_COM(2011)0380_EN.pdf
    New
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0380/COM_COM(2011)0380_EN.pdf
    links/European Commission/title
    Old
    PreLex
    New
    EUR-Lex
    activities/9
    date
    2015-03-07T00:00:00
    body
    EC
    type
    Proposal withdrawn by Commission
    commission
    DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/ title: Trade Commissioner: DE GUCHT Karel
    procedure/stage_reached
    Old
    Awaiting final decision
    New
    Procedure lapsed or withdrawn
    procedure/geographical_area/7
    Old
    Korea, Republic
    New
    South Korea
    activities
    • date: 2011-06-24T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0380/COM_COM(2011)0380_EN.pdf title: COM(2011)0380 type: Initial legislative proposal published celexid: CELEX:52011PC0380:EN type: Initial legislative proposal published body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/ title: Trade Commissioner: DE GUCHT Karel
    • date: 2011-08-23T00:00:00 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=ADV&RESULTSET=1&DOC_ID=12195%2F11&DOC_LANCD=EN&ROWSPP=25&NRROWS=500&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC type: Legislative proposal published title: 12195/2011 type: Legislative proposal published body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/ title: Trade Commissioner: DE GUCHT Karel
    • date: 2012-02-14T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2011-09-22T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: ZAHRADIL Jan body: EP shadows: group: PPE name: FJELLNER Christofer group: ALDE name: RINALDI Niccolò group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia group: ECR name: KAMALL Syed group: GUE/NGL name: SCHOLZ Helmut responsible: True committee: INTA date: 2012-02-29T00:00:00 committee_full: International Trade rapporteur: group: S&D name: MARTIN David body: EP responsible: False committee: ITRE date: 2012-01-09T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy rapporteur: group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia body: EP responsible: False committee: JURI date: 2011-07-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: REGNER Evelyn body: EP responsible: False committee: LIBE date: 2011-12-05T00:00:00 committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: DROUTSAS Dimitrios
    • body: CSL meeting_id: 3154 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3154*&MEET_DATE=16/03/2012 type: Debate in Council title: 3154 council: Foreign Affairs date: 2012-03-16T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting
    • date: 2012-05-30T00:00:00 body: all type: Additional information
    • date: 2012-06-21T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2011-09-22T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: ZAHRADIL Jan body: EP shadows: group: PPE name: FJELLNER Christofer group: ALDE name: RINALDI Niccolò group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia group: ECR name: KAMALL Syed group: GUE/NGL name: SCHOLZ Helmut responsible: True committee: INTA date: 2012-02-29T00:00:00 committee_full: International Trade rapporteur: group: S&D name: MARTIN David body: EP responsible: False committee: ITRE date: 2012-01-09T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy rapporteur: group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia body: EP responsible: False committee: JURI date: 2011-07-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: REGNER Evelyn body: EP responsible: False committee: LIBE date: 2011-12-05T00:00:00 committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: DROUTSAS Dimitrios
    • body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2012-204&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title: A7-0204/2012 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2011-09-22T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: ZAHRADIL Jan body: EP shadows: group: PPE name: FJELLNER Christofer group: ALDE name: RINALDI Niccolò group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia group: ECR name: KAMALL Syed group: GUE/NGL name: SCHOLZ Helmut responsible: True committee: INTA date: 2012-02-29T00:00:00 committee_full: International Trade rapporteur: group: S&D name: MARTIN David body: EP responsible: False committee: ITRE date: 2012-01-09T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy rapporteur: group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia body: EP responsible: False committee: JURI date: 2011-07-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: REGNER Evelyn body: EP responsible: False committee: LIBE date: 2011-12-05T00:00:00 committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: DROUTSAS Dimitrios date: 2012-06-22T00:00:00
    • date: 2012-07-03T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20120703&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
    • date: 2012-07-04T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=21786&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2012-287 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0287/2012 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
    committees
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2011-09-22T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: ECR name: ZAHRADIL Jan
    • body: EP shadows: group: PPE name: FJELLNER Christofer group: ALDE name: RINALDI Niccolò group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia group: ECR name: KAMALL Syed group: GUE/NGL name: SCHOLZ Helmut responsible: True committee: INTA date: 2012-02-29T00:00:00 committee_full: International Trade rapporteur: group: S&D name: MARTIN David
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: ITRE date: 2012-01-09T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy rapporteur: group: Verts/ALE name: ANDERSDOTTER Amelia
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: JURI date: 2011-07-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: REGNER Evelyn
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: LIBE date: 2011-12-05T00:00:00 committee_full: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: DROUTSAS Dimitrios
    links
    National parliaments
    European Commission
    other
    • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/ title: Trade commissioner: DE GUCHT Karel
    procedure
    dossier_of_the_committee
    INTA/7/06356
    geographical_area
    reference
    2011/0167(NLE)
    subtype
    Consent by Parliament
    selected_topics
    legal_basis
    stage_reached
    Awaiting final decision
    instrument
    Decision
    title
    EU/Australia, Canada, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and United States Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)
    type
    NLE - Non-legislative enactments
    subject