The RIAA submitted this letter in response to public requests for comment on the ACTA. The RIAA provides a detailed prescription of what it needs in order to ensure that its intellectual property rights are not infringed anywhere in the world. This includes recommendations for the definition of “piracy,” and which infringement cases should be prosecuted. It also sets out specific requirements for law enforcement and monitoring officials to follow. The RIAA expresses its strong supports for the dialogue the ACTA has provoked and expresses its wish that all of its arguments be taken into account when formulating its final version.
    The RIAA provides by far the clearest and most non-negotiable opinion. It explicitly states that all acts of piracy, commercial or non-commercial, should be prosecuted and the strictest laws should be applied. It seems that the RIAA has already created its own legal framework that advances the industry’s ambitions and protects its interests efficiently. The Association is merely looking for a conduit of its legal system and does not intend to negotiate with any party. It also disregards the motives of user worldwide to seek and use illegal materials online. The RIAA does directly address the links between piracy and organized crime, which shows that it recognizes some of the ramifications of copyright infringement that affect areas completely exterior to music.  While the Association’s stance should not be ignored, its positions should be considered alongside economic and empirical evidence (like the one provided by the IIPA). Additionally, the confidence and severity of the RIAA’s opinion should caution all countries that the U.S. organization is a powerful player and can include the international arena in its jurisdiction if its demands are completely met by any multinational agreement.

    The United States Trade Representative has provided the fact sheet and the document is a clear outline of the goals and provisions of the ACTA. The sheet provides information concerning international cooperation, enforcement policies and the legal framework. It stipulates that international cooperation needs to be strengthened through increased sharing of information. Enforcement policies need to be intensified through the creation of multinational oversight institutions.
    This document is useful in my research because it succinctly describes what the ACTA is about. However, I found the description very vague and general. Considered separately, each of the aforementioned stipulations is valuable and necessary. Yet, there is no mention of how they will actually come to life. What will be the jurisdiction of the proposed agencies be? Where will they be based? Is the judiciary of each country involved? Is there accountability? The EFF seems to be correct to question the legitimacy and transparency of this document, because information about the execution of ACTA is absent. While the fact sheet addressed this problem, the documents it offers to support its transparency do not give necessary details for the implementation of the project. The realization, however, is the most important part of the agreement. After all, there is no point in signing a contract, which reiterates that piracy should be stopped and the international community needs to work together to successfully eliminate online intellectual property infringement. Everybody wants to accomplish these goals, but what is crucial is the way countries interact on the international scene to carry out enforcement of copyright and punish its infringement.

This article provides a comprehensive overview of the tenets regarding the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). The proposal is drafted by Japan, the EC, the US and Switzerland as of now for a plurilateral anti-counterfeiting agreement. The report delves further into the issue of piracy by identifying factors studied by the OECD. The OECD report highlights that negative impacts on individual property right’s holders include decreased sales volumes, prices and royalties complemented by limited research and development. In the context of file sharing, this could potentially damage the image of product sales and bigger companies due to the lack of proper revenue being brought in. This trade discussion paper is also provides information about Australian participation in the ACTA negotiations. Areas further discussed within the legal framework include criminal enforcement and border measures. These just serve as a few of the potentially stringent new plans to be carried out should the ACTA be passed.

This article seems to be similar to the ACTA information sheet, but provides a more comprehensive look at the future of file sharing and problems associated with it. However, the claims tend to blanket all issues of piracy and copyright infringement and thus leave out a lot of information regarding file sharing. In reference to my thesis, this seems to provide early evidentiary support for the ACTA’s prototype and the legalities that would come along with its passing.

This research project provides a considerably strong and opinionated argument against the passing of the ACTA. Theorist Aaron Shaw argues that the ACTA will create harsh legal standards that infringe on the principles of a democratic government and civil liberties. Shaw further states that the USTR is just one of many organizations that is taking part in the formation of this agreement, a fact unknown to most file sharing users. The author further writes that service providers will be protected from the actions of their subscribers, throwing their own internet users under the train tracks of the law. If signed, this agreement would put money back in the hands of a few wealthy states and corporations while simultaneously crushing the rest of the world . This rejection of multilateralism will laud the usage of the DRM and other technology-blocking devices that prevent existing file sharing/transfer of information. Many large, multinational companies such as Microsoft and Time-Warner both agree that their software and liabilities would be better protected after the passing of this, but Shaw argues that they are overlooking the patents being passed on user-generated software, such as Myspace. This highlights many other points about the importance of user-generated interfaces such as Apple’s App store and the restrictions that would be placed on future products made by users.

This article provides a good third party view on the ACTA and the preliminary steps taken against its passing. Shaw’s outlook, though highly biased towards the liberalization of the media and its associated property rights, does provide a few good points about the potential consequences should this be approved. Though the passing of this bill could serve to help larger companies, the stress placed on consumers could serve as a double-edged sword for the larger service providers. The thesis within which my argument is framed specifically focuses on the transfer of information, so Shaw’s argument on the ethics of file sharing and the blockage of information seems to benefit my stance most. I highly recommend this source as a good introduction to the opposition against the ACTA.  Shaw also provides a clear argument against the passing of this and the future consequences that may result in both a theoretical and economical context.

The proliferation of piracy and counterfeiting appears to pose a threat to the development of the economy. It is believed that these infringements deprive legitimate businesses of proper income, while simultaneously limiting innovation and creativity. To combat these changes, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement serves to establish among nations a way to combat global infringements of copyrighted works.  Individual property rights’ protection via the ACTA will increase international cooperation, strengthen the framework of practices that contribute to effective enforcement of IPRs, and strengthen relevant IPR enforcement measures themselves. The provisions of the act stress international cooperation via improving technical assistance. This includes building relationships with organizations such as Comcast and other internet service providers to develop better restrictions on file sharing. These restrictive forces, when applied, will provide an easier way to control the transfer of illicit information via peer-to-peer sharing.

The ACTA's passing controls the future of file sharing and the implications involved in the advancement of these proposed restrictions. By taking this movement global, the ACTA will be able to infiltrate all forms of control and severely handicap the transfer of information. This block in file sharing appears to be the world's way of fixing our failing economy. Though this intends to strengthen the cause for the protection of individual property rights, this agreement severely stunts the growth of information and creativity from peer-to-peer. Joining other organizations in order to crack down on file sharing will enhance the opposition to find alternate paths to acquiring this information, a situation this agreement further fails to address. Though succinct, this article appears to highlight central arguments and provides constant updates on legislative procedures taken against the EFF.

 “We could reject the notion that Internet culture must oppose profit, or that profit must destroy Internet culture. But real change will be necessary if this is to be our future- changes in law, and changes in us.” These words spoken by heralded Creative Commons’ co-founder Lawrence Lessig really capture the attitude within which many officials are acting when addressing IPR. Lessig argues that many trials, ranging over Youtube videos to Girl Talk compilations, are responsible for the limitation on creativity of users. Lessig states that the release of the “remix” culture from the shackles of copyright owners could drive extraordinary economic growth. This "create as well as consume" culture can and will inspire a deeper, much more meaningful practice of learning. Lessig further supports that the war in this century is against the pirates and has resulted in a failed effort to get them to stop sharing. His closing statements reveal that it is necessary to decriminalize Generation-X since peer-to-peer sharing has only gotten stronger with technological advances present today.

This article provides a lot of hope for the future of creativity since Lessig addresses that restrictions, such as the ACTA, will inhibit economic advancement. Currently speaking, mashups and compilations of other works appear to be selling well and appeal to the market the most. Lessig’s approach appeared useful in my argument about the future of file sharing since it implied that it is a necessary evil. In contrast to other theorists, this movement towards a more liberalized outlook on copyrighted works can better the economy within reasonable means. Lessig’s article, in addition to being highly engaging, highlights points rarely brought up by other legal system analysts.

From a legal perspective, the DRM could significantly influence the distribution and control of information from country to country. This article in particular provides a clear overview of what the DRM system actually is and the policies it entails. Additionally, the role of copyright protection is also included in this overview of the DRM, establishing the bases for the regulatory approaches undertaken by the US and the EU. In reference to background information, DRM systems use a variety of technological protection measures to prevent digital content from being distributed without the right holders' consent. To provide secure distribution for digital content, DRM systems not only have to protect content against copying, but they must also offer a means to identify and manage content. The DRM thus strives to provide tamper-resistant hardware and software. This method of protection disables hackers and network insiders from being able to crack multiple levels of security, strengthening the protection of individual property rights'. In reference to the U.S., the U.S. congress enacted complex anticircumvention regulations as part of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act of 1998. The DMCA arranges these provisions on a biplanar scheme, which includes distinguishing between technological protection measures and the protection rights of the copyright owner.

This example seems to showcase the progressive changes in protection measures taken against copyright infringement. Though dense in its offerings, this article provides a decent anthology of acts and agreements enacted in order to protect individual property rights. This anthology further demonstrates the morphing of protective technology against copyright infringement. In the context of the ACTA, the DRM seems to be desired block against piracy and the illicit transfer of information.