The UK government has given its strongest hint yet that it would oppose secret moves by the international Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) to criminalise people who are "suspected" of involvement with unlawful copyright P2P file sharing via their broadband ISP.

The result of ACTA's policy change would be that unlawful P2P file sharing, which is currently only a civil offence because most people do it domestically and not for commercial gain, could attract a financial fine or even prison sentences. In other words it would become a criminal offence. We have visions of children being carted off to prison for sharing the latest Lady GaGa song with their friends.

Similarly those who incite, aid and abet the activity could also face punishment. This might, in theory, make an internet search engine like Google culpable because it inadvertently links to some websites that contain links to unlawful p2p copyright content. Google cannot realistically be expected to check the content for every one of the billions of website links in its database.

France-based advocacy group La Quadrature du Net revealed the section through one of April's leaked documents - Chapter 2 Criminal Provisions (PDF). The wider treaty seeks to establish international standards on general intellectual property rights enforcement, both in the real and online words. More than a few people now think it goes way too far.

Article 2.15: Liability, penalties and sanctions

1.- Liability of legal persons

(i) Each Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary, consistent with its legal principles, to establish the liability of legal persons for the offences referred to in Article 2.14.

(ii) Subject to the legal principles of the Party, the liability of legal persons may be criminal or non-criminal.

(iii) Such liability shall be without prejudice to the criminal liability of the natural persons who have committed the criminal offences.

2.- Inciting, aiding and abetting

The provisions of this section shall apply to inciting, aiding and abetting the offences referred to in Article 2.14.

3.- Penalties and sanctions

(i) For the offences referred to in Article 2.14, each Party shall provide for effective proportionate and dissuasive penalties. The available penalties shall include imprisonment and monetary fined.

(ii) For legal persons held liable under Article 2.15.1, each Party shall provide for effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions, including monetary sanctions.

However a representative for the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) has surprised many observers by signalling that the new government would back off from its support of the toughest ACTA proposals. An unusual move considering how the UK Digital Economy Act 2010 (DEA) already mirrors much of what ACTA seeks to do.


Participants in the negotiations included Australia, Canada, the European Union - represented by the European Commission, the EU Presidency and EU Member States - Japan, Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and of course the United States of America (USA).

Last April the European Commission (EC) claimed that no party in the ACTA negotiation is proposing that governments should introduce a compulsory "3 strikes" or "gradual response" rule to fight copyright infringements and internet piracy. The EC added that ACTA will by no means lead to a limitation of civil liberties or to "harassment" of consumers.