From: ** 2 words redacted**
Sent: Tuesday, 23 November 2010 6:28 PM
To: ** 2 words redacted**
Cc: ** 2 words redacted**; ** 2 words redacted**; ** 2 words redacted**
Subject: RE: whether a RIS will be required for ACTA [SEC=IN-CONFIDENCE]
Dear **redacted**.
Thank you very much for contacting the OBPR about your negotiations about to take place. Based
on the information provided, we advise that a Regulation Impact Statement is not required for this
because the impact on business in Australia is likely to be minor. We have retained the OBPR ID
number 11633 to this assessment.
Should you have any further questions about our assessment please feel free to contact us.
All the best.
** 2 words redacted**
Special Adviser
Regulation Impact Analysis Team 3
Office of Best Practice Regulation
Department of Finance and Deregulation
Ph: ** 1 word redacted**; M: ** 1 word redacted**
From: ** 2 words redacted**
[mailto: ** 2 words redacted** ]
Sent: Tuesday, 23 November 2010 12:27 PM
To: ** 2 words redacted**
Cc: ** 2 words redacted**; ** 2 words redacted**
Subject: whether a RIS will be required for ACTA [SEC=IN-CONFIDENCE]
Hi **redacted**,
Thanks for your email. As discussed, the negotiation phase of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade
Agreement (ACTA) has been completed, and we are now seeking advice from OBPR about whether
a RIS is required for the next (and final) phase of the process: that is, the Government's consideration
of whether Australia should formally become a party to the treaty. (** 1 word redacted** had previously
advised that a RIS was not required to be prepared prior to the announcement of Australia's
participation in the negotiations for ACTA.)
Australia and other key proponents of the ACTA seek to use the ACTA to combat the large
international trade in commercial scale counterfeit and pirate material. ACTA is focussed on setting a
global best-practice standard for enforcement of intellectual property (IP) rights, including cooperation
and information-sharing between countries who are parties to the treaty. Australia's existing domestic
laws for enforcement of intellectual property (IP) rights already meet the standards required by ACTA,
and therefore they will not need to be enhanced or otherwise changed in order to implement the
treaty.
Rather, Australia will benefit from the changes that other countries who sign up to the treaty will have
to make to their enforcement of the IP-rights of Australian rights-holders. ACTA is likely to make a
positive contribution to the export prospects of Australia’s knowledge-intensive and creative industries
(by reducing trade in counterfeit goods). That is, it will enhance the protection of Australia IP-rights
holders in overseas countries. But it will not change or otherwise impact on business within Australia
itself, because Australia's existing laws already provide for robust enforcement of IP rights.
Therefore, we can confirm that there will be no change, legislative or otherwise, to practice in
Australia as a result of joining ACTA. Any impact of the treaty will primarily occur overseas, on
overseas companies, or on Australian businesses operating overseas.
FYI, the text of the ACTA can be viewed at www.dfat.gov.au/trade/acta/.
Therefore, we'd be grateful for your advice as to whether a RIS will be required. Should you require
more information, my colleagues and I would be happy to have a teleconference exchange with you
(preferably this week).
I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Kind regards,
** 2 words redacted**
-----------------------------------------------------------------------** 2 words redacted**
International Intellectual Property Section
Office for Trade Negotiations
Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade, Australia
Ph: ** 2 words redacted**
Fax: ** 2 words redacted**
** 2 words redacted**
** 2 words redacted** ** 2 words
redacted**
22/11/2010 06:17 PM
To ** 2 words redacted**
Cc ** word redacted**, ** word redacted**,** word
redacted**
Subject FW: whether a RIS will be required for ACTA [SEC=IN-CONFIDENCE]
** word redacted**
Thanks for contacting the OBPR about your RIS.
The Best Practice Regulation Handbook outlines the requirements for RISs with regard to
treaties (page 22). The first is required when formal approval is sought for commencement of
negotiations and should accompany the Cabinet Submission (the 2nd , more detailed analysis,
is required when seeking endorsement to sign the final text of the treaty). See also DFAT’s
‘Signed, Sealed and Delivered, treaties and treaty making: officials handbook’, para 35).
It would appear you are at the stage of requiring a RIS to gain approval to commence
negotiations – if this is not the case, please let us know. Otherwise, we would be happy to
comment on your draft RIS as soon as it is ready.
Whether regulatory change is required or not is not an issue, however, it will definitely
negate the need for a possible 3rd RIS at the domestic legislative changes.
I’ll try phoning you tomorrow to explain further.
Regards
** word redacted**
Special Adviser
Regulation Impact Analysis Team 3
Office of Best Practice Regulation
Department of Finance and Deregulation
Ph: ** word redacted**; M: ** word redacted**
From:**2 words redacted** [mailto:** 1 words redacted**
]
Sent: Monday, 22 November 2010 11:36 AM
To: ** 1 word redacted**
Subject: whether a RIS will be required for ACTA [SEC=IN-CONFIDENCE]
Hi ** word redacted**,
I am following up from an earlier exchange you had my colleague, ** word redacted**, on
16/7/10, in relation to whether a RIS would be required to be prepared for a new treaty: the
Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). The advice from you at that stage was that a
RIS was not yet required, but that we should contact you again later in the process to
determine whether a RIS would ultimately be necessary.
As the negotiations on ACTA have just been completed, and we are now planning to seek
Govt consideration of whether to formally join the treaty, we would be grateful for advice on
whether a RIS will be required to be prepared for that process. FYI, the final negotiated
outcome of ACTA will require no legislative or regulatory change to be implemented by
Australia.
I'd be grateful if you could phone me to discuss the matter when you have a moment.
Kind regards,
** word redacted**
-----------------------------------------------------------------------** 2 words redacted**
International Intellectual Property Section
Office for Trade Negotiations
Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade, Australia
Ph: ** 2 words redacted**
Fax: ** word redacted**
** word redacted**
________________________________
Finance Australian Business Number (ABN): 61 970 632 495
Finance Web Site: www.finance.gov.au
IMPORTANT:
This transmission is intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain confidential o
r legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that an
y use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by telephone on
61-2-6215-2222 and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.
If responding to this email, please send to the appropriate person using the suffix .gov.au.
________________________________