At least you'll get one smile from their website, the page titled "Case for IP Protection" is blank :) http://www.iccwbo.org/bascap/id890/index.html
"BASCAP", of course, is just yet another name for the usual suspects - it's supporters are Vivendi Universal, EMI, Microsoft, CropLife (Monsanto), BSA, etc. (full, long, list: http://www.iccwbo.org/bascap/id884/index.html )
Here's their recent press release:
GLOBAL CEOS FORM COALITION TO FIGHT COUNTERFEITING AND PIRACY
London, October 4, 2005 -- Business leaders from some of the world's top companies today formed a unique coalition to take the fight against the theft of intellectual property to the highest international level. Meeting under the banner "Business Action to Stop Counterfeiting and Piracy" (BASCAP), the corporate leaders warned that this illegal activity - estimated at $600 billion - is threatening the knowledge-based economy of the 21st century.
Business leaders today agreed an initial 4-point plan of action and launched a recruitment drive to mobilize other CEOs from different countries and the spectrum of affected industries.
To learn more, please visit:
In the UK, the principal pro-enforcement umbrella group appears to be the "Alliance against IP theft": http://www.aacp.co.uk/ plus all its constituent members.
There's also a major UK government push on "IP crime", exemplified by publication of this "National IP crime strategy" (Summer 2004). http://www.patent.gov.uk/about/enforcement/ipbook.pdf -- well worth a read to get yourself into the language of those supporting the directive.
Before discussing the Directive, it's also useful to know where current national laws stand, so as to be able to identify clearly and accurately what any proposed Directive would change (and/or conversely, what one might /want/ to change, for example by introduction through the Directive of any harmonised new statutory defences)
For example, in a Government website gives the following advice on what might be currently prosecuted in the UK:
If some IP rights are intentionally infringed on a commercial scale, there may also be the possibility of prosecuting that person for a criminal offence. Criminal offences exist in copyright, trade marks, performers rights and conditional access law. The circumstances need to be studied carefully to determine if the behaviour amounts to a criminal offence or a matter that can be resolved using the civil law. The words counterfeiting, piracy and bootlegging are often used to describe the criminal behaviour. Where criminal offences may have been committed, an IP owner may pursue the matter themselves as a private prosecution, or report the matter to a public sector enforcer such as the police or trading standards office
(http://www.intellectual-property.gov.uk/std/faq/question4.htm)
The exact terms, eg for copyright, can be found in section 107 of the UK Copyright Designs & Patents Act (1988): http://www.jenkins-ip.com/patlaw/cdpa1.htm#s107
It would be useful to come up with the analogous Irish links for all of these.
The wording of the UK CDPA provision struck me as a little curious.
It's forbidden to "possess in the course of a business ... an infringing copy of a copyright work ... with a view to committing any act infringing the copyright".
I'm still trying to think out whether one of Google's directors could be guilty of a criminal act, if they went ahead scanning copyright material in the UK without authorisation for their indexing. Does this mean that their direct copy from the scan wouldn't be criminal i itself, but would become so if they then used it to make any further unauthorised copy (eg to feed to their indexing machines) ?! Maybe they'd better be careful where they visit!
For individuals (or organisations "other than in the course of business"), it's currently criminal to distribute an infringing copy or communicate a copy to the public "to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the owner of the copyright".