eWeek:

According to documents leaked earlier this week, the United States favors forcing international ISPs to proactively police copyright on user-contributed material and would require ISPs to cut off the Internet access of accused copyright infringers or face liability. In addition, the U.S. negotiators [on ACTA (International Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement)] are seeking international notice and take down agreements and mandatory prohibitions on breaking DRM systems. The provisions are all favored by major U.S. content owners.

According to the USTR (U.S. Trade Representative), the talks were "productive and focused on enforcement of rights in the digital environment and criminal enforcement. Participants also discussed the importance of transparency [like in health care?] including the availability of opportunities for stakeholders and the public in general to provide meaningful input into the negotiating process."

But it is the lack of transparency and openness about the negotiations that prompted the watchdog groups to write President Obama Nov. 5 complaining about the process. The ACTA negotiations began under former President Bush. The Obama administration has continued the Bush policy of refusing to make public the draft text of the agreement.

The Obama administration, according to the groups, has "actively resisted disclosure of relevant information during the course of litigation under the Freedom of Information Act." In addition to the secrecy around the negotiations, the groups maintain that ACTA is not a traditional trade agreement as much as it is a treaty dealing with intellectual property.

"In negotiating agreements focusing on traditional trade matters such as tariffs and trade barriers, confidentiality regarding some negotiating positions may be appropriate. But ACTA aims to set international legal norms, potentially driving changes to substantive intellectual property legal regimes on an international basis," the groups said in the letter to Obama. "Attempts to force a multilateral intellectual property agreement through trade processes unsuited for it does a disservice to citizens, public policy, and the USTR alike."

The groups said the information that is known about the treaty negotiations shows that the terms are heavily weighted in favor of big media companies.

I'm shocked. Just like the health insurance companies, Big Media's product sucks, so they seek to maintain their profits by having the government reinforce their monopoly. Yay!

NOTE Of course, the answer is DIY.