The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement rolls on. Negotiators have just wrapped up another round of talks this week in Lucerne, Switzerland, and more than two years into the ACTA process, have actually started to meet with civil society groups to talk about the actual ACTA draft text. (Many governments have previously asked for comments on ACTA, but before releasing the full text.)

"On the first day of the negotiations, in the interest of transparency, the Swiss Government hosted meetings at which ACTA negotiators met with representatives of civil society who have expressed an interest in ACTA to exchange views," says the official announcement.

We've seen notes from this meeting, which did not appear to be especially constructive. For instance, consider the following exchange, written up by American University's Sean Flynn, who was at the meeting:

Q. How do you guarantee that policies required to benefit from liability safe harbor for Internet service/access providers won't have the effect to force them to restrict fundamental freedoms—such as freedom of expression and communication, privacy, and the right to a fair trial—turning them, via contractual policies, into private copyright police/justice?

A. [ACTA negotiator:] It is important to recall that ACTA parties have expressed concern about fundamental rights after Wellington. We are aware of the importance of this matter and we have made clear... It is clear that ACTA parties are bound by human rights declarations and their own constitutions. ACTA will obviously have to comply with those norms.

Q. ...but you think encouraging companies to take down expression is respecting rights? This is how you make enforcement comply with freedom of expression?

A. [French delegate:] You think in EU we live in a totalitarian state? Is France a dictatorship? Have you no rights in France?

Q. That is not my question.

A. I am telling you it will comply with EU law. Are you saying EU does not comply with fundamental freedoms?

Q. It is companies that collect the information. You are encouraging the companies to use that information in ways that, if done by the state, would violate fundamental privacy protections. Is that promoting fundamental rights?

A. [French delegate:] Is France a totalitarian state? Is it?

Q. No, that is not what I am saying. OK, fine. You have addressed the issue. Let's move on.

Stung by years of criticism over the lack of transparency and ACTA's clear emphasis on enforcement (without much interest in limits and exceptions), the negotiators stress that "ACTA is not intended to include new intellectual property rights or to enlarge or diminish existing intellectual property rights. ACTA will not interfere with a signatory’s ability to respect fundamental rights and liberties."

"ACTA will not oblige border authorities to search travelers' baggage or their personal electronic devices for infringing materials."

ACTA's negotiations next come to the US, in what is meant as one of the final rounds on the agreement. The goal is to wrap ACTA up in 2010.