ACTA has actually been in the works for some time now, but now it aims to adopt some of the "principles" by the two internet acts that were recently shot down.
If you thought the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act were scary, imagine this: There is an international treaty with the same goals and civil rights infringements as its American cousins, crafted in secrecy outside any existing trade organization with the help of industry giants such as the Motion Picture Association of America.
The treaty's goal is to ban counterfeit goods and online piracy by requiring Internet Protocol servers and individual websites to monitor and prosecute suspected copyright infringements. But the goal comes packaged with some collateral damage: infringements on individual's civil rights and the creation of a system responsible for widespread, international online censorship.
This nightmare treaty is called the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. It has most of the same goals, supporters and privacy abuses of SOPA and PIPA. What it didn't have was the kind of public outcry led by websites such as Reddit and Wikipedia when it was signed by the U.S. The treaty now awaits ratification by the European Union before it goes into full force.
ACTA's scope is far wider than SOPA or PIPA. It aims to stop the "proliferation of counterfeit and pirated goods, as well as of services that share infringing material." This includes knockoff Louis Vuitton purses and cheap counterfeit medicine in developing nations. It also means any website or program that could potentially be used to infringe copyrighted material, from sites with links for music downloads to music-burning software, would be automatically outlawed.
http://www.thedailyaztec.com/2012/01/acta-has-same-dangers-as-pipa-and-sopa/The Daily Aztec
People have been saying the SOPA & PIPA was just a prelude of what's to come, and this might be the bigger picture that people haven't been seeing.
Was our will represented by our representatives? That's what they're there for. No?