There's a lot of misinformation out there about ACTA. The negotiations were secret for a long time, which didn't help the public's understanding of the issue (and even caused its legitimacy to be questioned). I still don't understand everything in it, thanks to the flowery language used. ACTA doesn't seem like a "worse version of SOPA". It did at first, but the worst parts were removed from the agreement due to public pressure.
That doesn't mean it's all peachy now, though.
EDRi (European Digital Rights) has summarised its objections on its website. I could try to summarise this summary even further, but I'm not a great writer (and I'm also in a lazy mood ), so here are some quotes from the EDRi documents:
^^^ The Getty images thread comes to mind, here.
ACTA:
- places the interests of rights-holders ahead of free speech, privacy and other fundamental rights,
- breaches EU law,
- violates the European Convention on Human Rights and the EU charter of Fundamental Rights.
In the US, Senate ratification was skipped by calling ACTA an agreement rather than a treaty. I don't know the particulars, but I've been told it's similar to this.
As to the "people with vested interests": that's everyone on the internet.
I'm all for an anti-piracy agreement, but not if that agreement infringes on civil rights. It's much more complicated than just enforcing copyright and tackling counterfeited goods. I urge you to read the EDRi's summary on the subject; it's only 5 one-page pdf files (on their site I linked at the top).