The first article was from July 2008 at the ratification of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (Acta). One of the most daunting and probing/consequential provisions from Acta arose from a footnote that said, “Members [of G8] shall provide for the provisions related to criminal enforcement and border measures to be applied at least in cases of trademark counterfeiting and copyright piracy,” (Arthur 2). This legal measure caused a raucous since it could be interpreted into having customs agents scanning through tech gadgets for pieces of copyright infringement from videos, song files, downloaded comics, and various other pieces of illegally obtained IP content; or even internet traffic surveillance.  The article suggests that this is just a myth and that high volume infringers are generally the targets crossing borders; thus making this a multi-national effort and need for teamwork.  The article also stressed that it was still early in the founding/birth of Acta so nothing was 100% concrete/for certain, and many things were still being engineered and discussed.
            The second article came out a few months later and mollified much of the fear surrounding the infamous Acta provision footnote. The article clarified that, “…a comprehensive set of proposals for the text of the agreement did not exist yet,” (Grant 1). Yet the article also stressed that Acta is not intended to encroach upon citizens’ civil liberties and other rights. If anything Acta would be used to attack mass traffickers of IP infringement.