12 ms·

TPP Text Confirms Massive Loss to Canadian Public Domain

364 points by jdc 11y ago

Johnny_Brahms 11y ago
Copyright does no longer exist to protect creators, but to protect the distributors. We badly need a reform.
- hamstergene 11y ago
  Isn't distribution done by third-party services either? Kindle store or iTunes store aren't copyright holders, for example. The problem with copyright is that it is used as an excuse to deliver the good idea to protect the new authors who are still alive, in the same package with the bad idea to let unspecified number of loosely related and unrelated people feed off free money source created by long dead authors decades ago.
  - coldtea 11y ago
    >The problem with copyright is that it is used as an excuse to deliver the good idea to protect the new authors who are still alive, in the same package with the bad idea to let unspecified number of loosely related and unrelated people feed off free money source created by long dead authors decades ago. I think part of the idea is that whether the creators are dead or not, having copyright and "unrelated people feed off", still maintains an economy over the item and gives it monetary value. Whereas if it was de-copyrighted it would lose that value -- everybody could just copy it. E.g. Disney only being able to create or allow the creation of Mickey Mouse stuff (t-shirts etc), leads to a large business for them, taxes for US etc. (Plus pays a lobby to ensure longer copyright). If Mickey Mouse was suddenly public domain, that would stop and its characters would be devalued very fast, with everybody competing with ever cheaper products with him on.
    - coldpie 11y ago
      And they would come up with some other creative character with a new copyright duration, thus enriching our public culture with their previous works and employing people to create new works for people to enjoy. Twenty years ought to be enough to recoup your investment, but I'm open to compromise. In any case, (rougly) 150 years, as it currently is, is way, way, way, way, way, way way too long.
      - coldtea 11y ago
        >And they would come up with some other creative character with a new copyright duration, thus enriching our public culture with their previous works and employing people to create new works for people to enjoy. Isn't letting them keep their copyright for long, an even stronger inventive for OTHERS to come up with some new characters? (in order to compete with them).
        coldpie 11y ago
        Maybe. It also stifles other creative endeavors that could be done with those characters by other authors. Lots of cool stuff is done with things in public domain (think Shakespeare, Sherlock Holmes, plenty of others), and I don't buy an argument that people would stop creating new things if they could simply copy someone else's.
      - coderdude 11y ago
        Way too long for why? I don't believe citizens are harmed by not being able to make money from something they didn't create.
        coldpie 11y ago
        Really? Copyright is siloing off culture in unprecedented ways. Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech is under copyright by his estate, and will be until the 2040s. It can't be used by anyone without paying (large) licensing fees to his estate, even though they had literally nothing to do with the creation of the speech. Ever notice how restaurants and movies never use "the Happy Birthday song"? That's because Warner Bros claimed copyright on it for decades. Another part of our culture that can't be used thanks to copyright. There are plenty of films, plays, and TV series based on works in the public domain. Romeo and Juliet, Pride and Prejudice, and Sherlock Holmes to name just a few that come to mind. Should those creators be required to pay tribute to the descendants of the long-dead authors in order to use those parts of our shared culture?
    - collyw 11y ago
      Linux doesn't loose value because people can copy it.
      - alsetmusic 11y ago
        Linux is under a permissible license. That's the point. https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/COPYING https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/COPYING
      - uremog 11y ago
        I think they mean monetary value... (vice educational, entertainment, etc value)
    - chongli 11y ago
      That's not true. Mickey Mouse himself is protected by trademark, which never expires as long as it is vigorously defended by the rightsholder. Copyright expiration would only affect those old, old films starring Mickey.
    - camexp 11y ago
      >Whereas if it was de-copyrighted it would lose that value -- everybody could just copy it. I think you have the whole process upside down. Digital media already has no value, and it can already be copied freely. The changes in the law that Disney and other copyright maximalists are doing is attempting to re-value digital media. So, the only option open to them is to push for ever more draconian laws simply to protect their broken and outdated business models.
- static_noise 11y ago
  The law is like a magic spell invisibly binding the hands of people by soft power and binding the hands of people through the law enforcement by hard power. The problem with hard power is, that it is expensive. If it wasn't police states would work wonderfully. Instead, the government needs cooperation of the people by formulating the law in ways that are acceptable to the people. By providing thought systems propagated through school and media appropriate patterns are engraved in the nations minds. People need to either think "this law is just" or "i don't want to go to jail for that" or "i don't want to lose everything that i hold dearly" or "i don't want my family to starve" for the spells of the law to work. We are more and more coming to a point where the proponents of copyright law must either step up the propaganda, the enforcement or change the law.
  - coldtea 11y ago
    >The problem with hard power is, that it is expensive. Only for total enforcement, and only when the technology is not advanced enough to make even that cheap. Here's a hypothetical example: with widespread internet surveillance, you could just charge people immediately on the first sign of them pirating something -- take the money off of their bank accounts/salary, kind of the same way one gets a traffic ticket through camera surveillance, but even faster. >If it wasn't police states would work wonderfully. Who said that they don't? It's often not the police state that fails, it is the state in general, and for other reasons.
- dustinchilson 11y ago
  Copyright was never for the creators, It's always been for the distributors. Not a great source but: http://questioncopyright.org/promise http://questioncopyright.org/promise
TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
Infinite copyright terms are unconstitutional in the United States. Hopefully SCOTUS will notice that someday.
- venomsnake 11y ago
  But 5 billion years ones are perfectly constitutional :(
  - PythonicAlpha 11y ago
    This leaves some room for distributors to enhance their revenue for some time -- and get some small money from works like the Ilias or Hamurabi.
    - swombat 11y ago
      I'm sure that will incentivise the creation of more ancient epic literature.
      - mordechai9000 11y ago
        You could argue that all modern codes of law are unauthorized derivative works of the Code of Hammurabi.
        PythonicAlpha 11y ago
        Great! Than the distributor that finds a descendant of Hammurabi can earn a ton of money from all existing countries.
- MichaelBurge 11y ago
  Have the copyright extensions actually been upheld in court? Nothing stops a legislator from passing an unconstitutional law, but if nobody fights it then it won't get struck down.
intopieces 11y ago
We need a massive, concerted effort to widely distribute digitally, for free, the works of all the authors who would have entered public domain. It's clear that negotiating with our leaders has failed; the free and open internet that has served us so well in the preceding decades is closing faster than ever and our only hope is digital civil disobedience.
- junto 11y ago
  Whilst "digital civil disobedience" is all well and good, breaking their rules won't help us break their will. The last bastion of hope is a "union of the consumers", where we collectively punish and break companies that we collectively see as dangerous to the future of our world. We only need to tear down one company to be able to set off a chain reaction. Once consumers realise the power they hold as a well organised and effective collective, the people can pull back some of the power from the corporation (and our governments to which they now hold the power over). Corporations can't survive without income and customers. Every day we vote with our wallets without giving it a second thought. It's time we started to appreciate that fact. Edit: I know this isn't particularly realistic :-(
  - enraged_camel 11y ago
    The problem is that the overwhelming majority of consumers don't know or care enough about copyright to form a union. And you can't have any leverage as a union if you are a small minority of the entire consumer-base.
    - laumars 11y ago
      And many of those that do know and care simply don't care enough to stand by their principles (or simply would rather pirate stuff in private - which doesn't have the same impact as a union).
    - junto 11y ago
      That is the traditional problem of a boycott and what makes it ineffectual. Moreover, the ineffectuality of boycotts makes people less likely to actually believe in them. Which is exactly what "they" want you to think.
machrider 11y ago
What the hell is the justification for the document being secret, anyway?
- rplnt 11y ago
  You (media) can't dissect any new thing that gets added. Explain why it's bad, etc.. Now you have a huge dump of new information and everyone gets overwhelmed.
- thomasahle 11y ago
  Making negotiations easier.
- kspaans 11y ago
  See the discussion on another link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10532565 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10532565 Summary: international trade deals involve a lot of tradeoffs in various sectors of a country: e.g. throwing textiles under the bus in order to get some advantages in automotive. If the initial negotiation of the treaty was open, special interest groups would make massive amounts of noise and no country would be able to come to agreement. Once the treaty is done being written, then countries can debate it internally, in its entirety. There will still be lots of noise but at least there is a complete treaty to argue over. See also: http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/06/26/417851577/episode-635-trade-deal-confidential http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/06/26/417851577/episo...
  - static_noise 11y ago
    Who is involved in creating such agreements? Are the parties of interest involved?
  - akerro 11y ago
    >There will still be lots of noise but at least there is a complete treaty to argue over So now we have to protest against whole document and WE AS PUBLIC, we citizens cannot negotiate paragraphs of the act because it's tightly coupled and one change will affect another paragraph. Now it all goes in or nothing.
tareqak 11y ago
I put up most of the TPP on genius.com yesterday [0]. All chapters from 0 to 30 are there except for chapter 20 and the annexes of chapters 2, 12, and 15. I am still working on reformatting the text since formatting is lost when copying from a PDF to an HTML textbox. I still have not heard back from genius.com support about some of the technical issues I am having: I can't delete/move chapter 20 with the rest, and new chapters do not appear in the collection list ("album" in genius parlance). If you know anyone with legal expertise who is willing to annotate a few places, please forward them to [0]. Alternatively, please retweet [1]. If you want to read the US government's take on the TPP, this link has a summaries before the full text in each of the chapters [2]. [0] http://genius.com/albums/Transpacific-partnership-tpp-negotiating-parties/Trans-pacific-partnership http://genius.com/albums/Transpacific-partnership-tpp-negoti... [1] https://twitter.com/TeeAyKay/status/663830955971338240 https://twitter.com/TeeAyKay/status/663830955971338240 [2] https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership If you've made up your mind about the TPP in whichever direction, please let your government know (Use #TPP on Twitter): Canada: Prime Minister's Office: http://pm.gc.ca/eng/contactpm http://pm.gc.ca/eng/contactpm Prime Minister's Twitter: https://twitter.com/JustinTrudeau https://twitter.com/JustinTrudeau Minister of International Trade: https://twitter.com/CanadaTrade https://twitter.com/CanadaTrade and https://twitter.com/cafreeland https://twitter.com/cafreeland Members of Parliament (by postal code!): http://www.parl.gc.ca/Parliamentarians/en/Constituencies/FindMP http://www.parl.gc.ca/Parliamentarians/en/Constituencies/Fin... USA: White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/write-or-call https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/write-or-call White House: twitter https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse House: http://www.house.gov/representatives/ http://www.house.gov/representatives/ Senate: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_c... * I am not affiliated with genius.com, or any political party. I just want an informed decision and the best possible outcome, whatever it may be. Edit: spacing
baldfat 11y ago
Public Domain's Number One Enemy = Mickey Mouse. Until there is some way to protect Disney and not have its IP placed in public domain we will never have nice things again in the public domain.
- JustSomeNobody 11y ago
  But ... this is wrong. Mickey should be in (or be headed towards) the public domain.
  - baldfat 11y ago
    Until there is a solution for Mickey Mouse the millions of dollars will keep everything behind copyright. We solve that one we will have Public Domain again.
    - JustSomeNobody 11y ago
      We solve that one and everyone follows Mickey's lead and nothing enters PD.
- drdeca 11y ago
  Boycott anything which uses Mickey mouse /at all/ , and which is produced/owned by an entity which has license to use Mickey mouse, or license to use it in that way? (So, not things that use Mickey mouse without getting license, but yes anything which licenses from Disney to use the littlest bit of the ears.) So, if a Disney toy has it on the packaging as a logo, don't buy it, or on a tag, or on a receipt etc. etc. (Provided that the use is not ip infringement) The goal being to make it so that using the micky mouse likeness in a licensed way does not increase income (ideally, reduces it), so there is no longer an incentive to "protect" the ip. So, kingdom hearts, Disneyland, most Disney toys, etc etc. Indefinitely.l
amelius 11y ago
I think the text needs a provision to roll it back gracefully. For instance, by tapering any repercussions in a certain time-window.
mark_l_watson 11y ago
A while ago, I said something like "the elites have totally won the battle against the slave class (formally known as the middle class)" to a friend and he was shocked that I felt that way. I was half way joking but the more I think about it the more I think that it is game over for the non-elites, except for a few things that people can do: 1. Pay a lot of attention to your own job skills and education, managing career, etc. 2. Put a lot of energy into maintaining your economic outlook, that of your family and friends, and that of your local community 3. Ignore crap like the show of elections, and the show of "news" in general. If you want to do something positive then pick a cause, like a constitutional amendment to overthrow the Citizen's United ruling, and work on that cause year after year. Time better spent.
- onion2k 11y ago
  It's never been "game over" in the past. History has shown that oppression of the masses is usually the forerunner to a revolution. Why would be any different this time around? (I'm not advocating revolt as a solution; just questioning the validity of the idea that the 'slave class' have no way to change things.)
  - yesco 11y ago
    People really harp off about 1984 a lot when speaking about surveillance but they always seem to leave out what I considered the most disturbing part of the book. The government in the story was very aware that they were following a pattern that would lead to a revolution. So they created a system where revolution was impossible. 1984 like most science fiction, was created to show an extreme. While there is no such thing as an unbeatable system, there is definitely people higher up aware of the possibility and actively preventing any major paradigm shifts in politics. The only thing that would truly force a revolution (which doesn't even have to be violent) is if people don't have enough food or their life is on the line. We saw this in the Arab Spring with the rise in wheat prices, which Saudi Arabia was able to avoid through subsidies.
  - JustSomeNobody 11y ago
    Because this time the government has large bombs.
walterbell 11y ago
If you want to do something positive: 1. Organize a local event or travel to DC in the week of Nov. 14, there is a 90-day window to mobilize opposition to TPP, https://www.eff.org/event/global-week-actions-against-tpp-ttip-tisa https://www.eff.org/event/global-week-actions-against-tpp-tt.... EFF actions in DC will coincide with APEC meetings in the Philippines, where US officials (including trade reps) will push the TPP, and EFF Philippine allies will have mass protests. 2. Remember how many companies rallied against SOPA? Ask your tech employer to issue a public statement on TPP and digital rights. Create a public list that links to company statements. TPP unfairly advantages legacy business models at the expense of emerging business models. It is not about "elites" vs. "citizens", it is about crony insider companies vs. all other companies. 3. Ask organizations like Wikipedia, Archive.org, Google, Facebook to run banners to raise awareness about TPP, asking users to flood TPP governments with calls for representation. Companies and citizens have never had so many channels for rallying opposition. If TPP (and TTIP and TISA later) passes, those channels may be limited in the future. Use them or lose them. We not only need to stop each of these bad agreements, we need to reduce incentives for future bad agreements. They are a DDoS on the legislative process, at the expense of opportunities to create sensible rules which support technology innovation and the goals of modern civil society.
richard_mcp 11y ago
The Canadian copyright length is being extended. Does the TPP also put a cap on the US copyright length or are countries still free to extend their copyrights as they see fit?
- kuschku 11y ago
  It just requests a minimum length, nothing about maximum lengths. (Obviously, as the US needs to extend Disney’s copyright soon again)
bufordsharkley 11y ago
Is there any indication that this has an overall limit of 95 years as per the U.S. Copyright? ("Copyright protection for works published prior to January 1, 1978, was increased by 20 years to a total of 95 years from their publication date."[0])? This cannot be stressed enough, that the real losers here aren't people who want to remix ultra-famous copyrighted works-- it's that works that nobody cares to profit upon will remain orphaned. If there is one protection to the Public Domain that needs to take place, it's that copyright owners should have to show a willingness to profit off their material (by paying a recurring fee) so we don't experience this deadweight loss. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act
- greglindahl 11y ago
  The general rule is that copyright terms are never reduced. Some of the countries in TPP signed up for the Berne convention before 1978, which means that the US method would reduce the length of some copyrights.
- bufordsharkley 11y ago
  More on Orphaned Works: "Significant among those changes were the elimination of the registration and notice requirements, which resulted in less accurate and incomplete identifying information on works, and the automatic renewal of copyrighted works that were registered before the effective date of the 1976 Copyright Act." [0] Bringing back registration and ending automatic renewals would do a lot of good. (Adding a fee would be better.) Has there been any work on laws to do this? [0] http://copyright.gov/orphan/reports/orphan-works2015.pdf http://copyright.gov/orphan/reports/orphan-works2015.pdf
  - eigenman 11y ago
    The problem is the Berne convention explicitly forbids requiring registration for a work to enjoy the benefits of copyright. The USA ratified this convention in 1989. However, I agree with you. There needs to be some mechanism pushing back on copyright holders encouraging them to let their works revert to the public domain. A nominal fee at regular intervals would go a long way to encouraging this. However, perhaps something more aggressive is needed. Since the advocates of increased copyright duration often phrase their argument in terms of "intellectual property", perhaps a copyright property tax would be more appropriate. "OK Disney, you can keep the mouse out of the public domain, but that will be $50M/yr."

364 points by jdc 11y ago

Johnny_Brahms 11y ago

hamstergene 11y ago
Isn't distribution done by third-party services either? Kindle store or iTunes store aren't copyright holders, for example. The problem with copyright is that it is used as an excuse to deliver the good idea to protect the new authors who are still alive, in the same package with the bad idea to let unspecified number of loosely related and unrelated people feed off free money source created by long dead authors decades ago.
- coldtea 11y ago
  >The problem with copyright is that it is used as an excuse to deliver the good idea to protect the new authors who are still alive, in the same package with the bad idea to let unspecified number of loosely related and unrelated people feed off free money source created by long dead authors decades ago. I think part of the idea is that whether the creators are dead or not, having copyright and "unrelated people feed off", still maintains an economy over the item and gives it monetary value. Whereas if it was de-copyrighted it would lose that value -- everybody could just copy it. E.g. Disney only being able to create or allow the creation of Mickey Mouse stuff (t-shirts etc), leads to a large business for them, taxes for US etc. (Plus pays a lobby to ensure longer copyright). If Mickey Mouse was suddenly public domain, that would stop and its characters would be devalued very fast, with everybody competing with ever cheaper products with him on.
  - coldpie 11y ago
    And they would come up with some other creative character with a new copyright duration, thus enriching our public culture with their previous works and employing people to create new works for people to enjoy. Twenty years ought to be enough to recoup your investment, but I'm open to compromise. In any case, (rougly) 150 years, as it currently is, is way, way, way, way, way, way way too long.
    - coldtea 11y ago
      >And they would come up with some other creative character with a new copyright duration, thus enriching our public culture with their previous works and employing people to create new works for people to enjoy. Isn't letting them keep their copyright for long, an even stronger inventive for OTHERS to come up with some new characters? (in order to compete with them).
      - coldpie 11y ago
        Maybe. It also stifles other creative endeavors that could be done with those characters by other authors. Lots of cool stuff is done with things in public domain (think Shakespeare, Sherlock Holmes, plenty of others), and I don't buy an argument that people would stop creating new things if they could simply copy someone else's.
    - coderdude 11y ago
      Way too long for why? I don't believe citizens are harmed by not being able to make money from something they didn't create.
      - coldpie 11y ago
        Really? Copyright is siloing off culture in unprecedented ways. Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech is under copyright by his estate, and will be until the 2040s. It can't be used by anyone without paying (large) licensing fees to his estate, even though they had literally nothing to do with the creation of the speech. Ever notice how restaurants and movies never use "the Happy Birthday song"? That's because Warner Bros claimed copyright on it for decades. Another part of our culture that can't be used thanks to copyright. There are plenty of films, plays, and TV series based on works in the public domain. Romeo and Juliet, Pride and Prejudice, and Sherlock Holmes to name just a few that come to mind. Should those creators be required to pay tribute to the descendants of the long-dead authors in order to use those parts of our shared culture?
  - collyw 11y ago
    Linux doesn't loose value because people can copy it.
    - alsetmusic 11y ago
      Linux is under a permissible license. That's the point. https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/COPYING https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/COPYING
    - uremog 11y ago
      I think they mean monetary value... (vice educational, entertainment, etc value)
  - chongli 11y ago
    That's not true. Mickey Mouse himself is protected by trademark, which never expires as long as it is vigorously defended by the rightsholder. Copyright expiration would only affect those old, old films starring Mickey.
  - camexp 11y ago
    >Whereas if it was de-copyrighted it would lose that value -- everybody could just copy it. I think you have the whole process upside down. Digital media already has no value, and it can already be copied freely. The changes in the law that Disney and other copyright maximalists are doing is attempting to re-value digital media. So, the only option open to them is to push for ever more draconian laws simply to protect their broken and outdated business models.
static_noise 11y ago
The law is like a magic spell invisibly binding the hands of people by soft power and binding the hands of people through the law enforcement by hard power. The problem with hard power is, that it is expensive. If it wasn't police states would work wonderfully. Instead, the government needs cooperation of the people by formulating the law in ways that are acceptable to the people. By providing thought systems propagated through school and media appropriate patterns are engraved in the nations minds. People need to either think "this law is just" or "i don't want to go to jail for that" or "i don't want to lose everything that i hold dearly" or "i don't want my family to starve" for the spells of the law to work. We are more and more coming to a point where the proponents of copyright law must either step up the propaganda, the enforcement or change the law.
- coldtea 11y ago
  >The problem with hard power is, that it is expensive. Only for total enforcement, and only when the technology is not advanced enough to make even that cheap. Here's a hypothetical example: with widespread internet surveillance, you could just charge people immediately on the first sign of them pirating something -- take the money off of their bank accounts/salary, kind of the same way one gets a traffic ticket through camera surveillance, but even faster. >If it wasn't police states would work wonderfully. Who said that they don't? It's often not the police state that fails, it is the state in general, and for other reasons.
dustinchilson 11y ago
Copyright was never for the creators, It's always been for the distributors. Not a great source but: http://questioncopyright.org/promise http://questioncopyright.org/promise

TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago

Infinite copyright terms are unconstitutional in the United States. Hopefully SCOTUS will notice that someday.

venomsnake 11y ago
But 5 billion years ones are perfectly constitutional :(
- PythonicAlpha 11y ago
  This leaves some room for distributors to enhance their revenue for some time -- and get some small money from works like the Ilias or Hamurabi.
  - swombat 11y ago
    I'm sure that will incentivise the creation of more ancient epic literature.
    - mordechai9000 11y ago
      You could argue that all modern codes of law are unauthorized derivative works of the Code of Hammurabi.
      - PythonicAlpha 11y ago
        Great! Than the distributor that finds a descendant of Hammurabi can earn a ton of money from all existing countries.
MichaelBurge 11y ago
Have the copyright extensions actually been upheld in court? Nothing stops a legislator from passing an unconstitutional law, but if nobody fights it then it won't get struck down.

intopieces 11y ago

We need a massive, concerted effort to widely distribute digitally, for free, the works of all the authors who would have entered public domain. It's clear that negotiating with our leaders has failed; the free and open internet that has served us so well in the preceding decades is closing faster than ever and our only hope is digital civil disobedience.

junto 11y ago
Whilst "digital civil disobedience" is all well and good, breaking their rules won't help us break their will. The last bastion of hope is a "union of the consumers", where we collectively punish and break companies that we collectively see as dangerous to the future of our world. We only need to tear down one company to be able to set off a chain reaction. Once consumers realise the power they hold as a well organised and effective collective, the people can pull back some of the power from the corporation (and our governments to which they now hold the power over). Corporations can't survive without income and customers. Every day we vote with our wallets without giving it a second thought. It's time we started to appreciate that fact. Edit: I know this isn't particularly realistic :-(
- enraged_camel 11y ago
  The problem is that the overwhelming majority of consumers don't know or care enough about copyright to form a union. And you can't have any leverage as a union if you are a small minority of the entire consumer-base.
  - laumars 11y ago
    And many of those that do know and care simply don't care enough to stand by their principles (or simply would rather pirate stuff in private - which doesn't have the same impact as a union).
  - junto 11y ago
    That is the traditional problem of a boycott and what makes it ineffectual. Moreover, the ineffectuality of boycotts makes people less likely to actually believe in them. Which is exactly what "they" want you to think.

machrider 11y ago

What the hell is the justification for the document being secret, anyway?

rplnt 11y ago
You (media) can't dissect any new thing that gets added. Explain why it's bad, etc.. Now you have a huge dump of new information and everyone gets overwhelmed.
thomasahle 11y ago
Making negotiations easier.
kspaans 11y ago
See the discussion on another link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10532565 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10532565 Summary: international trade deals involve a lot of tradeoffs in various sectors of a country: e.g. throwing textiles under the bus in order to get some advantages in automotive. If the initial negotiation of the treaty was open, special interest groups would make massive amounts of noise and no country would be able to come to agreement. Once the treaty is done being written, then countries can debate it internally, in its entirety. There will still be lots of noise but at least there is a complete treaty to argue over. See also: http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/06/26/417851577/episode-635-trade-deal-confidential http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/06/26/417851577/episo...
- static_noise 11y ago
  Who is involved in creating such agreements? Are the parties of interest involved?
- akerro 11y ago
  >There will still be lots of noise but at least there is a complete treaty to argue over So now we have to protest against whole document and WE AS PUBLIC, we citizens cannot negotiate paragraphs of the act because it's tightly coupled and one change will affect another paragraph. Now it all goes in or nothing.

tareqak 11y ago

I put up most of the TPP on genius.com yesterday [0]. All chapters from 0 to 30 are there except for chapter 20 and the annexes of chapters 2, 12, and 15. I am still working on reformatting the text since formatting is lost when copying from a PDF to an HTML textbox. I still have not heard back from genius.com support about some of the technical issues I am having: I can't delete/move chapter 20 with the rest, and new chapters do not appear in the collection list ("album" in genius parlance). If you know anyone with legal expertise who is willing to annotate a few places, please forward them to [0]. Alternatively, please retweet [1]. If you want to read the US government's take on the TPP, this link has a summaries before the full text in each of the chapters [2]. [0] http://genius.com/albums/Transpacific-partnership-tpp-negotiating-parties/Trans-pacific-partnership http://genius.com/albums/Transpacific-partnership-tpp-negoti... [1] https://twitter.com/TeeAyKay/status/663830955971338240 https://twitter.com/TeeAyKay/status/663830955971338240 [2] https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership If you've made up your mind about the TPP in whichever direction, please let your government know (Use #TPP on Twitter): Canada: Prime Minister's Office: http://pm.gc.ca/eng/contactpm http://pm.gc.ca/eng/contactpm Prime Minister's Twitter: https://twitter.com/JustinTrudeau https://twitter.com/JustinTrudeau Minister of International Trade: https://twitter.com/CanadaTrade https://twitter.com/CanadaTrade and https://twitter.com/cafreeland https://twitter.com/cafreeland Members of Parliament (by postal code!): http://www.parl.gc.ca/Parliamentarians/en/Constituencies/FindMP http://www.parl.gc.ca/Parliamentarians/en/Constituencies/Fin... USA: White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/write-or-call https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/write-or-call White House: twitter https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse House: http://www.house.gov/representatives/ http://www.house.gov/representatives/ Senate: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_c... * I am not affiliated with genius.com, or any political party. I just want an informed decision and the best possible outcome, whatever it may be. Edit: spacing

baldfat 11y ago

Public Domain's Number One Enemy = Mickey Mouse. Until there is some way to protect Disney and not have its IP placed in public domain we will never have nice things again in the public domain.

JustSomeNobody 11y ago
But ... this is wrong. Mickey should be in (or be headed towards) the public domain.
- baldfat 11y ago
  Until there is a solution for Mickey Mouse the millions of dollars will keep everything behind copyright. We solve that one we will have Public Domain again.
  - JustSomeNobody 11y ago
    We solve that one and everyone follows Mickey's lead and nothing enters PD.
drdeca 11y ago
Boycott anything which uses Mickey mouse /at all/ , and which is produced/owned by an entity which has license to use Mickey mouse, or license to use it in that way? (So, not things that use Mickey mouse without getting license, but yes anything which licenses from Disney to use the littlest bit of the ears.) So, if a Disney toy has it on the packaging as a logo, don't buy it, or on a tag, or on a receipt etc. etc. (Provided that the use is not ip infringement) The goal being to make it so that using the micky mouse likeness in a licensed way does not increase income (ideally, reduces it), so there is no longer an incentive to "protect" the ip. So, kingdom hearts, Disneyland, most Disney toys, etc etc. Indefinitely.l

amelius 11y ago

I think the text needs a provision to roll it back gracefully. For instance, by tapering any repercussions in a certain time-window.

mark_l_watson 11y ago

A while ago, I said something like "the elites have totally won the battle against the slave class (formally known as the middle class)" to a friend and he was shocked that I felt that way. I was half way joking but the more I think about it the more I think that it is game over for the non-elites, except for a few things that people can do: 1. Pay a lot of attention to your own job skills and education, managing career, etc. 2. Put a lot of energy into maintaining your economic outlook, that of your family and friends, and that of your local community 3. Ignore crap like the show of elections, and the show of "news" in general. If you want to do something positive then pick a cause, like a constitutional amendment to overthrow the Citizen's United ruling, and work on that cause year after year. Time better spent.

onion2k 11y ago
It's never been "game over" in the past. History has shown that oppression of the masses is usually the forerunner to a revolution. Why would be any different this time around? (I'm not advocating revolt as a solution; just questioning the validity of the idea that the 'slave class' have no way to change things.)
- yesco 11y ago
  People really harp off about 1984 a lot when speaking about surveillance but they always seem to leave out what I considered the most disturbing part of the book. The government in the story was very aware that they were following a pattern that would lead to a revolution. So they created a system where revolution was impossible. 1984 like most science fiction, was created to show an extreme. While there is no such thing as an unbeatable system, there is definitely people higher up aware of the possibility and actively preventing any major paradigm shifts in politics. The only thing that would truly force a revolution (which doesn't even have to be violent) is if people don't have enough food or their life is on the line. We saw this in the Arab Spring with the rise in wheat prices, which Saudi Arabia was able to avoid through subsidies.
- JustSomeNobody 11y ago
  Because this time the government has large bombs.

walterbell 11y ago

If you want to do something positive: 1. Organize a local event or travel to DC in the week of Nov. 14, there is a 90-day window to mobilize opposition to TPP, https://www.eff.org/event/global-week-actions-against-tpp-ttip-tisa https://www.eff.org/event/global-week-actions-against-tpp-tt.... EFF actions in DC will coincide with APEC meetings in the Philippines, where US officials (including trade reps) will push the TPP, and EFF Philippine allies will have mass protests. 2. Remember how many companies rallied against SOPA? Ask your tech employer to issue a public statement on TPP and digital rights. Create a public list that links to company statements. TPP unfairly advantages legacy business models at the expense of emerging business models. It is not about "elites" vs. "citizens", it is about crony insider companies vs. all other companies. 3. Ask organizations like Wikipedia, Archive.org, Google, Facebook to run banners to raise awareness about TPP, asking users to flood TPP governments with calls for representation. Companies and citizens have never had so many channels for rallying opposition. If TPP (and TTIP and TISA later) passes, those channels may be limited in the future. Use them or lose them. We not only need to stop each of these bad agreements, we need to reduce incentives for future bad agreements. They are a DDoS on the legislative process, at the expense of opportunities to create sensible rules which support technology innovation and the goals of modern civil society.

richard_mcp 11y ago

The Canadian copyright length is being extended. Does the TPP also put a cap on the US copyright length or are countries still free to extend their copyrights as they see fit?

kuschku 11y ago
It just requests a minimum length, nothing about maximum lengths. (Obviously, as the US needs to extend Disney’s copyright soon again)

bufordsharkley 11y ago

Is there any indication that this has an overall limit of 95 years as per the U.S. Copyright? ("Copyright protection for works published prior to January 1, 1978, was increased by 20 years to a total of 95 years from their publication date."[0])? This cannot be stressed enough, that the real losers here aren't people who want to remix ultra-famous copyrighted works-- it's that works that nobody cares to profit upon will remain orphaned. If there is one protection to the Public Domain that needs to take place, it's that copyright owners should have to show a willingness to profit off their material (by paying a recurring fee) so we don't experience this deadweight loss. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act

greglindahl 11y ago
The general rule is that copyright terms are never reduced. Some of the countries in TPP signed up for the Berne convention before 1978, which means that the US method would reduce the length of some copyrights.
bufordsharkley 11y ago
More on Orphaned Works: "Significant among those changes were the elimination of the registration and notice requirements, which resulted in less accurate and incomplete identifying information on works, and the automatic renewal of copyrighted works that were registered before the effective date of the 1976 Copyright Act." [0] Bringing back registration and ending automatic renewals would do a lot of good. (Adding a fee would be better.) Has there been any work on laws to do this? [0] http://copyright.gov/orphan/reports/orphan-works2015.pdf http://copyright.gov/orphan/reports/orphan-works2015.pdf
- eigenman 11y ago
  The problem is the Berne convention explicitly forbids requiring registration for a work to enjoy the benefits of copyright. The USA ratified this convention in 1989. However, I agree with you. There needs to be some mechanism pushing back on copyright holders encouraging them to let their works revert to the public domain. A nominal fee at regular intervals would go a long way to encouraging this. However, perhaps something more aggressive is needed. Since the advocates of increased copyright duration often phrase their argument in terms of "intellectual property", perhaps a copyright property tax would be more appropriate. "OK Disney, you can keep the mouse out of the public domain, but that will be $50M/yr."