4 ms·

It depends on which laws you are talking about. >provided that such measures are consistent with the provisions of this Chapter Specifically, if there is a lo

It depends on which laws you are talking about. >provided that such measures are consistent with the provisions of this Chapter Specifically, if there is a local law that requires measures that are not consistent with the provisions of the mentioned chapter, it can easily be argued that this agreement overrides that local law. Also, why even include this language, if it does nothing special, as you seem to be claiming?

tptacek 11y ago
In Message Board Law, anything "can be argued", but it remains not the case that the TPP overrides local laws. How do you think it would even work, for a trade treaty to override a law in New Zealand? Is the idea that the US would invade New Zealand to revoke the law at the RIAA's behest?
- jsprogrammer 11y ago
  The US doesn't need to invade New Zealand militarily. See Kim Dotcom.
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    Excellent example! Thank you! Kim Dotcom didn't even step foot in US jurisdiction, and the US copyright cartel is using the US Federal Attorney's office to attempt to extradite him from New Zealand. http://sputniknews.com/us/20151223/1032223132/new-zealand-judge-rules-kim-dotcom-can-be-extradited-to-us.html http://sputniknews.com/us/20151223/1032223132/new-zealand-ju...
- pjc50 11y ago
  There are international courts to handle treaty disputes and breaches. It would doubtless run on for years but eventually result in the NZ government having to pay compensation.
- wfn 11y ago
  Not "override" in the sense of changing local law at the conclusion of the case, but "override" in the sense of a trade tribunal deciding against a given state's laws (on the basis of a prior trade agreement), and the state having to pay damages etc. so that it does not breach the previous trade agreement: https://www.ag.gov.au/tobaccoplainpackaging https://www.ag.gov.au/tobaccoplainpackaging (ongoing, at least with WTO it seems, but not the original investor-state case. The latter was/is Australia vs. Phillip Morris Asia.) That is most probably evidence for a rather weaker point, cf. the one you argued against.

tptacek 11y ago

In Message Board Law, anything "can be argued", but it remains not the case that the TPP overrides local laws. How do you think it would even work, for a trade treaty to override a law in New Zealand? Is the idea that the US would invade New Zealand to revoke the law at the RIAA's behest?

jsprogrammer 11y ago
The US doesn't need to invade New Zealand militarily. See Kim Dotcom.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  Excellent example! Thank you! Kim Dotcom didn't even step foot in US jurisdiction, and the US copyright cartel is using the US Federal Attorney's office to attempt to extradite him from New Zealand. http://sputniknews.com/us/20151223/1032223132/new-zealand-judge-rules-kim-dotcom-can-be-extradited-to-us.html http://sputniknews.com/us/20151223/1032223132/new-zealand-ju...
pjc50 11y ago
There are international courts to handle treaty disputes and breaches. It would doubtless run on for years but eventually result in the NZ government having to pay compensation.
wfn 11y ago
Not "override" in the sense of changing local law at the conclusion of the case, but "override" in the sense of a trade tribunal deciding against a given state's laws (on the basis of a prior trade agreement), and the state having to pay damages etc. so that it does not breach the previous trade agreement: https://www.ag.gov.au/tobaccoplainpackaging https://www.ag.gov.au/tobaccoplainpackaging (ongoing, at least with WTO it seems, but not the original investor-state case. The latter was/is Australia vs. Phillip Morris Asia.) That is most probably evidence for a rather weaker point, cf. the one you argued against.