There's nothing to see here. "Party" (capitalized) and "person of a Party" have specific meanings in this document, as defined in the definitions section: "Par

There's nothing to see here. "Party" (capitalized) and "person of a Party" have specific meanings in this document, as defined in the definitions section: "Party means any State or separate customs territory for which this Agreement is in force;" "person of a Party means a national or an enterprise of a Party;" (Chapter 1, Section A, Article 1.3, [0]) So the statement "No Party shall require the transfer of..." restricts what a State that signed the treaty may do to the persons and enterprises of another State. For example, China can't require Microsoft to disclose its source code as a condition to selling Windows in China. Regarding the other quote about contracts, the operative part is "Nothing in this Article shall preclude". So this treaty has no effect on terms regarding source code in commercially negotiated contracts. Even if you are of the misguided belief that FOSS licenses are contracts, this provision does not affect them. Finally, FOSS licenses are not contracts because they do not contain bargained-for reciprocal promises. They are grants of rights, subject to terms and conditions. A FOSS license operates as a defense against copyright infringement. If the terms and conditions are not met, then the license is void. The infringer can then be sued for copyright infringement, not breach of contract. This has two important implications: (1) a court won't order specific performance (a contract remedy) in a case of copyright infringement, and (2) a third party has no standing to sue, because where there is no contract there can't be a third-party beneficiary (only the rights-holder may sue). [0] http://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/not-yet-in-force/tpp-11/official-documents/Documents/ch1-initial-provisions-and-general-definitions.pdf http://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/not-yet-in-force/tpp-11/... (Edit: Clarified lack of breach of contract claim.)