I agree it doesn't do a great job explaining the issue. You can find a better summary in [1]: > The TPP and USMCA have a broadly worded “nondiscrimination” re

I agree it doesn't do a great job explaining the issue. You can find a better summary in [1]: > The TPP and USMCA have a broadly worded “nondiscrimination” requirement that could be interpreted as restricting member countries from enacting policy that, while neutral on its face, effectively has a greater impact on firms from a particular country. > This risk is not hypothetical. We’ve already seen Apple and Google wield this argument in the context of South Korea’s 2021 law targeting anticompetitive app store policies, on the grounds that it has a discriminatory effect because of its disparate impact on U.S. firms. So basically large tech firms are trying to use trade agreements that are supposed to equalize market access to instead argue that laws aimed at their behavior are illegal under the terms of the trade agreement. Also: > Expansive and absolute-secrecy guarantees for source code and algorithms are another key feature of the industry-backed USMCA/TPP approach. These provisions are justified as preventing the forced transfer of software trade secrets as a condition for market access (a concern animated primarily by Chinese actions in the past) > several organizations have pointed out that the USMCA definition of “algorithm” is broad enough to restrict the sharing of even mere descriptions of algorithms with regulators, a key part of algorithmic transparency proposals.. [1] https://ainowinstitute.org/publication/international-digital-trade-agreements https://ainowinstitute.org/publication/international-digital...