4 ms·

Latest TPP Leak Shows US Still Pushing Terrible DRM and Copyright Term Proposals

105 points by sinak 12y ago

sdreyesghn 12y ago
Criminal treatment of trade Secrets without "public interest" exception. great, Aaron Swartz is gonna happen again. :(
Twirrim 12y ago
It's not entirely clear to me, what do partner countries actually gain from TPP? There has to be at least some kind of carrot on the stick.
- marcosdumay 12y ago
  It's not the countries that participate in negotiations. The right question is: What do partner countries' politicians gain from TPP?
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- nisa 12y ago
  It's not about countries. It's about corporations. The talks between Europe and the US (TTIP) are largely to remove barriers in legislation for corporations. E.g. new medication and chemicals can be sold in Europe/US if either passing FDA review or EU review. This will save corporations millions of dollars. Wikipedia has a quite good overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_Trade_and_Investment_Partnership https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_Trade_and_Invest... As a citizen of a country I'll doubt you'll have any benefits from it. People in Europe are worried (I think not without reason) that it will worsen safety regulations for consumers.
  - acgourley 12y ago
    If a corporation saves money bringing a drug to market you will save money buying that drug from them.
    - cheepin 12y ago
      Or maybe they will just have higher margins than they already have?
    - thirsteh 12y ago
      [citation needed]
    - nisa 12y ago
      I doubt that will happen and think it's naive. If the corporation can still take the higher price (because of patents) it will take the price and make more profit. Coincidently patents and intellectual property are also a big discussion point that is discussed there. Intellectual property rights will be tightened and likely generic medication will be more difficult to produce.
      - warble 12y ago
        You're right if that's the only variable. Corporations love to be the only player, and tweak government to make sure they are. Normally without interference, they rarely have a monopoly for long.
      - SamReidHughes 12y ago
        It means more drugs can be profitably be taken to market. This increases competition and lowers prices when multiple drugs can treat the same condition.
        timonovici 12y ago
        How does that increases competition? And you turn around the idea at at the end: you say it would be more profitable to make certain drugs, and then you say it would lower the prices , which will make (obviously) less profitable to make/sell those same drugs. So which one is it?
- vilhelm_s 12y ago
  Well, it's a free-trade agreement. Mutually getting rid of tariffs increases trade, which makes all the participating countries better off. In addition, it tries to remove non-tariff barriers to trade, which involves harmonizing legislation. E.g. if you want to sell US beef in Japan and Japanese beef in the US, then the health regulations about how cows should be raised should be the same in both countries. The copyright stuff comes under the heading of harmonizing intellectual property law, although somehow it seems to end up as pro-copyright-holder as possible...
  - SupremumLimit 12y ago
    Here is a counterpoint about everybody being "better off": http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/free-trade-explained-in-an-excellent-comic/ http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/free-trade-explained-... It hasn't happened historically, and it isn't likely to happen now, but we will get a bunch of draconian legislation nobody wants through TPP.
  - bonaldi 12y ago
    > then the health regulations about how cows should be raised should be the same in both countries. As you point out in the copyright example, this is an immediate race to the regulations that are best for businesses. So in this plan, Japanese consumers would be subject to health regulations constructed on behalf of corporations by a broken and regulatory-captured US political system. Ultimately, the health regulations of their food would be that imposed by US companies, regardless of the political actions of the Japanese electorate. This is not harmony, it is discord.
    - captaindiego 12y ago
      Yes exactly. And to take your specific example, Japanese health regulations with regard to meat are much more strict than US regulation. I've eaten things raw in Japan (pork, beef, fish, etc.) that I would never consider doing in the US. Choosing the lowest common denominator for the sake of improved trade will cause problems and get people killed due to culture differences. And as you say, totally ignores the wishes of the local electorate.
ccvannorman 12y ago
The issue is NOT whether or not this benefits corporations, consumers, IP, or other pieces. The issue is that it's being done in secret and there is a big push for a "Fast Track" for the US signers, so that Congress will not be allowed to view it or vote on it.
- ccvannorman 12y ago
  By the way, make your voice heard here: http://www.house.gov/htbin/findrep http://www.house.gov/htbin/findrep https://act.eff.org/action/speak-out-against-the-trans-pacific-partnership-agreement https://act.eff.org/action/speak-out-against-the-trans-pacif... http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_c...

105 points by sinak 12y ago

Criminal treatment of trade Secrets without "public interest" exception. great, Aaron Swartz is gonna happen again. :(

It's not entirely clear to me, what do partner countries actually gain from TPP? There has to be at least some kind of carrot on the stick.

marcosdumay 12y ago
It's not the countries that participate in negotiations. The right question is: What do partner countries' politicians gain from TPP?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
nisa 12y ago
It's not about countries. It's about corporations. The talks between Europe and the US (TTIP) are largely to remove barriers in legislation for corporations. E.g. new medication and chemicals can be sold in Europe/US if either passing FDA review or EU review. This will save corporations millions of dollars. Wikipedia has a quite good overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_Trade_and_Investment_Partnership https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_Trade_and_Invest... As a citizen of a country I'll doubt you'll have any benefits from it. People in Europe are worried (I think not without reason) that it will worsen safety regulations for consumers.
- acgourley 12y ago
  If a corporation saves money bringing a drug to market you will save money buying that drug from them.
  - cheepin 12y ago
    Or maybe they will just have higher margins than they already have?
  - thirsteh 12y ago
    [citation needed]
  - nisa 12y ago
    I doubt that will happen and think it's naive. If the corporation can still take the higher price (because of patents) it will take the price and make more profit. Coincidently patents and intellectual property are also a big discussion point that is discussed there. Intellectual property rights will be tightened and likely generic medication will be more difficult to produce.
    - warble 12y ago
      You're right if that's the only variable. Corporations love to be the only player, and tweak government to make sure they are. Normally without interference, they rarely have a monopoly for long.
    - SamReidHughes 12y ago
      It means more drugs can be profitably be taken to market. This increases competition and lowers prices when multiple drugs can treat the same condition.
      - timonovici 12y ago
        How does that increases competition? And you turn around the idea at at the end: you say it would be more profitable to make certain drugs, and then you say it would lower the prices , which will make (obviously) less profitable to make/sell those same drugs. So which one is it?
vilhelm_s 12y ago
Well, it's a free-trade agreement. Mutually getting rid of tariffs increases trade, which makes all the participating countries better off. In addition, it tries to remove non-tariff barriers to trade, which involves harmonizing legislation. E.g. if you want to sell US beef in Japan and Japanese beef in the US, then the health regulations about how cows should be raised should be the same in both countries. The copyright stuff comes under the heading of harmonizing intellectual property law, although somehow it seems to end up as pro-copyright-holder as possible...
- SupremumLimit 12y ago
  Here is a counterpoint about everybody being "better off": http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/free-trade-explained-in-an-excellent-comic/ http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/free-trade-explained-... It hasn't happened historically, and it isn't likely to happen now, but we will get a bunch of draconian legislation nobody wants through TPP.
- bonaldi 12y ago
  > then the health regulations about how cows should be raised should be the same in both countries. As you point out in the copyright example, this is an immediate race to the regulations that are best for businesses. So in this plan, Japanese consumers would be subject to health regulations constructed on behalf of corporations by a broken and regulatory-captured US political system. Ultimately, the health regulations of their food would be that imposed by US companies, regardless of the political actions of the Japanese electorate. This is not harmony, it is discord.
  - captaindiego 12y ago
    Yes exactly. And to take your specific example, Japanese health regulations with regard to meat are much more strict than US regulation. I've eaten things raw in Japan (pork, beef, fish, etc.) that I would never consider doing in the US. Choosing the lowest common denominator for the sake of improved trade will cause problems and get people killed due to culture differences. And as you say, totally ignores the wishes of the local electorate.

ccvannorman 12y ago

The issue is NOT whether or not this benefits corporations, consumers, IP, or other pieces. The issue is that it's being done in secret and there is a big push for a "Fast Track" for the US signers, so that Congress will not be allowed to view it or vote on it.

ccvannorman 12y ago
By the way, make your voice heard here: http://www.house.gov/htbin/findrep http://www.house.gov/htbin/findrep https://act.eff.org/action/speak-out-against-the-trans-pacific-partnership-agreement https://act.eff.org/action/speak-out-against-the-trans-pacif... http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_c...