The Trans-Pacific Partnership

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The Trans-Pacific Partnership

Are you in favor of the TPP?
	Yes
	No
	N/A without more data

mila kunis: Jun 10, 2011

Our leaders have definitely demonstrated that they'd never ever put the interests of their donors and the people who give them super high paying private sector jobs after leaving office over the good of the public and the country as a whole.

I'm sure there's nothing to worry about in this highly secretive treaty.

# ¿ Oct 6, 2015 04:28

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 03:38

mila kunis: Jun 10, 2011

computer parts posted:

Oh look, one minor change and I have a 5 year old post.

An actively discussed and publically fought over bill isn't the same thing as a trade treaty where the signatories have gone to extreme lengths to keep public stakeholders out of the discussion.

Tpp = obamacare and thats why its good. This forum lol

# ¿ Oct 6, 2015 05:36

mila kunis: Jun 10, 2011

Fojar38 posted:

Which only seem to be terrible if you're Wikileaks and/or a news outlet that has a special relationship with Wikileaks ie. The Guardian.

That does seem terrible because they're two of the few organizations interested in investigating and exposing the terrible poo poo US and US-aligned governments are doing.

# ¿ Oct 10, 2015 03:01

mila kunis: Jun 10, 2011

EFF article slamming the TPP: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/10/final-leaked-tpp-text-all-we-feared

Some choice bits:

quote:

If you dig deeper, you'll notice that all of the provisions that recognize the rights of the public are non-binding, whereas almost everything that benefits rightsholders is binding. That paragraph on the public domain, for example, used to be much stronger in the first leaked draft, with specific obligations to identify, preserve and promote access to public domain material. All of that has now been lost in favor of a feeble, feel-good platitude that imposes no concrete obligations on the TPP parties whatsoever.

Another, and perhaps the most egregious example of this bias against users is the important provision on limitations and exceptions to copyright (QQ.G.17). In a pitifully ineffectual nod towards users, it suggests that parties �endeavor to achieve an appropriate balance in its copyright and related rights system,� but imposes no hard obligations for them to do so, nor even offers U.S.-style fair use as a template that they might follow. The fact that even big tech was ultimately unable to move the USTR on this issue speaks volumes about how utterly captured by Hollywood the agency is.

The bolded bit confirms something one of the initial drafters of the treaty said in this interview (http://thediplomat.com/2015/10/trans-pacific-partnership-prospects-and-challenges/):

quote:

I have felt a bit like the creator of Frankenstein�s monster. A decade ago, when I and other Asia hands developed the concept for the TPP, our goal was actually quite idealistic: The point of the enterprise was to promote labor standards, human rights, environmental projections, and prosperity in Asia without the use of force or coercion. It was also part of an American hedging strategy on China�s rise. Let�s also remember that the free flow of trade is a classically liberal idea. Over time, however, the lobbyists, lawyers, and corporate money corrupted this pure idea, turning it into something more questionable in its current form. Will the TPP become a good monster or bad one? I�m not sure, and I can understand why there is now opposition to the TPP these days, for example over the provisions that would restrict access to generic, affordable drugs.

quote:

Perhaps the biggest overall defeat for users is the extension of the copyright term to life plus 70 years (QQ.G.6), despite a broad consensus that this makes no economic sense, and simply amounts to a transfer of wealth from users to large, rights-holding corporations.

quote:

Ban on Circumventing Digital Rights Management (DRM)

The provisions in QQ.G.10 that prohibit the circumvention of DRM or the supply of devices for doing so are little changed from earlier drafts, other than that the opposition of some countries to the most onerous provisions of those drafts was evidently to no avail. For example, Chile earlier opposed the provision that the offense of DRM circumvention is to be �independent of any infringement that might occur under the Party's law on copyright and related rights,� yet the final text includes just that requirement.

The odd effect of this is that someone tinkering with a file or device that contains a copyrighted work can be made liable (criminally so, if wilfullness and a commercial motive can be shown), for doing so even when no copyright infringement is committed. Although the TPP text does allow countries to pass exceptions that allow DRM circumvention for non-infringing uses, such exceptions are not mandatory, as they ought to be.

quote:

On damages, the text (QQ.H.4) remains as bad as ever: rightsholders can submit �any legitimate measure of value� to a judicial authority for determination of damages, including the suggested retail price of infringing goods. Additionally, judges must have the power to order pre-established damages (at the rightsholder's election), or additional damages, each of which may go beyond compensating the rightsholder for its actual loss, and thereby create a disproportionate chilling effect for users and innovators.

quote:

Trade Secrets

The severity of the earlier language on trade secrets protection has not been abated in the final text. It continues to criminalize those who gain �unauthorized, willful access to a trade secret held in a computer system,� without any mandatory exception for cases where the information is accessed or disclosed in the public interest, such as by investigative journalists or whistleblowers.

DMCA for everyone except Chile

quote:

ISP Liability

The provisions on ISP liability (Appendix Section I), as we previously found in the last leaked text, are not quite as permissive as we hoped. It will still require most countries to adopt a version of the flawed U.S. DMCA notice-and-takedown system, albeit with a few safeguards such as penalties for those who issue wrongful takedown notices, and allowing (but not requiring) a Japanese-style system of verification of takedown notices by an independent body of ISPs and rightsholders.

mila kunis fucked around with this message at 04:16 on Oct 10, 2015

# ¿ Oct 10, 2015 04:11

mila kunis: Jun 10, 2011

What's the current status of TPP ratification in the various signatory countries?

# ¿ Feb 17, 2016 19:48

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The Trans-Pacific Partnership