Tweet
Paul Craig Roberts has a piece on the TPP in Counterpunch. Seems like an end run. Anyone following this story?
“The US Trade Representative has given some 600 corporate lobbyists and representatives of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce regular online access to the TPP negotiating drafts as "cleared advisors," but continues to block and restrict access to members of Congress and the public.”
From wikipedia…
There has been criticism[30][31][32] of some provisions relating to the enforcement of patents and copyrights alleged to be present in leaked copies of the US proposal for the agreement:
The USTR proposal for the TPP intellectual property chapter would:
1. Include a number of features that would lock-in as a global norm many controversial features of U.S. law, such as endless copyright terms.
2. Create new global norms that are contrary to U.S. legal traditions, such as those proposed to damages for infringement, the enforcement of patents against surgeons and other medical professional, rules concerning patents on biologic medicines etc.
3. Undermine many proposed reforms of the patent and copyright system, such as, for example, proposed legislation to increase access to orphaned copyrighted works by limiting damages for infringement, or statutory exclusions of "non-industrial" patents such as those issued for business methods.
4. Eliminate any possibility of parallel trade in copyrighted books, journals, sheet music, sound recordings, computer programs, and audio and visual works.
5. Require criminal enforcement for technological measures beyond WIPO Internet Treaties, even when there is not copyright infringement, impose a legal regime of ISP liability beyond the DMCA standards.
6. Require legal incentives for service providers to cooperate with copyright owners in deterring the unauthorized storage and transmission of copyrighted materials.
7. Require identifying internet users for any ISP, going beyond U.S. case law, includes the text of the controversial US/KOREA side letter on shutting down web sites.
8. Require adopting compensation for infringement without actual damages.
9. Require criminal punishment of commercial and non-commercial copyright and trademark infringement.
The proposals have been accused of being excessively restrictive, providing intellectual property restraints beyond those in the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement and Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA).[33]
A number of U.S. Congresspeople,[34] including Senator Bernard Sanders[35] and Representatives Henry Waxman, Sander M. Levin, John Conyers, Jim McDermott,[36] John Lewis, Pete Stark, Charles B. Rangel, Earl Blumenauer, and Lloyd Doggett,[37] have expressed concerns about the effect the TPP requirements would have on access to medicine. In particular, they are concerned that the TPP focuses on protecting intellectual property to the detriment of efforts to provide access to affordable medicine in the developing world, particularly Vietnam, going against the foreign policy goals of the Obama administration and previous administrations.[34] Additionally, they worry that the TPP would not be flexible enough to accommodate existing non-discriminatory drug reimbursement programs and the diverse health systems of member countries
“The US Trade Representative has given some 600 corporate lobbyists and representatives of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce regular online access to the TPP negotiating drafts as "cleared advisors," but continues to block and restrict access to members of Congress and the public.”
From wikipedia…
There has been criticism[30][31][32] of some provisions relating to the enforcement of patents and copyrights alleged to be present in leaked copies of the US proposal for the agreement:
The USTR proposal for the TPP intellectual property chapter would:
1. Include a number of features that would lock-in as a global norm many controversial features of U.S. law, such as endless copyright terms.
2. Create new global norms that are contrary to U.S. legal traditions, such as those proposed to damages for infringement, the enforcement of patents against surgeons and other medical professional, rules concerning patents on biologic medicines etc.
3. Undermine many proposed reforms of the patent and copyright system, such as, for example, proposed legislation to increase access to orphaned copyrighted works by limiting damages for infringement, or statutory exclusions of "non-industrial" patents such as those issued for business methods.
4. Eliminate any possibility of parallel trade in copyrighted books, journals, sheet music, sound recordings, computer programs, and audio and visual works.
5. Require criminal enforcement for technological measures beyond WIPO Internet Treaties, even when there is not copyright infringement, impose a legal regime of ISP liability beyond the DMCA standards.
6. Require legal incentives for service providers to cooperate with copyright owners in deterring the unauthorized storage and transmission of copyrighted materials.
7. Require identifying internet users for any ISP, going beyond U.S. case law, includes the text of the controversial US/KOREA side letter on shutting down web sites.
8. Require adopting compensation for infringement without actual damages.
9. Require criminal punishment of commercial and non-commercial copyright and trademark infringement.
The proposals have been accused of being excessively restrictive, providing intellectual property restraints beyond those in the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement and Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA).[33]
A number of U.S. Congresspeople,[34] including Senator Bernard Sanders[35] and Representatives Henry Waxman, Sander M. Levin, John Conyers, Jim McDermott,[36] John Lewis, Pete Stark, Charles B. Rangel, Earl Blumenauer, and Lloyd Doggett,[37] have expressed concerns about the effect the TPP requirements would have on access to medicine. In particular, they are concerned that the TPP focuses on protecting intellectual property to the detriment of efforts to provide access to affordable medicine in the developing world, particularly Vietnam, going against the foreign policy goals of the Obama administration and previous administrations.[34] Additionally, they worry that the TPP would not be flexible enough to accommodate existing non-discriminatory drug reimbursement programs and the diverse health systems of member countries