Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)
Knowledge Ecology International has a timeline with useful links including leaked draft text. To the best of my knowledge, there still hasn't been any official release of draft text -- the whole agreement is shrouded in secrecy.
Michael Geist writes about a report from the Productivity Commission's report on trade agreements.
The Commission considers that Australia should not generally seek to include IP provisions in further BRTAs, and that any IP provisions that are proposed for a particular agreement should only be included after an economic assessment of the impacts, including on consumers, in Australia and partner countries. To safeguard against the prospect that acceptance of ‘negative sum game’ proposals, the assessment would need to find that implementing the provisions would likely generate overall net benefits for members of the agreement.{: list-style-type="no-bullet"}
[…]{: list-style-type="no-bullet"}
As noted above, the AUSFTA changes to copyright imposed net costs on Australia, and extending these changes to other countries would be expected to impose net costs on them, principally to the benefit of third parties.{: list-style-type="no-bullet"}
- Productivity Commission's report on trade agreements
Ben Finney's analysis
At the January 2011 meeting, I talked about the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Here is the information for the group.
Short version
It's pretty bad. We need to lobby government to stop this. There's hope that other nations seem partially aware of the problems.
Longer version
The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a plan currently being effected by the USA's Office of the United States Trade Representative.
[…] a regional, Asia-Pacific trade agreement, known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement with the objective of shaping a high-standard, broad-based regional pact.{: list-style-type="no-bullet"}
[…]{: list-style-type="no-bullet"}
The first round of negotiations took place from March 15-19 in Melbourne, Australia. The second round of negotiations took place from June 14-18 in San Francisco, California.{: list-style-type="no-bullet"}
USTR is currently conducting an unprecedented fifty-state domestic outreach strategy for TPP. Read about our outreach events and updates on our TPP outreach page.{: list-style-type="no-bullet"}
Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) has been discussing the leaked internals of this secretive international pact.
Industry is asking the US government for a number of TRIPS plus, WCT plus and ACTA plus provisions:{: list-style-type="no-bullet"}
To seek the highest possible IP protection from TPP negotiating parties.
To built upon existing FTAs and use the US/Korea Free Trade Agreement as a baseline. Although the letter does not specifically mention the May 10, 2007 compromise that included important public health flexibilities in the US/Peru FTA, US
- Industry is clearly demanding the US government to reject the compromise as the basis for negotiations.{: list-style-type="no-bullet"}
To go beyond the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). For instance, it states that the TPP should outlaw camcording in theaters, despite the fact that the ACTA made it optional for countries to have criminal penalties for camcording.
Public Knowledge reminds us that this is “ACTA the sequel”.
While a text may not have been drafted yet, content owners are doing their bit to ensure that the TPP would contain IP provisions that aggressively protect their interests at the expense of the rest of ours. A paper prepared by the U.S. Business Coalition for TPP (reported to be drafted by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufactures of America, the US Chamber of Commerce, and the Motion Picture Association of America) and leaked on the Internet, indicates that rights holders are urging the USTR to include in TPP IP protections more extensive than those present in ACTA. Specifically, the paper suggests that the following issues be addressed in TPP:{: list-style-type="no-bullet"}
Temporary copies: [cached or intermediate copies within a computer]
Circumvention of digital locks: [harsher DRM enforcement]
Copyright terms: The paper urges the TPP to provide for longer copyright terms.
Statutory damages: [ignore putative damages suffered by plaintiff; instead, calculate damages as multiple of nominal fee for use]
The coalition suggests many other worrisome provisions such as requiring ISPs to act as copyright cops and treating individual infringers with the same severity as large-scale pirates.{: list-style-type="no-bullet"}
http://www.publicknowledge.org/blog/acta-sequel-transpacific-partnership-agreemen
The above article at Public Knowledge also discusses a leaked document within the NZ government, which shows a good awareness of the issues raised by the TPP in light of similar regimes and their effects on economies and freedom.
Recommended actions
- Get in touch with DFAT and be put on the stakeholder mailing list (tpp@dfat.gov.au). Write, expressing your concern, stating your interest, and asking for a consultation in Melbourne.
Points from Chris Samuel
First, on the TTPA front here's Kim Weatherall's take onthe now leaked US IP proposals and their affect on Australia should they go through:
Includes patent evergreening (no requirement for an extension to involve an improvement) and copyright term extensions to 95 years from publication.
Secondly, the "new" anti-piracy report that the Australian govt, newspapers and IP folks have been touting, but nobody had seen (not even the journalists who were writing about it) turns out to just be a rehash of the fatally flawed "Building a Digital Economy" report that went around in the EU recently.
http://torrentfreak.com/secret-australian-piracy-report-revealed-and-debunked-110316/
Amongst the howlers is the attestation that a doubling in bandwidth means a doubling in piracy...{: page-href="wiki:///TPP"}