
Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement - shill
http://wikileaks.org/tpp/
======
AlexanderDhoore
I really, really hope the culture of leaking information becomes so strong
that governments will become incapable of keeping anything a secret. That
would give me some hope for the future.

Anyone that leaks information is a fucking hero.

Edit: Stop attacking me personally. I'm talking about the government's privacy
here, not mine (nor anyone else's). I actually think my privacy will improve
if this becomes a reality.

~~~
mcphilip
It's not quite so simple as considering all leaks of government information
heroic. For instance, would it have been heroic to leak news that U.S. code
breakers had cracked enemy codes in WW2?

~~~
jellicle
Even better, what if the government was closing in a child pornographer with
chemical weapons and a nuke, and the leak allowed him to rape more children
while nuking a nunnery and poisoning an orphanage?

~~~
stelonix
Is this some kind of humor? The odds of such a thing happening are close to
nil.

~~~
swombat
It could happen. Even worse, it could happen on the anniversary of 9/11.

(disclaimer: that's a joke)

------
pvnick
This revelation proves Wikileaks is stil alive and relevant. I hope they see a
renewed jolt of donations and interest. This is the organization of heroes
that helped get Snowden to safety.

Also, I'm getting sick and tired of our "leaders" attempting to legislate free
speech and intellectual property in secret through anti-democratic means. It's
disgusting.

Edit: second paragraph

~~~
ihsw
The problem with these kinds of things is that the document might be
watermarked to obviate who leaked it. It follows the same vein as "spying on
allies" which -- until recently -- was tin-foil-hat conspiracy territory.

The political fallout will not be minimal, and it will not be kept secret.

~~~
twoodfin
_It follows the same vein as "spying on allies" which -- until recently -- was
tin-foil-hat conspiracy territory._

Not at all. Nations have been spying on their allies since there have been
nations and spies. Anyone "shocked" by those revelations is either putting on
a show or rather naive.

~~~
ihsw
You are correct, perhaps _spying_ on allies was a poor choice of word.

 _Evaluating_ allies would probably fit better.

~~~
mpyne
I doubt it. We had plans about how to invade Canada prior to WWII.

People freaked out when they first heard about that, but it had nothing to do
with _Canada_ in particular, and everything to do with the Department of War
having plans for effectively _everybody_ that had any major military
capability that could theoretically harm the U.S., just like Batman has plans
to defeat every other superhero in the Justice League (just in case...).

Until the days of unilateral world government (when nations won't have to act
in their own best interest), allies _should_ evaluate each other, at least at
a high level. That doesn't have to mean sinister things though. Just ask
Batman.

------
nikcub
The content isn't interesting[1] because bilateral free trade agreements are
public[0], and having the USA force partners into accepting patent
enforcement, copyright laws like the DMCA etc. are well known

What is a little interesting is the negotiations and diplomacy at work. You
can see how each country is trying to further its own position and interest.
Looking at this version of the document, it is impossible to see how a
compromise will be reached since there are so many areas that are at complete
opposite viewpoints - but you know that in a few weeks time an agreement will
be announced as one side or another gives way (guess which!), and the public
are nonethewiser.

Some are really good at watering things down, eg.

> The Parties shall endeavour to [US/SG propose: cooperate] [US oppose:
> establish a framework for cooperation] among their respective patent offices
> to facilitate

You can see already that they don't intend to cooperate. Establishing a
framework? what the hell does that even mean ..

You can now see that Australia, Singapore and Mexico are on Team USA when it
comes to copyright terms (Australia opposed it during the FTA negotiations),
everybody else opposes, but they will eventually have to come around on this:

> [NZ/BN/MY/VN/CA/JP propose; US/AU/SG/MX oppose: The term of protection of a
> work, performance or phonogram shall be determined according to each Party's
> domestic law and the international agreements to which each Party is a
> party.]

[0] Here is USA - Australia: [http://www.ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-
agreements/a...](http://www.ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-
agreements/australian-fta/final-text)

Here is NAFTA - [https://www.nafta-sec-
alena.org/Default.aspx?tabid=97&langua...](https://www.nafta-sec-
alena.org/Default.aspx?tabid=97&language=en-US)

[1] It might not be interesting because we have seen a lot of this in
completed deals previously, but it is very important. The USA enforces its
business interest laws such as patent and copyright terms onto recipients of
"free trade" agreements, in exchange for getting access to the non-protected
part of their domestic market. This is why US laws are so important to the
rest of the world, because we end up having to adopt them (this is what modern
imperialism looks like).

~~~
rtpg
> [NZ/BN/MY/VN/CA/JP propose; US/AU/SG/MX oppose: The term of protection of a
> work, performance or phonogram shall be determined according to each Party's
> domestic law and the international agreements to which each Party is a
> party.]

On a sidenote, wouldn't it be great if we could at least get unified copyright
law? From the draft it seems like the US is pushing more towards that

~~~
wonderyak
Not when its coupled with things like Corporations being able to sue
governments for 'loss of potential future profits' for policy decisions. That
is incredibly dangerous.

------
husein10
I think it's absurd that these negotiations were shrouded in such secrecy in
the first place. These rules, if implemented, will have a massive impact on
how the global economy will work. Yet, the public, who will end up living
under the yoke of these rules, not only has very little direct input into the
process but didn't (until today) even have a clear view of what rules were
being considered.

I don't see how one can have a modern democracy if rules are made in what was
(before the leak) a black box.

Hopefully this will lead to more transparency for these types of negotiations
in the future. Leaking/spreading this leaked information should help show
those with political power that this type of closed door process is not going
to be palatable to a connected and informed public.

These types of international agreements tend to stick around for a long time
once they are implemented. So, expending energy on the front end to get a more
balanced agreement that works for everyone impacted, not just those with an
invitation to sit at the table, will save a lot of trouble later on.

------
ksrm
>[US propose; AU/NZ/VN/BN/CL/PE/MY/SG/CA/MX oppose: shall make patents
available for inventions for the following] [NZ/CL/PE/MY/AU/VN/BN/SG/CA/MX
propose: may also exclude from patentability]:

Made me laugh. You're on your own there, USA.

~~~
shmerl
I wonder why this "USA" there is supposed to represent the whole USA. Who
decides? USTR isn't even democratically elected, yet it got some weird
authority to draft far reaching regulations which affect everyone.

------
shmerl
Note how some propose more proper approach of not applying anticircumvention
restrictions on non infringing usage, while others oppose it. It's good that
Wikileaks now published this with demonstrating opinions of the participants
as well.

 _> [CA oppose: noninfringing uses [SG oppose: of a work, performance, or
phonogram] in a particular class of works, [SG oppose: performances, or
phonograms] when an actual or likely adverse impact on those noninfringing
uses [CL propose: or exceptions or limitations to copyright or related rights
with respect to users] is [PE oppose: credibly demonstrated] [PE propose:
found] [CL propose: demonstrated or recognized] in a legislative or
administrative review or proceeding [SG oppose: by substantial evidence];
provided that [AU/PE oppose: any limitation or exception adopted in reliance
upon this clause shall have effect for a renewable period of not more than
three [SG propose: four] years] [AU/PE propose: any such review or proceeding
is conducted at least once every four years] from the date of conclusion of
such review or proceeding.]_

The bottom line, they want to create some kind of DMCA 1201 clone as was
expected. Now hopefully there will be more chances to stop this beast.

------
anigbrowl
The title is slightly misleading. They've only released the IP chapter -
presumably because they figure the content will annoy hacktivists. I
personally want to know about the whole thing, since agricultural tariffs,
labor conditions, visa rules and the like seem to me at least as important as
IP matters.

------
NamTaf
The AU government has previously stayed neutral/supportive of our high court
ruling that ISPs are included under 'safe harbour' clauses and that they carry
common-carrier status, in that they provide a service but do not have to
police what that service is used for. In specific, they are not the police
when it comes to online piracy and do not have to block websites, disconnect
users, etc. iiNet won a hard-fought legal battle to get that ruling and it was
used as precedence to basically stop the US IP lobby groups exerting pressure
on AU businesses to conform to something our laws didn't even support.

Now it's become apparent from this that the government wants to throw all of
that under the bus and is supporting transcontinental IP laws that are almost
entirely in US interests and serve to screw over our citizens and go against
high court rulings. All to be a lap dog to the US and appease their
taskmasters.

I have nothing but hatred for our government for conducting themselves in such
a miserable, self-serving sense.

------
sdoering
Older version on HN:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6725046](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6725046)

~~~
k3n
Oddly, given the same exact title, this newer one is around 2x as successful
(comments & votes) as the older one.

~~~
sdoering
Well I was watching it (I made the mistake, of posting the link with a anchor
in it to the start of the document).

It gained some fast early upvotes, without having comments, it reached #2 on
the frontpage, gained its first comment, while my submission had about 4 - 5
comments and was trailing some 5 - 6 places behind on the frontpage.

But ok, it gained traction faster, so it is quite ok with me. And, for me the
information counts, not who submitted it.

So please, everybody: put your comments on the winning thread, as there will
be much more interaction going on there.

------
mrspeaker
It's fun seeing how important lil' old words can be!

    
    
        Each party shall provide [VN: oppose adequate and effective]
        [VN propose: appropriate] remedies against the registration trafficking

------
JackFr
Am I the only one who is bothered by the fact that wikileaks isn't actually a
wiki?

~~~
_mulder_
Or the fact that they keep half of their leaked material secret from us.

~~~
mpyne
I'm _still_ waiting for the WikiLeaks major leaks about Moscow that we were
all promised. At least, promised until Assange got his TV show on Russia
Today.

~~~
tedunangst
I was personally more interested in the Bank of America files, but I think
they're gone now too.

~~~
mpyne
I had heard DDB had erased those before he left. Never heard _why_ though,
unless it was supposed to be one last 'fuck you' to Assange before he got
booted out.

------
sker
Wikileaks again messing up the world's economy and putting lives at risk.
Won't somebody shut them down?

On a more serious note, wasn't there a reward if they got their hands on this
leak?

Also, as a mexican, it sucks that we're part of this treaty. So far Mexico has
been a lawless wild west with regards to copyright enforcement.

------
danbruc
What the hell is going on? Secret negotiations about trading policies? What is
the legitimation for doing this in secrecy? When did the people lose their
right to know what their government is doing?

------
aferreira
I'm actually more interested in the US-EU negotiations, I wonder how long that
one's going to take :)

------
trendoid
good overview and relevant links at reddit :
[http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1qj6xd/wikileaks_...](http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1qj6xd/wikileaks_releases_the_secret_negotiated_draft/cddbt55)

[http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1qj6xd/wikileaks_...](http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1qj6xd/wikileaks_releases_the_secret_negotiated_draft/cddc5sq)

Aaron Swartz turned in his grave.

------
stevengg
Any good overviews of this leak yet?

~~~
TomGullen
There's a lot of information there... probably take a few days.

~~~
simgidacav
I hope someone will post tl;dr indeed. This is like reading licenses. No
wonder there's people who just blindly accepts everything without reading. I
love when there's a blog post and they put tl;dr on head.

On the other hand, by sticking to the tl;dr you accept the version the non-
lazy guy will give you.

~~~
ISL
Almost anywhere you live, it's your government. If you want your government to
make clear and simple rules, vote in people you think might make that happen.

------
mtgx
Here's an explanation for some of the more dangerous stuff in it:

[http://keionline.org/node/1825](http://keionline.org/node/1825)

By the way, they intend to maintain unlocking phones or other devices illegal
with TPP. It's just that now it will extend to a lot more countries.

------
lettergram
Seems to me this may have just been given to Wikileaks directly from the
government. The language seems a bit simpler than most trade agreements I have
read (though to be fair I have only read 3 or 4).

------
contingencies
The negotiation of this has been known for some time. I submitted an objection
to the Wikimedia ethics board when I found out that at the same time this
agreement was under negotiation, Wikimedia Indonesia was hosting an event in
the US embassy sponsored 'American Cultural Center' (or similar) in Jakarta.

As a long term Wikimedia contributor, I expected at least a response. I
received nothing.

------
gesman
Would be great if someone to summarize this bloat of gibberish in human
readable bullet-points format...

------
mankypro
The President...shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the
Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present
concur... Constitution of the United States, Art. II, Sec. 2

~~~
mpyne
That's an accurate quote and all. Of course no treaty has been signed yet so
I'm not sure what your point is.

------
shmerl
Detailed analysis:
[http://www.keionline.org/node/1825](http://www.keionline.org/node/1825)

------
s369610
interesting search: "[US propose".

------
shmerl
At last.

