
TPP Leak Confirms the Worst: US Still Trying to Trade Away Internet Freedoms - jim-greer
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/tpp-leak-confirms-worst-us-negotiators-still-trying-trade-away-internet-freedoms
======
sounds
Like I mentioned in the other thread on the TPP Leak, the TPP could
immediately have the following effects, if it is enacted into law by the
participating nations. I picked the ones you would most likely notice:

1\. 3-strikes laws in all participating nations. Note that the US and France
have already effectively abandoned their attempted three-strikes laws [1] [2]
[3], but would likely reinstate them.

2\. dvdcss and UEFI Secure Boot circumvention (including shim loaders) will
become illegal in enough countries to have chilling effects on open source
innovation

3\. significant extension of patents for medication, increasing healthcare
costs

4\. additional regulation of internet backbone providers – to perform deep
packet inspection for government investigation of copyright infringement. This
would use taxpayer dollars to enforce dying copyright regimes. I assume
governments would be delighted to have justification to tap the internet at
backbones.

5\. End of works entering the public domain. Copyright term extensions are
likely just as the US has done, so the public domain may not see new additions
for a long time.

I want to mention the significant curtailing of fair use in Europe, which
would train young artists not to remix or reuse others' ideas. However, it
might take up to 5 years to feel the effects.

[1] [http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/07/france-defangs-
it...](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/07/france-defangs-its-anti-
piracy-law-removes-disconnection-penalty/) (I'm citing Ars here mainly because
they follow copyright law pretty closely. Please use google for other
sources.)

[2] [http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/02/heres-what-an-
act...](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/02/heres-what-an-actual-six-
strikes-copyright-alert-looks-like/)

[3] [http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/07/major-isps-
agree-...](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/07/major-isps-agree-to-six-
strikes-copyright-enforcement-plan/)

~~~
Svip
I have to ask; are there fair use laws in Europe? I was always under the
impression that was a US law.

~~~
chalst
Yes, more or less, but they are generally not as generous as the US.

E.g., the UK equivalent of fair use, "fair dealing", is limited to a
definitive list of circumscribed purposes of the unauthorised use of copyright
material, e.g., in writing a review. By contrast, US law has a non-exclusive
set of tests to check if an unauthorised use is fair use, of which purpose is
just one factor to be weighed in the balance.

I gather that Germany does not have any fair use law [1], but in practice a
regime similar to the UK's has been established through several precedents in
the German courts. France seems to be in a similar situation, with a more
generous court interpretation of fair use [2].

Wikipedia tells me that Israel has a fair use law similar to the US; cf. [3].

[1]:
[http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/students/groups/is/files/2013/08/8-...](http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/students/groups/is/files/2013/08/8-Potzlberger.pdf)
\- note that vog's comment below seems to refute this source

[2]: [https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2011/01/who-said-
france-d...](https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2011/01/who-said-france-does-
not-have-fair-use)

[3]:
[https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2008/01/israel%E2%80%99s-...](https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2008/01/israel%E2%80%99s-fair-
use)

~~~
vog
While Germany may not have an exact equivalent of "fair" use, it does have
something similar, in the law. It is named "Schranken des Urheberrechts"
(limitation of copyright law), which you can find in §§ 44a to 63a (e.g. [1]
and [2]). Part of it is the famous (at least in Germany) "Privatkopie"
(private copy) which allows for copying material for private use. [3]

[1]
[http://dejure.org/gesetze/UrhG/44a.html](http://dejure.org/gesetze/UrhG/44a.html)

[2]
[http://dejure.org/gesetze/UrhG/63a.html](http://dejure.org/gesetze/UrhG/63a.html)

[3] However, you are not alloweed to break an effective copy protection on
that way ... which is kind of contradictory, becase if lots of people manage
to create those copies privately, that "copy protection" mechanism wasn't
really "effective", was it?

~~~
TomaszZielinski
In English (not sure about the quality of the translation and if it contains
the latest amendments to the law):

[http://www.gesetze-im-
internet.de/englisch_urhg/englisch_urh...](http://www.gesetze-im-
internet.de/englisch_urhg/englisch_urhg.html#p0246)

------
duncan_bayne
Maybe it's time to kill Copyright for good (in both possible meanings of
good):

[http://praxeology.net/anticopyright.htm](http://praxeology.net/anticopyright.htm)

 _Edited_ : and by "maybe it's" I mean "It's about damn time".

 _Edited again_ : this quote from Jefferson is highlighted on that Anti
Copyright Resources page, and nicely captures the spirit of why we might
choose to kill Copyright:

... He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without
lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without
darkening me.

That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the
moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems
to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made
them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in
any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical
being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation.

Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property.

~~~
Joeri
You are arguing against patents, not copyright. Copyright is not the
protection of invention, it is the protection of expression.

~~~
001sky
This is pedantic; the idea of a 'creation' easily spans both cases.

------
DigitalSea
Was anyone honestly expecting anything good to come from TPP? We've known
since the first draft leak back in 2011 leaked that the whole purpose of TPP
was not to benefit anyone except copyright lobbyists and pharmaceutical
companies. Why else do you think these talks are being secretly held?

If the TPP is approved in all participating countries, it has the potential to
really wreak havoc. What we are seeing here whether or not you understand it
that well is bad news for open source, bad news for anyone that uses the
Internet and bad news for countries that rely on cheaper generic drugs to
treat illnesses.

What a sad world we live in when lobbyists and rogue politicians are
conspiring to destroy the world. And while it could be worse, if TPP passes
this is only the beginning of what would be a very destructive agreement.

------
r0h1n
It gives me hope that large and significant countries like India and China are
not (yet) part of the TPP, and thus this isn't applicable to the entire world.

I'm sure the US realizes this, which is why there's been some talk to bring in
India, South Korea, Thailand and even China (I say "even" because China
apparently feels that the TPP is an "anti-China club") into the TPP fold.

>> Bring India into the TPP [Politico],
[http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/bring-india-into-
the-t...](http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/bring-india-into-the-
tpp-95049.html)

Given India's long-standing objections towards strict copyright and patent
laws, and as an Indian, I hope we stay clear of the TPP.

~~~
joeshevland
As an Australian (US by birth unfort, I actually hate my country of birth at
this stage because of their governance), I'm actually looking to China and
non-partisan countries to fix this mess. The solution isn't going to come from
a country so entrenched in corruption.

~~~
pjc50
Don't think that China isn't partisan; they're _Chinese_ partisans supporting
Chinese interests and companies instead. They don't have the same level of
global meddling capability as the US - yet.

------
jackhammons
When did governments go from trying to act in the best interests of their
citizens so as to make their lives better and safer to restricting individual
freedoms so as to create bigger profits for private companies?

~~~
olefoo
Thus has it ever been. The history of government is the history of privilege
and it's protection. That the Enlightenment of the 18th Century brought forth
modern notions of representative democracy was in large part a reaction to the
failure and catastrophic overthrow of the feudal order that had existed prior
to that time. The American and the French revolutions made it clear that some
form of safety valve that allowed class conflict to be mediated and
ameliorated was better than the alternatives as far as the interests of the
upper classes.

~~~
dangero
Can you recommend any good books on this topic? You just blew my mind.

~~~
vezzy-fnord
Your mind was blown from the idea that a government does not necessarily exist
to serve the interest of its people, or the little historical blurb?

In any case, the heavily ingrained belief of government benevolence in
contemporary Western societies, is horrific. But not surprising, with minds
like Edward L. Bernays at work (his 1928 book _Propaganda_ should be mandatory
reading for everyone).

~~~
erikschoster
I don't mean to speak for the person you're addressing, but I suspect this was
the part that was surprising: "some form of safety valve that allowed class
conflict to be mediated and ameliorated was better than the alternatives as
far as the interests of the upper classes".

That's not an obvious truth, and doesn't deserve self-important snark.

I've also read 'Propaganda', and would also recommend it despite its age.

~~~
vidarh
It's been obvious since before Bismarck introduced the welfare state in the
1840's onwards.

His opposition tried to tarnish his image by claiming he was introducing
"state socialism", after which he himself started using the same term about
his welfare programs, and explicitly made the point that it was intended to
counter the influence of the socialists and calm the masses.

Bismarck, which was an ultra-conservative monarchist, actually went further
than the majority of the socialist opposition at the time in anticipation of
further demands, in order to quell their support.

------
joeshevland
Anyone else starting to feel worn down and disgusted by the behavior of your
government? I don't see a lot of change, just a lot of dissection of how bad
it is. If the mechanism to change the problem is broken, how do you change the
problem?

~~~
junto
What I find worst of all, is that our governments are using our tax dollars to
negotiate and write this stuff behind our backs in order to shaft us, the
people.

~~~
joeshevland
Its almost Terry Pratcher'esque. I'm seriously depressed about how shit our
system is.

~~~
joeshevland
Terry Pratchett _

------
mercurial
I find it striking that these people are seemingly willing to spend years
negotiating on this, and presumably spend a lot of money in the process, while
not having learned anything about the failure of the previous agreement. It
seems also clear that the US trade representative is not interested in
balancing the interest of the public with business interests.

~~~
ordinary
History shows that a people roused is a force without equal. But it also
teaches us that rousing a people is far from an easy task, and it becomes
harder the more often you try it, or the more often it's necessary.

This creates an incentive to try again and again and again. The costs are
minimal (lobbying is cheap when you're a multi-billion dollar industry), the
risk of blowback practically non-existant (no one boycots Disney), and the
potential rewards are huge.

Therefore, I think you're incorrect when you say these people have not learned
anything. Defeating one treaty or proposed law does nothing to prevent them
from trying to pass the same reforms at a later point.

------
frank_boyd
"We must handle this in secret! Trust us! It's for your own good! We just want
to protect you from the danger!"

Why do I keep hearing this bullshit from all governments all over the World?
(The last time, it was the NSA saying we should let them set up the police
state.)

Secrecy has nothing to do with democracy. It kills it. (And that seems to be
the goal, lately.)

------
Fuxy
This is completely idiotic and obviously not in the best interest of the
citizens of that country.

Why do we even have this crap? Trade agreements are obviously just a way for
big corporations make into law all their stupid ideas.

Corporations shouldn't have a say in law to begin with that will inevitably
lead to abuse of power.

This looks just like a price setting agreement between large corporation
(clearly illegal) but instead of setting prices the set laws in their favor.
Considerably worse and should be just as illegal.

------
diorray
"Water sleeps, and the enemy is sleepless"

------
Sniperfish
Some interesting discussions by KEI
[http://keionline.org/node/1825](http://keionline.org/node/1825)

Having not been following the TPP terribly thoroughly I did not realise how
wide in scope some of its provisions would appear to be.

------
linuxhansl
Of course. The US is becoming a service/IP economy. It is no longer producing
many physical goods. So pushing these laws worldwide is essential for economic
success.

~~~
thrownaway2424
"It is no longer producing many physical goods."

LOLWUT, as they say on the internet. The US currently enjoys more industrial
production than at any time in its history. It is still the largest producer
of manufactured goods in the world.

"U.S. Manufacturing in International Perspective"
[http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42135.pdf](http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42135.pdf)

US Census Bureau - New Manufacturing Orders
[http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d2p7r4l1574rh_&c...](http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d2p7r4l1574rh_&ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=orders&fdim_y=order_type:New&fdim_y=seasonality:Seasonally+adjusted&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:US&ifdim=country&tstart=697968000000&tend=1373698800000&ind=false&icfg&iconSize=0.5)

~~~
mcphilip
If you're impressed primarily by absolute dollar amounts of value added, then
sure, U.S. manufacturing looks good on a bar chart comparison of G7 countries.

However, the rest of the FAS report is stuffed full of metrics showing the
rapid decline of the manufacturing sector.

~~~
thrownaway2424
There are a number of valid and interesting perspectives on manufacturing
output. "No longer produces physical goods" is not one of them.

------
joeshevland
Punch drunk from the abuse, how much worse can it get?

------
benbojangles
Why isn't China in the TPP?

