Declassified Opinion On Bulk Email Collection Details More Abuse By The NSA

USTR Lies: Says TPP Is No Different Than US Law

from the except-it-does dept

Tue, Nov 19th 2013 1:05pm — Mike Masnick

Soon after the TPP IP chapter was leaked via Wikileaks, we predicted that the USTR would claim that it doesn't require legal changes in the US and was just about harmonizing norms. It took all of a day for that prediction to come true. In US Trade Rep Michael Froman's interview with Variety, he said exactly that:

“what we have in there are things that are already in U.S. law about making sure, whether it is copyright or other protections, are fully enforced around the world.”

That is a lie. It's fundamentally untrue. For example, in just the copyright section alone, Margot Kaminski from the Information Society Project at Yale has outlined eight things that differ from US law in the text proposed or supported by the US, some of them rather substantial, including the standards for criminal liability as well as the standards allowed for reverse engineering exemptions for DRM. Jamie Love, over at KEI, pointed out early on that many of the US proposals "are more restrictive than U.S. laws." Also, as we expected, the language on the "three step test," which the USTR pretended was about supporting fair use, actually would massively limit fair use.

Of course, as we pointed out with ACTA and again with TPP, even if it was just about taking things that are in US law and making sure they're "fully enforced around the world" (which is not actually what TPP is about), it would ridiculously lock in a bunch of bad things that are in US law, which pretty much everyone not under the full-time sway of Hollywood already knows has been really bad for the US economy and creativity. The very fact that this agreement would effectively block many of the suggestions made by the head of the US Copyright Office to Congress in terms of copyright reform should show why the USTR has no business doing anything around copyright.

Who in their right mind would try to export US law and lock us into it at the very same time that the experts in the field of law they're talking about have admitted that it's outdated and a mess and in need of a major rewrite? Apparently, the USTR is so clueless that it thinks existing copyright law is settled law and that it's so great we should lock it in and force everyone else to do the same, at the very same time Congress, the head of the Copyright Office, and a lot of other people have admitted it's time for a change.

So why is the USTR blindly pushing ahead with it?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: copyright, michael froman, tpp, us law

34 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

silverscarcat (profile), 19 Nov 2013 @ 11:21am

Money, dear boy!
Who else is going to give them millions of dollars of bribe money?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
arcan, 19 Nov 2013 @ 1:09pm

So why is the USTR blindly pushing ahead with it?

simple, they are being paid to.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 1:20pm

Blindly?
They know they want this. They want to make it easier for their propaganda mouthpieces to have monopolies on all culture and information. No powerful empire would even let an opposing voice out that doesn't border on parody. They want to suck those they haven't killed off or imprisoned dry.

And if things don't go their way, they'll whine some more and push for something even worse, assuming there's anything left.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 1:39pm

'So why is the USTR blindly pushing ahead with it?'

just guessing but

a) because those sorting it out have been encouraged to do so, particularly by Hollywood and the entertainment industries

b) if they can get this brought into agreement with a dozen other nations carried along, it is going to massively benefit the USA while being as equally detrimental to those other nations by limiting what they can do for their own people; by forcing the purchase of USA drugs and media at prices set by the USA that the people of those other nations couldn't afford; by removing the option of changing any part of the 'treaty' without agreement from the USA, which would never happen.

c) once this is in force with these dozen nations, it would be used as a means to force other nations to agree to the one sided conditions as well, all of which would again benefit the USA whilst being detrimental to all other nations. dont forget that if any other nation at any time tries to do something similar to what the USA is doing, there will be all sorts of threats from the USA to whichever nation is in question.

the aim is to basically take over the control of the other nations by ruling their economies and their internet capabilities. it is an occupation akin to winning a war with no shots being fired and no lives lost, not until, that is, the poor in the other nations start to die because they are forced to either go without medicines or pay x1000 for USA supplied drugs! anyone in the USA pharma industries that haven't been behind this can be counted on one hand. anyone that gives a toss about those people amount to zero! so much for a democratic nation that does it's best to help all others at all times. i think that has changed to who helps itself to the detriment of all others!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 1:45pm

So they want to force their corrupt laws on the rest of the world too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 1:58pm

I would love to live in a world where officials making these statements do so under threat of perjury. Genuine threat, not NSA official to congress threat. Genuine threat, not DMCA threat.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 1:59pm

It's simple. The USTR is a wholly owned subsidiary of the MAFIAA, just like Congress.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 1:59pm

Please stay the F out of my country. I don't want your backwards copyright laws. Ours are sensible already (Canada)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 19 Nov 2013 @ 2:07pm

"So why is the USTR blindly pushing ahead with it?"
Gee, Mike, maybe you're just too blind to see the globalist corporatist conspiracy right in front of your nose. For a few million tops, everyone necessary can be bribed to go along with a scam that'll net trillions. Go'vt policy is always the best "investment" for corporations.

TPP: NAFTA on Steroids

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a trade deal from hell. It's a stealth corporate coup d'etat.

It's a giveaway to banksters. It's a global neoliberal ripoff. It's a business empowering Trojan horse. It's a freedom and ecosystem destroying nightmare.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) calls it "a secretive, multi-national trade agreement that threatens to extend restrictive intellectual property (IP) laws across the globe and rewrite international rules on its enforcement."

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/11/tpp-nafta-on-steroids.html

By the way, Mike, that's as a real writer produces, not brief re-writes ending with rhetorical question.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 19 Nov 2013 @ 2:11pm

Re:
So, Blue, how come you're still willing to defend Warner Bros. when you keep going on about a Global Conspiracy theory involving businesses?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 19 Nov 2013 @ 2:12pm

Re: @ AC: MPAA has little to do with TPP: that's just Mike's mis-casting.
@ just guessing but

a) because those sorting it out have been encouraged to do so, particularly by Hollywood and the entertainment industries

It's far larger than MPAA, and that Mike doesn't even get near to mentioning the major corporations just shows that he's a corporatist and/or lightweight.

Read this article and you won't have to guess:

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/11/tpp-nafta-on-steroids.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 19 Nov 2013 @ 2:18pm

Re: Re:
@ "silverscarcat" So, Blue, how come you're still willing to defend Warner Bros. when you keep going on about a Global Conspiracy theory involving businesses?

a) I've explained that I side with Warner Bros narrowly over you nasty little pirates: the former are producers, you're just petty sneak thieves.

b) So how come you're not concerned about actual globalists and their corporations which plan to take over the world and are well begun on it? Read the linked article.

c) It's difficult to make progress when tiny minds like yours are too small to grasp the real threats.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 2:20pm

Re:
Well, that is a bit... However, it is true that USTR is owned by large companies, including several members with significant affiliation to the RIAA and MPAA.

USTR is not a true government entity. It is a government mouthpiece for large industries. Unfortunately the politicians fear holding them back, resulting in deals void of workers, consumers and NGO opinions.

As an official negotiation team for USAs government, USTRs construction is completely insufficient.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
hunar, 19 Nov 2013 @ 2:47pm

Yeah, the Kaminski post raises an interesting point: how can the TPP possibly contradict the Kirtsaeng decision? It's one thing to push through TPP and then get Congress to change the laws, but what can they do to nullify a Supreme Court ruling?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 2:54pm

If it is no different than US law, he has argued that we don't need the TPP. It's as simple as that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 2:57pm

Re: Re: @ AC: MPAA has little to do with TPP: that's just Mike's mis-casting.
nice try blue, but you and everyone else here know damn well that the copyright sections are most relevant to this blog.

you might as well complain that video game magazines don't cover lady gaga's newest music videos
[ link to this | view in thread ]
the Conscious Catholic, 19 Nov 2013 @ 3:40pm

Re:
Not as much now since almost half of congress is not happy about fast track
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 19 Nov 2013 @ 3:43pm

Re: Re: Re:
Wow...

A: Warner Bros. don't produce anything, they're the backers, the directors produce stuff.

B: Who says I'm NOT concerned about that stuff? But by stopping copyright from getting worse, it makes their jobs harder.

C: You really shouldn't insult yourself like that, man. I mean, we know you have a hard time doing critical thinking, but no need to say that you have a tiny mind.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 3:55pm

Re:
Don't be so sure about that. Don't you Canucks have the 50 cent per CD-R MAFIAA tax, ya know, because pirates use CD-R's?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 19 Nov 2013 @ 4:48pm

Re: Re:
Saying they aren't happy with it is one thing, voting against it quite another.

Call me cynical, but I'll wait until the votes are tallied before I take them at their word that they really do object to handing over their job like that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 5:06pm

Re: Re: Re:
A) Wait wait wait, WB is a 'producer' but talk about an corporation outside the context of copyrights with you and they're a scum sucking leech that extracts all the value from their workers labor and profits from it. Double standard much?

B) Your point being that if you care about the copyright provisions in the TPP you're incapable of caring about any of the others?

C) After the circular logic, the hypocrisy, and the straw men have been expended it always boils down to a lame ad hom with you doesn't it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 5:07pm

Even if it were accurate that the provisions in the TPP matched current statues it still would be a lie to say it is no different than US law because it is inherent to US law that it be mutable to a mandate from the masses.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 5:15pm

"things that are already in U.S. law "

except that - oh wait - no it's not
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 6:27pm

Re: Re:
What I'd like to know is how we ended up with such a collection of spineless, gutless wonders in Congress. If these folks can't stand up to any "Threat, foreign or domestic" what the hell are they doing there? They're certainly not defending or supporting the Constitution.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 6:33pm

Re: Re:
Yeah, but when the voting happens we'll find out that less then 49% are so affected.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 6:38pm

Re: Re:
Which is strange because rotating disks have gone the way of tape cassettes and will soon vanish just like them.

{Hint to pirates: start using cassettes or 8-track cartridges (containing high bit density tape, of course) again for data transport. No one knows what to do with them now.}
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2013 @ 9:30pm

Re: Re: Re: @ AC: MPAA has little to do with TPP: that's just Mike's mis-casting.
Mike Masnick just hates it when copyright law is enforced.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2013 @ 12:22am

Can I just say that this is the "lies to children" fallacy writ large?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2013 @ 3:27am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
average_joe just hates it when due process is enforced. DMCAed, you little bitch!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pragmatic, 20 Nov 2013 @ 5:45am

Re: Re: Re:
Gerrymandering and political polarization. When people start to think for themselves, it'll change, and not one moment before.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 20 Nov 2013 @ 9:52am

Re: Re: Re: Re: @ AC: MPAA has little to do with TPP: that's just Mike's mis-casting.
More like he hates it when the Copyfraud alliance abuses copyright law to get away with doing anything they want.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kronomex, 20 Nov 2013 @ 12:26pm

Here in Australia our new Prime Minister wants the TPP signed, sealed, and delivered by the end of the year. Since the information about this travesty was leaked we haven't heard a word so I'm guessing that he still wants to sign away more of our rights to the altar of corporate US greed.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2013 @ 9:33pm

Re:
Might be interesting if you could find out how much he's being paid to push this through.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Nov 2013 @ 6:05am

Re:
TPP is all about trying to represent commercial interests from the countries involved. The real trick is to get the formulations in line with the law.

Just pushing the line of "no laws will change" is very likely to be true about the end-result, but the real value of trade agreements is their ability to shatter specific jurisprudence and thereby force a new interpretation of the laws that is more to the liking of the negotiating parties. It has the added bonus of soft-locking legislation and making some reforms almost impossible to pass on account of "international obligations".

I don't know about constitutional issues and therefore SCOTUS jurisprudence, but in general all jurisprudence has to be reinterpreted.
[ link to this | view in thread ]