PDA

View Full Version : The Trans-Pacific Partnership Is a Corporate Coup in Disguise



Ares
13th November 2013, 05:08 PM
What if our national leaders told us that communities across America had to eliminate such local programs as Buy Local, Buy American, Buy Green, etc. to allow foreign corporations to have the right to make the sale on any products purchased with our tax dollars? This nullification of our people's right to direct expenditures is just one of the horror stories in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

This is a super-sized NAFTA, the 1994 trade scam rammed through Congress by the entire corporate establishment. NAFTA promised the "glories of globalization": prosperity across our land. Unfortunately, corporations got the gold. We got the shaft — thousands of factories closed, millions of middle-class jobs went south, and the economies of hundreds of towns and cities were shattered.

Twenty years later, the gang that gave us NAFTA is back with the TPP, a "trade deal" that mostly does not deal with trade. Of the 29 chapters in this document, only five cover traditional trade matters! The other chapters amount to a devilish "partnership" for corporate protectionism:

—Food safety. Any of our government's food safety regulations (on pesticide levels, bacterial contamination, fecal exposure, toxic additives, etc.) and food labeling laws (organic, country-of-origin, animal-welfare approved, GMO-free, etc.) that are stricter than "international standards" could be ruled as "illegal trade barriers." Our government would then have to revise our consumer protections to comply with weaker standards.

—Fracking. Our Department of Energy would lose its authority to regulate exports of natural gas to any TPP nation. This would create an explosion of the destructive fracking process across our land, for both foreign and U.S. corporations could export fracked gas from America to member nations without any DOE review of the environmental and economic impacts on local communities — or on our national interests.

—Jobs. US corporations would get special foreign-investor protections to limit the cost and risk of relocating their factories to low-wage nations that sign onto this agreement. So, an American corporation thinking about moving a factory would know it is guaranteed a sweetheart deal if it moves operations to a TPP nation like Vietnam. This would be an incentive for corporate chieftains to export more of our middle-class jobs.

—Drug prices. Big Pharma would be given more years of monopoly pricing on each of their patents and be empowered to block distribution of cheaper generic drugs. Besides artificially keeping everyone's prices high, this would be a death sentence to many people suffering from cancer, HIV, AIDS, tuberculosis and other treatable diseases in impoverished lands.

—Banksters. Wall Street and the financial giants in other TPP countries would make out like bandits. The deal explicitly prohibits transaction taxes (such as the proposed Robin Hood Tax here) that would shut down speculators who have repeatedly triggered financial crises and economic crashes around the world. It restricts "firewall" reforms that separate consumer banking from risky investment banking. It could roll back reforms that governments adopted to fix the extreme bank-deregulation regimen that caused Wall Street's 2007 crash. And it provides an escape from national rules that would limit the size of "too-big-to-fail" behemoths.

—Internet freedom. Corporations hoping to lock up and monopolize the Internet failed in Congress last year to pass their repressive "Stop Online Piracy Act." However, they've slipped SOPA's most pernicious provisions into TPP. The deal would also transform Internet service providers into a private, Big Brother police force, empowered to monitor our "user activity," arbitrarily take down our content and cut off our access to the Internet. To top that off, consumers could be assessed mandatory fines for something as benign as sending your mom a recipe you got off of a paid site.

—Public services. TPP rules would limit how governments regulate such public services as utilities, transportation and education — including restricting policies meant to ensure broad or universal access to those essential needs. One insidious rule says that member countries must open their service sectors to private competitors, which would allow the corporate provider to cherry-pick the profitable customers and sink the public service.

Lori Wallach, director of Global Trade Watch, correctly calls the Trans-Pacific Partnership "a corporate coup d'etat." Nations that join must conform their laws and rules to TPP's strictures, effectively supplanting U.S. sovereignty and canceling our people's right to be self-governing. Worse, it creates virtually permanent corporate rule over us.

Is it impossible to stop? Nope. There is also a broad, well-organized and politically experienced coalition of grassroots groups, which has stopped other deals and will do it again. We the people can protect our democratic rights from this threat of corporate usurpation. Check out globaltradewatch.org.

http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18231-jim-hightower-the-trans-pacific-partnership-is-a-corporate-coup-in-disguise

PatColo
13th November 2013, 08:13 PM
Thanks Ares-- this TPP has been so 'secretive', it's flown below the GSUS radar from what I've seen!

Mami's has posted a number of things on it, a search just now yielded,

Tuesday, July 16, 2013 Fighting The Trans-Pacific Partnership - Nile Bowie on GRTV (http://grizzom.blogspot.com/2013/07/fighting-trans-pacific-partnership-nile.html)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yk6VOJHGoM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yk6VOJHGoM


Tuesday, July 16, 2013 Government Will Not Save You From Corporations (http://grizzom.blogspot.com/2013/07/government-will-not-save-you-from.html)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=mCAIj3YJUmg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=mCAIj3YJUmg

Journalists and political partisans have expressed the mistaken presumption that government is a "balancing force" against the excess powers of corporations. This video explains that most excess power of corporations is provided and granted by government and that government seeks partnership with corporations and shares in the profits. This "public-private partnership" is so advanced that the public interest is no longer a primary concern of government. Government is now a for-profit operation serving itself at the expense of the public interest. Link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=mCAIj3YJUmg)

PatColo
22nd November 2013, 11:03 PM
Sunday, November 17, 2013 TPP: The Biggest Threat to the Internet You've Probably Never Heard Of

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3KlrfjcjV4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3KlrfjcjV4

The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) is being negotiated in secret between more than 12 countries around the Pacific region. Find out why it poses a huge threat to your digital freedoms.

For more information and to find out how you can take action, visit https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp

Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp)


https://www.eff.org/sites/default/files/TPP-banner.png

(https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/whats-wrong-tpp) What is the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)?
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is 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. The main problems are two-fold:


(1) IP chapter: Leaked draft texts of the agreement show that the IP chapter would have extensive negative ramifications for users’ freedom of speech, right to privacy and due process, and hinder peoples' abilities to innovate.


(2) Lack of transparency: The entire process has shut out multi-stakeholder participation and is shrouded in secrecy.


The twelve nations currently negotiating the TPP are the US, Japan, Australia, Peru, Malaysia, Vietnam, New Zealand, Chile, Singapore, Canada, Mexico, and Brunei Darussalam. The TPP contains a chapter on intellectual property covering copyright, trademarks, patents and perhaps, geographical indications (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographical_indication). Since the draft text of the agreement has never been offically released to the public, we know from leaked documents, such as the February 2011 draft US TPP IP Rights Chapter [PDF] (http://keionline.org/sites/default/files/tpp-10feb2011-us-text-ipr-chapter.pdf), that US negotiators are pushing for the adoption of copyright measures far more restrictive than currently required by international treaties, including the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (https://www.eff.org/issues/acta) (ACTA).


The TPP Will Rewrite Global Rules on Intellectual Property Enforcement



All signatory countries will be required to conform their domestic laws and policies to the provisions of the Agreement. In the US, this is likely to further entrench controversial aspects of US copyright law (such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (http://www.eff.org/issues/dmca) [DMCA]) and restrict the ability of Congress to engage in domestic law reform to meet the evolving IP needs of American citizens and the innovative technology sector. The recently leaked US-proposed IP chapter also includes provisions that appear to go beyond current US law.


https://wfc2.wiredforchange.com/o/9042/images/digital-handshake-square.png

(https://action.eff.org/o/9042/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=9357) The leaked US IP chapter includes many detailed requirements that are more restrictive than current international standards, and would require significant changes to other countries’ copyright laws. These include obligations for countries to:





Place Greater Liability on Internet Intermediaries (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/tpp-creates-liabilities-isps-and-put-your-rights-risk): The TPP would force the adoption of the US DMCA Internet intermediaries copyright safe harbor regime in its entirety. For example, this would require Chile to rewrite its forward-looking 2010 copyright law (http://www.leychile.cl/Navegar?idNorma=1012827&idParte=&idVersion=2010-05-04) that currently establishes a judicial notice-and-takedown regime, which provides greater protection to Internet users’ expression and privacy than the DMCA.




Regulate Temporary Copies (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/07/temporary-copies-another-way-tpp-profoundly-disconnected): Treat temporary reproductions of copyrighted works without copyright holders' authorization as copyright infringement. The language reveals a profound disconnect with the reality of the modern computer, as all routine computer functions rely upon the regular creation of temporary copies of programs and files. As drafted, the related provision creates chilling effects not just on how we behave online, but also on the basic ability of people and companies to use and create on the Web.




Expand Copyright Terms (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/all-nations-lose-tpps-expansion-copyright-terms): Create copyright terms well beyond the internationally agreed period in the 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). The TPP could extend copyright term protections from life of the author + 50 years, to Life + 70 years for works created by individuals, and either 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation for corporate owned works (such as Mickey Mouse).




Enact a "Three-Step Test" Language That Puts Restrictions on Fair Use (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/new-leaked-tpp-puts-fair-use-risk): The United States Trade Representative (USTR) (http://www.ustr.gov/tpp/) is putting fair use at risk with restrictive language in the TPP's IP chapter. US and Australia have proposed very restrictive text, while other countries such as Chile, New Zealand, and Malaysia, have proposed more flexible, user-friendly terms.




Escalate Protections for Digital Locks (https://www.eff.org/document/tpp-tpms-and-civil-rights-presentation): It will compel signatory nations to enact laws banning circumvention of digital locks (technological protection measures or TPMs) (https://www.eff.org/files/filenode//EFF%20TPP%20TPM%20Analysis_0.pdf) [PDF] that mirror the DMCA and treat violation of the TPM provisions as a separate offense even when no copyright infringement is involved. This would require countries like New Zealand to completely rewrite its innovative 2008 copyright law, as well as override Australia’s carefully-crafted 2007 TPM regime exclusions for region-coding on movies on DVDs, videogames, and players, and for embedded software in devices that restrict access to goods and services for the device—a thoughtful effort by Australian policy makers to avoid the pitfalls experienced with the US digital locks provisions. In the US, business competitors have used the DMCA to try to block printer cartridge refill services, competing garage door openers, and to lock mobile phones to particular network providers.





Ban Parallel Importation: Ban parallel importation of genuine goods acquired from other countries without the authorization of copyright owners.




Adopt Criminal Sanctions: Adopt criminal sanctions for copyright infringement that is done without a commercial motivation, based on the provisions of the 1997 US No Electronic Theft Act.



In short, countries would have to abandon any efforts to learn from the mistakes of the US and its experience with the DMCA over the last 12 years, and adopt many of the most controversial aspects of US copyright law in their entirety. At the same time, the US IP chapter does not export the limitations and exceptions in the US copyright regime like fair use, which have enabled freedom of expression and technological innovation to flourish in the US. It includes only a placeholder for exceptions and limitations. This raises serious concerns about other countries’ sovereignty and the ability of national governments to set laws and policies to meet their domestic priorities.


Non-Transparent and On The Fast Track



Despite the broad scope and far-reaching implications of the TPP, negotiations for the agreement have taken place behind closed doors and outside of the checks and balances that operate at traditional multilateral treaty-making organizations such as the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization.


Like ACTA, the TPP is being negotiated rapidly with little transparency. During the TPP negotiation round in Chile in February 2011, negotiators received strong messages from prominent civil society groups (https://tppwatch.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/us-transparency-letter-to-ustr-kirk-021411-final1.pdf) demanding an end to the secrecy that has shielded TPP negotiations from the scrutiny of national lawmakers and the public. Letters addressed to government representatives in Australia (http://www.citizen.org/documents/AFTINET-TPP-letter.pdf), Chile (http://www.citizen.org/documents/Chile-TPP-letter.pdf), Malaysia (http://www.citizen.org/documents/Malaysia-TPP-NGO-letter.pdf), New Zealand (http://www.citizen.org/documents/NZ-TPP-letter.pdf) and the US (http://www.citizen.org/documents/US-TPP-letter.pdf) emphasized that both the process and effect of the proposed TPP agreement is deeply undemocratic. TPP negotiators apparently discussed the requests for greater public disclosure during the February 2011 negotiations, but took no action.


Why You Should Care



TPP raises significant concerns about citizens’ freedom of expression, due process, innovation, the future of the Internet’s global infrastructure, and the right of sovereign nations to develop policies and laws that best meet their domestic priorities. In sum, the TPP puts at risk some of the most fundamental rights that enable access to knowledge for the world’s citizens.


The US Trade Rep is pursuing a TPP agreement that will require signatory counties to adopt heightened copyright protection that advances the agenda of the US entertainment and pharmaceutical industries agendas, but omits the flexibilities and exceptions that protect Internet users and technology innovators.


The TPP will affect countries beyond the 11 that are currently involved in negotiations. Like ACTA, the TPP Agreement is a plurilateral agreement that will be used to create new heightened global IP enforcement norms. Countries that are not parties to the negotiation will likely be asked to accede to the TPP as a condition of bilateral trade agreements with the US and other TPP members, or evaluated against the TPP's copyright enforcement standards in the annual Special 301 process (http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/04/shaping-ip-laws-not-so-gentle-persuasion-special) administered by the US Trade Rep.
Here’s what you can do: Are you in the United States?



Tell U.S. lawmakers to stand up for your digital rights and preserve our constitutional checks and balances in government (https://action.eff.org/o/9042/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=9357). Demand your state representatives oppose any initiative to enact Fast Track (aka Trade Promotion Authority), which hands their own constitutional authority to debate and modify trade law.


https://www.eff.org/sites/default/files/images_insert/Screen%20Shot%202012-08-22%20at%2011.26.27%20AM.png
(https://action.eff.org/o/9042/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=9357)Join EFF and more than 30,000 people in sending a message to Congress members to demand an end to these secret backdoor negotiations. (https://wfc2.wiredforchange.com/o/9042/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=8229) Tell the White House to uphold openness and transparency in (http://www.publicknowledge.org/Tell-White-House-Ensure-OpennessTPP-IP-Chapter) TPP negotiations.

For close analysis of the TPP and its impacts on digital rights, visit Knowledge Ecology International's TPP resource page (http://keionline.org/tpp).


https://www.eff.org/sites/default/files/KEI_small.png (http://keionline.org/tpp) For more information on other aspects of the TPP, visit Public Citizen (http://www.citizen.org/tpp)’s resource page.