Wikileaks release of TPP deal text stokes 'freedom of expression' fears
Wikileaks release of TPP deal text stokes 'freedom of
expression' fears
Intellectual property rights chapter appears to give
Trans-Pacific Partnership countries’ countries greater power to stop
information from going public
Friday 9 October 2015 13.34 EDT Last modified on Friday 9
October 2015 14.50 EDT
Wikileaks has released what it claims is the full
intellectual property chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the
controversial agreement between 12 countries that was signed off on Monday.
TPP was negotiated in secret and details have yet to be
published. But critics including Democrat presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton
and Bernie Sanders, unions and privacy activists have lined up to attack what
they have seen of it. Wikileaks’ latest disclosures are unlikely to reassure
them.
One chapter appears to give the signatory countries
(referred to as “parties”) greater power to stop embarrassing information going
public. The treaty would give signatories the ability to curtail legal
proceedings if the theft of information is “detrimental to a party’s economic
interests, international relations, or national defense or national security” –
in other words, presumably, if a trial would cause the information to spread.
A drafter’s note says that every participating country’s
individual laws about whistleblowing would still apply.
“The text of the TPP’s intellectual property chapter
confirms advocates warnings that this deal poses a grave threat to global freedom
of expression and basic access to things like medicine and information,” said
Evan Greer, campaign director of internet activist group Fight for the Future.
“But the sad part is that no one should be surprised by this. It should have
been obvious to anyone observing the process, where appointed government
bureaucrats and monopolistic companies were given more access to the text than
elected officials and journalists, that this would be the result.”
Among the provisions in the chapter (which may or may not
be the most recent version) are rules that say that each country in the
agreement has the authority to compel anyone accused of violating intellectual
property law to provide “relevant information [...] that the infringer or
alleged infringer possesses or controls” as provided for in that country’s own
laws.
The rules also state that every country has the authority
to immediately give the name and address of anyone importing detained goods to
whoever owns the intellectual property.
That information can be very broad, too: “Such
information may include information regarding any person involved in any aspect
of the infringement or alleged infringement,” the document continues, “and
regarding the means of production or the channels of distribution of the infringing
or allegedly infringing goods or services, including the identification of
third persons alleged to be involved in the production and distribution of such
goods or services and of their channels of distribution.”
TPP is now facing a rough ride through Congress where
President Obama’s opponents on the right argue the agreement does not do enough
for business while opponents on the left argue it does too much.
Obama has pledged to make the TPP public but only after
the legislation has passed.
Michael Wessel was one of the advisers who was asked by
the US government to review what he said were woefully inadequate portions of
the document. Wessel said the thrust of the TPP does nothing for Americans.
“This is about increasing the ability of global corporations to source wherever
they can at the lowest cost,” he said.
“It is not about enhancing or promoting production in the
United States,” Wessel said. “We aren’t enforcing today’s trade agreements
adequately. Look at China and Korea. Now we’re not only expanding trade to a
far larger set of countries under a new set of rules that have yet to be tested
but we’re preparing to expand that to many more countries. It would be easier
to accept if we were enforcing today’s rules.”
Wessel said that ultimately, the countries currently
benefiting from increased outsourcing of jobs by American firms aren’t likely
to see wages rise above a certain level. “If you look in other countries,
Mexico and India and others – there’s been a rise in the middle class but
there’s been stagnation for those we’re hoping to get into the middle class,”
Wessel said. “Companies are scouring the globe for countries they can get to produce
most cheaply.”
That, he said, results in constant downward pressure on
American wages. “Companies are not invested here the way we’d like them to;
they’re doing stock buybacks and higher dividends,” Wessel continued. “They may
yield support for the stock-holding class but it’s not creating jobs.”
Comments
Post a Comment