The controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP) has once again leaked. The freshly leaked details re-confirms some of human rights and activists worst fears about the Intellectual Property chapter. We go in-depth into this secretive agreement to show what (if any) has changed and what remains on this secret agreement between countries around the world.
There may be many news stories that surface on broadcast media in your area. However, what is not likely to appear in local newspapers or mainstream news broadcast is the latest revelations coming from the secretive Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (or, as it is commonly referred to, the TPP in short). Major multinational corporations have direct access to it along with top negotiators who represent each individual country involved, but common citizens and even elected members of government are shut out of the process. How do we have access to some details of this agreement? It’s all thanks to Wikileaks which released a leaked copy of the updated draft agreement. We present to you full coverage of what is in this agreement as we read the details ourselves. For better referencing, we shall refer to the PDF version of this leaked copy.
We’ve been covering the different countries the IIPA (International Intellectual Property Alliance) wants on their piracy watchlist. So far, the submissions were either demanding everything and the kitchen sink, had a host of problems in their logic or both. The submission about Italy is no exception to this. We explore why.
The biggest thing that stuck out for us when it came to why the IIPA wants Italy on the special 301 report is the fact that Italy has privacy laws. Enforcement of copyright laws can occur with user privacy – particularly with a notice-and-notice regime. Unfortunately, it seems that the IIPA wants to trash the privacy laws in favor of laws found in the United States. This is unfortunate, but considering who we’re dealing with, not entirely surprising. Here’s one mention of the privacy laws:
We’ve been covering the various countries that the IIPA (International Intellectual Property Association) wants to see on the Special 301 report. A surprising request is that Mexico be included on that list. It’s not what was included in the submission that is the most surprising, but what isn’t.
Last year, to the surprise of many, Mexico signed the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). Some suggest that this was to get into the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP) which is an agreement for even further tightening of copyright laws around the world. In addition to that surprise move, Mexico is famous for having the longest copyright term in the world (100 years after the creators death). You’d think that these moves would put Mexico in the good books for foreign copyright holders. You’d think wrong. The IIPA, in spite of all of these moves to please such entities, it once again, demanding that Mexico be placed on the Special 301 report (PDF) anyway.
There are a number of countries the International Intellectual Property Alliance wants on the US Special 301 priority watchlist. The watchlist is put together by American corporations and published on a government website after. We’ve been covering the reasons why other countries are being requested to put on the watchlist and, today, we are looking at why the organization thinks Egypt should be on the list.
We’ve been covering what the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) has been recommending for the Special 301 watchlist. While the 301 Watchlist isn’t really a credible source for reliable information, major corporate entities tend to lobby targeted governments demanding certain laws be implemented no matter how poorly conceived they really are. This time, we look at why the IIPA thinks Greece be placed on the piracy watchlist.
The submission for Greece (PDF) is about 8 pages long. This is notably shorter than the previous one we looked at with regard to Spain. One of the complaints about Greece appears to be that websites aren’t taken down fast enough. Here’s what the submission says:
In 2011, Spain passed a controversial anti-piracy law dubbed the “Sinde Law”. The law set up an administrative body that is responsible for taking complaints about websites and decide whether or not to shut them down. After massive protests against the law, it passed thanks partly due to US pressure. Fastforward to today, it seems that US rightsholders are now wanting Spain to be put on the Special 301 piracy watchlist partly because the administrative body isn’t making enough rulings against various websites.
The International Intellectual Property Association (IIPA) is making recommendations on who should be put on a Special 301 report in the US. The Special 301 report lists countries that are considered piracy havens by corporate entities such as major record labels and movie studios. Michael Geist found out that Canada was to be put on the watchlist even though it passed copyright reform laws that satisfied some of the demands coming from the US. We’ll be looking at that angle later, but for now, we turn our attention to why the IIPA wants Spain to be put on the watchlist.
One of the notable patterns we noticed in the previous debate we covered was the fact that the Liberal party was the party that was asking the questions about CETA. That pattern was reversed the next day with the NDP being the party to ask the questions. We got the transcripts of what was said during the debate again and we’re going over some of the points that were brought up.
While we’ve been covering CETA (Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement) all year, the agreement has recently made a splash in the Canadian media. This is in part due to the fact that the agreement was actively debated in the Canadian House of Commons. We now have a transcript of what was being debated.
CETA appears to have briefly made it into the spotlight in the Canadian media yesterday. On CBC, the agreement was discussed and portrayed as an agreement on the verge of being finalized. However, we know from following this more thoroughly that differences between Canadian and European interests are currently threatening to delay the agreement. So, comments yesterday saying that the agreement is on the Prime Ministers desk is really muddying the waters in terms of what the status is of this agreement.
A fresh round of reports is suggesting that CETA (Comprehensive economic and trade Agreement) will not be completed next week. The report comes after last months report that suggests that CETA could be completed by the end of February.
When we saw the initial reports that the negotiations might be completed by February, one of the things we’ve noted was the fact that there were still some noted differences between Canada and Europe. We noted, “while negotiators are hoping to complete CETA next month, these differences on policy certainly opens the door for more delays in the process” knowing that differences between different parties at the international level can really throw a wrench into the system. At the time, these differences were taken more lightly.
Battle lines are already beginning to form as the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). Late last month, the word was that CETA was weeks away from completion. Now, reports are surfacing that social democratic group Quebec Solidaire has sent a letter to European lawmakers urging them to join the resistance against the impending agreement.
We’re continuing out extensive coverage of the developments revolving around the various trade agreements that are presenting a real threat to Internet freedom. We reviewed known provisions in the secretive agreement and they included extension of the terms of copyright and possibly a three strikes law which has been draining money out of both the New Zealand and French economies with no real measurable results for the long term.