• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

New Wikileaks Reveal: Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)

Status
Not open for further replies.
EDIT: Here is a small breakdown of the sister initiative TTIP (NOT TPP) from the Guardian. Thanks for the link Nils
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/04/us-trade-deal-full-frontal-assault-on-democracy
The purpose of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is to remove the regulatory differences between the US and European nations. I mentioned it a couple of weeks ago. But I left out the most important issue: the remarkable ability it would grant big business to sue the living daylights out of governments which try to defend their citizens. It would allow a secretive panel of corporate lawyers to overrule the will of parliament and destroy our legal protections. Yet the defenders of our sovereignty say nothing.

The mechanism through which this is achieved is known as investor-state dispute settlement. It's already being used in many parts of the world to kill regulations protecting people and the living planet.

The Australian government, after massive debates in and out of parliament, decided that cigarettes should be sold in plain packets, marked only with shocking health warnings. The decision was validated by the Australian supreme court. But, using a trade agreement Australia struck with Hong Kong, the tobacco company Philip Morris has asked an offshore tribunal to award it a vast sum in compensation for the loss of what it calls its intellectual property.

Hooolyyyyy shiiiit.

NWO shit right here.

Original post:
Today, 13 November 2013, WikiLeaks released the secret negotiated draft text for the entire TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) Intellectual Property Rights Chapter. The TPP is the largest-ever economic treaty, encompassing nations representing more than 40 per cent of the world’s GDP. The WikiLeaks release of the text comes ahead of the decisive TPP Chief Negotiators summit in Salt Lake City, Utah, on 19-24 November 2013. The chapter published by WikiLeaks is perhaps the most controversial chapter of the TPP due to its wide-ranging effects on medicines, publishers, internet services, civil liberties and biological patents. Significantly, the released text includes the negotiation positions and disagreements between all 12 prospective member states.

The TPP is the forerunner to the equally secret US-EU pact TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership), for which President Obama initiated US-EU negotiations in January 2013. Together, the TPP and TTIP will cover more than 60 per cent of global GDP. Both pacts exclude China.

Since the beginning of the TPP negotiations, the process of drafting and negotiating the treaty’s chapters has been shrouded in an unprecedented level of secrecy. Access to drafts of the TPP chapters is shielded from the general public. Members of the US Congress are only able to view selected portions of treaty-related documents in highly restrictive conditions and under strict supervision. It has been previously revealed that only three individuals in each TPP nation have access to the full text of the agreement, while 600 ’trade advisers’ – lobbyists guarding the interests of large US corporations such as Chevron, Halliburton, Monsanto and Walmart – are granted privileged access to crucial sections of the treaty text.

The TPP negotiations are currently at a critical stage. The Obama administration is preparing to fast-track the TPP treaty in a manner that will prevent the US Congress from discussing or amending any parts of the treaty. Numerous TPP heads of state and senior government figures, including President Obama, have declared their intention to sign and ratify the TPP before the end of 2013.
WikiLeaks’ Editor-in-Chief Julian Assange stated: “The US administration is aggressively pushing the TPP through the US legislative process on the sly.” The advanced draft of the Intellectual Property Rights Chapter, published by WikiLeaks on 13 November 2013, provides the public with the fullest opportunity so far to familiarise themselves with the details and implications of the TPP.

The 95-page, 30,000-word IP Chapter lays out provisions for instituting a far-reaching, transnational legal and enforcement regime, modifying or replacing existing laws in TPP member states. The Chapter’s subsections include agreements relating to patents (who may produce goods or drugs), copyright (who may transmit information), trademarks (who may describe information or goods as authentic) and industrial design.
The longest section of the Chapter – ’Enforcement’ – is devoted to detailing new policing measures, with far-reaching implications for individual rights, civil liberties, publishers, internet service providers and internet privacy, as well as for the creative, intellectual, biological and environmental commons. Particular measures proposed include supranational litigation tribunals to which sovereign national courts are expected to defer, but which have no human rights safeguards. The TPP IP Chapter states that these courts can conduct hearings with secret evidence. The IP Chapter also replicates many of the surveillance and enforcement provisions from the shelved SOPA and ACTA treaties.

The consolidated text obtained by WikiLeaks after the 26-30 August 2013 TPP meeting in Brunei – unlike any other TPP-related documents previously released to the public – contains annotations detailing each country’s positions on the issues under negotiation. Julian Assange emphasises that a “cringingly obsequious” Australia is the nation most likely to support the hardline position of US negotiators against other countries, while states including Vietnam, Chile and Malaysia are more likely to be in opposition. Numerous key Pacific Rim and nearby nations – including Argentina, Ecuador, Colombia, South Korea, Indonesia, the Philippines and, most significantly, Russia and China – have not been involved in the drafting of the treaty.

In the words of WikiLeaks’ Editor-in-Chief Julian Assange, “If instituted, the TPP’s IP regime would trample over individual rights and free expression, as well as ride roughshod over the intellectual and creative commons. If you read, write, publish, think, listen, dance, sing or invent; if you farm or consume food; if you’re ill now or might one day be ill, the TPP has you in its crosshairs.”
Current TPP negotiation member states are the United States, Japan, Mexico, Canada, Australia, Malaysia, Chile, Singapore, Peru, Vietnam, New Zealand and Brunei.
https://wikileaks.org/tpp/pressrelease.html

Full text is in there. Not sure what to make of it or what the specifics are, but figured it needed to be posted.
 

mjontrix

Member
tl;dr - bite the pillow the big corps are coming in dry, and they'll have lifetime patents on drugs so they'll be plundering you hard.

ninja edit: HOLY CRAP SECRET EVIDENCE! This is, oh god this is bad - this is some NSA level shit right here. So basically all you'd have to do is bribe your way to get the decision you want, have some secret evidence to make it seem 'legit' and you now control the courts.
 
D

Deleted member 13876

Unconfirmed Member
The Guardian has had some coverage of it.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/04/us-trade-deal-full-frontal-assault-on-democracy

The purpose of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is to remove the regulatory differences between the US and European nations. I mentioned it a couple of weeks ago. But I left out the most important issue: the remarkable ability it would grant big business to sue the living daylights out of governments which try to defend their citizens. It would allow a secretive panel of corporate lawyers to overrule the will of parliament and destroy our legal protections. Yet the defenders of our sovereignty say nothing.

The mechanism through which this is achieved is known as investor-state dispute settlement. It's already being used in many parts of the world to kill regulations protecting people and the living planet.

The Australian government, after massive debates in and out of parliament, decided that cigarettes should be sold in plain packets, marked only with shocking health warnings. The decision was validated by the Australian supreme court. But, using a trade agreement Australia struck with Hong Kong, the tobacco company Philip Morris has asked an offshore tribunal to award it a vast sum in compensation for the loss of what it calls its intellectual property.

On the other hand, there's people claiming it will create great prosperity for the countries involved:

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ic-trade-and-investment-partnership-democracy

Despite its byzantine name, the TTIP is in fact a trade deal between the EU and the US: an astonishingly bold project which aims to create a free market encompassing the 800 million peoples of Europe and America, potentially boosting our collective GDP by £180bn.

Whatever the case may be, it does seem there is very little transparency and media attention going to something that is a big deal that could shape policy for decades so I hope more people pick up on this.
 

Dascu

Member
The TTIP is "secret"? For fuck's sake, they're having a public briefing on Friday (at which I will be present).

I'm sorry, but this leak seems massively overblown and misinformed.
 
This should be on EVERY front page tomorrow true out the entire world, on every thing that calls itself news.

This is seriously so bad wow insane that, you know what is even more bad the fact that we will probably let this go over us and no one will care until its to late.
 

Dascu

Member
TTIP is different from TPP.

I know, I was referring to this quote:
The TPP is the forerunner to the equally secret US-EU pact TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership), for which President Obama initiated US-EU negotiations in January 2013. Together, the TPP and TTIP will cover more than 60 per cent of global GDP. Both pacts exclude China.

It's a basic free-trade deal, but of a very large scale. Been in negotiation hell for a while now and will continue to be so for the near future. And I'd like to reassure people that the EU is not going to bend over to the USA (hence why it's taking so long to negotiate), plus the Parliament will have to give its consent to it. The entire NSA scandal made the EU side even more skeptical and apprehensive.
 

Guerilla

Member
The TTIP is "secret"? For fuck's sake, they're having a public briefing on Friday (at which I will be present).

I'm sorry, but this leak seems massively overblown and misinformed.

What exactly is this public briefing? If it's the usual PR bullshit so that the corporatist scumbags can cover their asses then the agreement remains secretive. Will they release specific details about it? Also link to the public briefing please, can't find anything on google.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
Secret evidence is so beyond fucked that I'm not even sure if there even is a possible defense of it.

More secret evidence?

In all seriousness, I wonder if it's intended to be used for trade secrets. But in reality will get abused back and forth.
 

Dascu

Member
What exactly is this public briefing? If it's the usual PR bullshit so that the corporatist scumbags can cover their asses then the agreement remains secretive. Will they release specific details about it? Also link to the public briefing please, can't find anything on google.

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=982

Of course we're not going to get every detail, since it's still being negotiated. There is simply no reason to disclose every thing that was said, very much to avoid articles such as in the OP that can already skew public opinion, put pressure on the talks and spread misinformation.

My general point here is that it may be true that whatever is posted in the OP may have at one point been part of a draft. But with these negotiations, many of those elements can and probably have already been discarded. And whatever does make it through, will have to pass through the EU Parliament where it is under full public scrutiny.

So, a little bit of context please, people. Is it possible one of the USA negotiators put in or wanted to put in a paragraph on "secret evidence hearings"? Maybe. Is it still in the draft text? No idea. Will it be in the final text (months if not years off)? No idea either, but I'd say very very unlikely (such a clause, as described, would cause an enormous fit). If it is, will we ever find out and have the chance to combat it? Yes and it will be fought and struck down by the EP.
 
D

Deleted member 13876

Unconfirmed Member
A lot of the news I'm reading about it paints the TPP (not the TTIP) as a trojan horse that would give corporations more control over governments. Apparently of the 19 chapters in the agreement, only 5 are actually about free-trade. According to this video there's stuff about internet freedom, SOPA, copyright regulation, food safety deregulation, financial deregulation and other stuff all these countries would have to put into practice.

Here's a quote from Lori Wallach, the director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch.

"And then there’s a whole set of very worrisome issues relating to Internet freedom. Through sort of the backdoor of the copyright chapter of TPP is a whole chunk of SOPA, the Stop Online Privacy Act, that activism around the country successfully derailed a year ago. Think about all the things that would be really hard to get into effect as a corporation in public, a lot of them rejected here and in the other 11 countries, and that is what’s bundled in to the TPP. And every country would be required to change its laws domestically to meet these rules. The binding provision is, each country shall ensure the conformity of domestic laws, regulations and procedures."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS-x5SlcPPM

Full video and article:

www.democracynow.org/2013/10/4/a_corporate_trojan_horse_obama_pushes

I don't claim to know the full extent of this, but there are a number of news sources who are very worried about this and I'm hoping for more clarity soon.

Just started watching this video, seems to cover it more thoroughly:

http://vimeo.com/78324869

BIll Moyers (Yves Smith and Dean Baker on Secrets in Trade). This video also goes into the TTIP a bit.
 

Hrothgar

Member
The weird thing is that the TTIP would be inherently lacking in civil/consumer protection (due to the US' legal environment which will undoubtedly be pushed onto the treaty), which would nullify all the progress the EU has made in that department in the last two decades.
 

Dascu

Member
Apparently of the 19 chapters in the agreement, only 5 are actually about free-trade. According to this video there's stuff about internet freedom, SOPA, copyright regulation, food safety deregulation, financial deregulation and other stuff all these countries would have to put into practice.

I don't know which provisions from SOPA are being re-negotiated. I can't imagine many substantial ones though, since DG Trade simply has no mandate to negotiate things that aren't related to trade.

As for the other subjects you mentioned: All of these are related to trade. It's things about having the same kind of information on food packaging, same kind of copyright protection so that a USA book publisher can sell his stuff in the EU without having to worry that people can copy it here. Nothing spectacular.
 

gcubed

Member
The Guardian has had some coverage of it.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/04/us-trade-deal-full-frontal-assault-on-democracy



On the other hand, there's people claiming it will create great prosperity for the countries involved:

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ic-trade-and-investment-partnership-democracy



Whatever the case may be, it does seem there is very little transparency and media attention going to something that is a big deal that could shape policy for decades so I hope more people pick up on this.
Of course it will create great prosperity, but at what cost?
 
Gee, I'm sure they only kept it secret to protect the public....

I always try to look at things from both sides on these types of negotiations. On the side that I'm on, the consumer/citizen side, I feel like things like this shouldn't have to be "exposes" on Wikileaks to get some coverage...the mainstream media ought to be all over it, and legislators ought to be out there talking with their constituencies.

The other side of me deals with things like contract and agreement negotiations on the daily as part of my job, and I can say with full surety that every time, every side tries to get as much in there that will benefit the as possible, whether it's pricing, legal protection, or whatever. That part of me is now thinking "a bunch of interest groups are probably going to shove as much shit in there as possible to ensure that they can do whatever the fuck they want and not get into legal trouble, but it won't go through." To follow, it also means that well, no surprise here, business is going to be greedy. All that legislators need to do is READ THE FUCKING CONTRACT and negotiate well. Don't sign something you're not 100% behind (or at least the bulk of your constituency is behind).

That last bit carries lots of faith in government, which I grant is reasonably shaky at times.
 

mavs

Member
It's come to us now hoping extremist tea party republicans save us from Obama. Wow. I can't imagine the House passing this.

Uhh really? It gives corporations the opportunity to nullify powers of the government? The politicians who feed off the backs of the tea party won't be in favor of that?
 
D

Deleted member 13876

Unconfirmed Member
I always try to look at things from both sides on these types of negotiations. On the side that I'm on, the consumer/citizen side, I feel like things like this shouldn't have to be "exposes" on Wikileaks to get some coverage...the mainstream media ought to be all over it, and legislators ought to be out there talking with their constituencies.

The alternative press over here has been paying attention it, including papers like The Guardian but on the whole it has been pretty quiet. Wikileaks isn't the ideal venue as it makes it easier to discredit it as conspiracy ramblings.
 
The alternative press over here has been paying attention it, including papers like The Guardian but on the whole it has been pretty quiet. Wikileaks isn't the ideal venue as it makes it easier to discredit it as conspiracy ramblings.

To a degree, yea. I think Wikileaks carries some credibility as Whistleblower Prime. My statement was more on the US side. Sometimes things just float through without discussion due to interests of media stakeholders (I think).

It is good to see that outlets in other nations are looking at it and making the information more front and center, publicly.
 

Nokterian

Member
This was known for a long time it is a follow up from ACTA,SOPA and PIPA. it is just as disgusting and it is all done behind closed doors this needs to be stopped.
 
D

Deleted member 13876

Unconfirmed Member
A bit of a fringe thing related to the case I found, in terms of how it might affect copyright law. The New Zealand judge who was handling the Kim Dotcom case spoke out against a proposal in the TPP that would make it a crime to circumvent region locking on DVDs, made a remark against the US and was forced to step down from the case.

There are technological protection measures of all sorts of flavours and one of the flavours and one of those flavours is one that stops you from accessing a region one DVD [the US region] on your region 4 [NZ] DVD player.

Now you can hack around that, and you can do that around New Zealand law perfectly legitimately under the 2008 amendments to the Copyright Act – because access was the issue, copying was not.

Under TPP and the American Millennium Copyright Act provisions, you will not be allowed to do that. That will be prohibited – point one.

Point two – if you do, you will be a criminal. That’s what will happen.

Now even before the 2008 amendments, it wasn’t criminalised.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/opinion/what-judge-harvey-said

It's from a year ago and I know the text could have changed in between then and whatever, but it is an indication of the type of legislation proposed in the package.
 

bonercop

Member
a treaty signed with 600 companies at the negotiation table and zero public representatives or any other interests?

i'm sure this will greatly benefit the common man

On the other hand, there's people claiming it will create great prosperity for the countries involved:

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ic-trade-and-investment-partnership-democracy



Whatever the case may be, it does seem there is very little transparency and media attention going to something that is a big deal that could shape policy for decades so I hope more people pick up on this.

that article sure doesn't explain how this treaty would do that. It just asserts that this will bring greater prosperity.

I don't see how anyone can say that after examining the bits and pieces that have managed to leak out about this treaty.
 

Enkidu

Member
The purpose of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is to remove the regulatory differences between the US and European nations. I mentioned it a couple of weeks ago. But I left out the most important issue: the remarkable ability it would grant big business to sue the living daylights out of governments which try to defend their citizens. It would allow a secretive panel of corporate lawyers to overrule the will of parliament and destroy our legal protections. Yet the defenders of our sovereignty say nothing.
This doesn't seem right. I feel like I've read several times that this particular part of the agreement is something which the US want to add but the EU is refusing, hence why talks haven't gone anywhere for a while.
 
D

Deleted member 13876

Unconfirmed Member
a treaty signed with 600 companies at the negotiation table and zero public representatives or any other interests?

i'm sure this will greatly benefit the common man



that article sure doesn't explain how this treaty would do that. It just asserts that this will bring greater prosperity.

I don't see how anyone can say that after examining the bits and pieces that have managed to leak out about this treaty.

I felt obligated to include a counterpoint, but I'm not exactly buying it myself. I'm sure it'll create profit, for some and maybe the author expects to be included in that.
 

bonercop

Member
This doesn't seem right. I feel like I've read several times that this particular part of the agreement is something which the US want to add but the EU is refusing, hence why talks haven't gone anywhere for a while.

the EU has been signaling that they might derail the trade deal over the NSA stuff(which is really just Kabuki imo, at best they'll delay the deal).

I haven't seen the sovereignty issue be brought up by anyone.
 

jWILL253

Banned
I just read on Mother Jones that there are a number of Democrats and Republicans that oppose this deal and will vote it down, as Obama still has to get permission from Congress to be granted the authority to fast-track any free trade agreement without input from Congress. As you recall, they voted down Clinton's request for the same permissions, while barely passing Bush's request some time later.

I don't think this will go anywhere, but it will only be because of our obstructionist-led Congress. However, this type of international trade law is sinister in nature, and having said that, I've now had it with Obama. One day, he'll advocate and legislate for something that is reasonable and progressive, and the next day, he'll do some crazy shit like this.

He needs to fall the fuck back...
 

Toxi

Banned
My dad just called me. He was horrified by this news and asked, to quote, "What the fuck is wrong with him?" Considering that he rallied voters for the Obama campaigns in 2008 and 2012, that's not a good sign.
 

Loki

Count of Concision
Of course we're not going to get every detail, since it's still being negotiated. There is simply no reason to disclose every thing that was said, very much to avoid articles such as in the OP that can already skew public opinion, put pressure on the talks and spread misinformation.

Oh yes, heaven forfend the average person have access to information which will undoubtedly affect his life, and be able to pressure his elected officials to serve his interests, which they are elected to do. God, no. <roll eyes>
 

leroidys

Member
Of course it will create great prosperity, but at what cost?

Hey buddy, this is the US. We can only talk about things relative to our GDP.

Shaving 1% off of everyone's take home to make sure that 45,000 don't die a year from lack of health insurance? GIVE ME A BREAK.
 
My dad just called me. He was horrified by this news and asked, to quote, "What the fuck is wrong with him?" Considering that he rallied voters for the Obama campaigns in 2008 and 2012, that's not a good sign.

Nothing is wrong with Obama. It's just that his agenda isn't our agenda.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom