WikiLeaks, and oh who am I kidding. Unless you haven’t had access to the internet since 2006, you already have an opinion on WikiLeaks, Assange, and the PFC formerly known as Bradley Manning.
Which is important for what this filing is about. Once we form opinions, we generally don’t question ourselves. This is a general observation of mine, not some sort of scientific research that will cause you to question whether you agree with scientific research generally, specifically, or on a case-by-case basis.
I hope you haven’t formed an opinion on the TransPacific Partnership (TPP). The TPP is a hugely important piece of international trade legislation that involves many of the more powerful nation-states ringing the Pacific Ocean: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam.
OK, so let’s talk about what the TPP is.
The Office of the United States Trade Representative has a minisite for the TPP, but only has statements about the TPP. No text or uncurated language is available: http://www.ustr.gov/tpp We really shouldn’t be surprised at the level of message control on the website, it is a .gov address. But there’s no citation to authority. None. Everything is based upon a “Here’s what we’re telling you about this thing we can’t specifically tell you about.”
uh, say what?
OK. Well, we we can reasonably conclude that since it’s a trade agreement, it involves IP. I see New Zealand on the list of countries. Whenever I see New Zealand and IP together, I think Kim Dotcom.
You’re probably not an IP nerd, so you don’t know about how terrible the US Department of Justice appears in New Zealand. Read up here and here. The second link is to a decision by NZ Judge David Harvey, wherein he declares the FBI’s case against MegaUpload attempts to use concepts of civil law, in particular secondary copyright infringement, in a criminal case – for those who haven’t studied law, combining civil law and criminal law in the same case is utterly and completely asinine. Clearly this isn’t dispositive, what does a Kiwi really know about US law, but it’s not often a Judge accuses the legal enforcement arm of the most powerful country in the world of confusing its own laws. IP in the southern Pacific is, at the least, questionably enforced.
Whenever I see the US and IP together, I think Electronic Frontier Foundation. Why? Because the EFF has maintained a lawsuit against the NSA since 2008. The EFF is nearly categorically opposed to the TPP: “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.” Read the whole page for their worldwide rebuttal.
I beg you to form your own, informed opinion. Do not take what you hear on TV or read on major outlets to be a honest and reasonable representation of the truth – spinning the news to the political aims of the network’s Boards of Directors has overtaken journalistic integrity and the very theory of the fifth estate as an independent, professional occupation: Cite. Cite. Form your own opinion, and be very wary of any opinion suggested to you for the TPP that doesn’t cite the TPP.
Example: The US Gov’t and the people are diametrically opposed on how to understand the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Compare this with this with this.
Finally, so you’ll trust this correspondent’s opinion, the May 2014 draft version of the TPP is here. Infographic here. FAQs here.
My hope is that you’ll encounter the next story about the TPP with enough background information to see past the honne of the story and see the tatemae of the publisher’s political agenda. News is a for-profit business, notwithstanding the laws our Congress has passed giving journalists such heightened access to affairs in the public interest.
Follow Knolan at @LawOfDucats and listen to his full report on this week’s David Dorer Show