Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 181 posts

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#21

Post by thomasahle »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #8

There is a very interesting podcast (LSE series about a year ago now), with the chair of the previous round of physical goods talks explaining what has gone wrong, and how to fix it. In essence the idea is a good one - set out worldwide standards of trade - like WTO - for intellectual goods as well as physical. If I remember it's things like having same standards of animal welfare innabbatoirs (the U.S. Think EU chic…

What about if one country wants to highen their standards in a certain area, will all the countries that signed up then immediately have to follow? Won't the other countries bully the first one to stay to the status quo?

Also, are there really always such a thing as 'highest standard'? Couldn't it be that more often than not, the rules aim for opposing values?

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#22

Post by snarfy »

fixxer wrote: post #2

Can a progressive democrat please explain to me why their hero is supporting this? PS To those trying to claim he isn't a progressive... Obama may not be the progressive you want, but he is the one you deserve.

Democrat or Republican, this is about rich vs poor, and neither party represents the poor.

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#24

Post by afarrell »

fixxer wrote: post #2

Can a progressive democrat please explain to me why their hero is supporting this? PS To those trying to claim he isn't a progressive... Obama may not be the progressive you want, but he is the one you deserve.

Because the US government wants more tax revenue and tax revenue comes from corporate revenue and the salaries/capital gains that flow from it. US companies tend to generate a lot of revenue from IP. Therefore, the US Government has an incentive to help corporations extract more revenue from IP.

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#25

Post by avdempsey »

brudgers wrote: post #20
dmitrygr wrote: post #11

I, for one, am glad to know that that interests of everyone important are well protected in this treaty. I just wish I knew how to join this class of people who are important. Apparently being a citizen is not enough anymore.

There's been several carefully crafted changes to the language of American politics over the past twenty-five years and "citizen" has been replaced by "taxpayer" [1] as the relevant political constituency. Since corporations ostensibly pay taxes, their personhood has been lifted. Likewise, since wealthy individuals tend to pay more taxes on an absolute basis (despite an increasingly regressive system) their interests…

Well said. And correspondingly, very little talk of responsibilities.

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#26

Post by slg »

brudgers wrote: post #20
dmitrygr wrote: post #11

I, for one, am glad to know that that interests of everyone important are well protected in this treaty. I just wish I knew how to join this class of people who are important. Apparently being a citizen is not enough anymore.

There's been several carefully crafted changes to the language of American politics over the past twenty-five years and "citizen" has been replaced by "taxpayer" [1] as the relevant political constituency. Since corporations ostensibly pay taxes, their personhood has been lifted. Likewise, since wealthy individuals tend to pay more taxes on an absolute basis (despite an increasingly regressive system) their interests…

I think you are letting the citizenry off the hook for their part in this. The only reason corporations gained this power is because they have more collective money (or at least are more willing to use that money) to lobby. The only reason lobbying works is because politicians need money to get elected. The only reason politicians need money to get elected is because people are so susceptible to political marketing. Coporate personhood is therefore just a symptom of a larger problem, a disinterested and easily manipulated electorate.

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#27

Post by aqme28 »

brudgers wrote: post #20
dmitrygr wrote: post #11

I, for one, am glad to know that that interests of everyone important are well protected in this treaty. I just wish I knew how to join this class of people who are important. Apparently being a citizen is not enough anymore.

There's been several carefully crafted changes to the language of American politics over the past twenty-five years and "citizen" has been replaced by "taxpayer" [1] as the relevant political constituency. Since corporations ostensibly pay taxes, their personhood has been lifted. Likewise, since wealthy individuals tend to pay more taxes on an absolute basis (despite an increasingly regressive system) their interests…

More noticeably, "people" has been replaced with "citizen."

The bill of rights specifically delineates protections that apply to "people" and protections that apply to "citizens." The dialogue is often about civil rights violations of American citizens, but the original language is more often "people."

From Yick Wo v. Hopkins

The rights of the petitioners, as affected by the proceedings of which they complain, are not less because they are aliens and subjects of the emperor of China. . . . The fourteenth amendment to the constitution is not confined to the protection of citizens. It says: “Nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” These provisions are universal in their application, to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction, without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality; and the equal protection of the laws is a pledge of the protection of equal laws. . . . The questions we have to consider and decide in these cases, therefore, are to be treated as involving the rights of every citizen of the United States equally with those of the strangers and aliens who now invoke the jurisdiction of the court.

Example from the other side: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/01/07/kt-mcfarland-chris... With the Detroit bomber we now have a clear pattern that reveals how the Obama administration deals with terrorists – try them in civilian courts with the full rights of American citizens... The president is treating terrorists like citizens and citizens like terrorists.

Note: I've taken both these examples from an excellent Glenn Greenwald article on the subject

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#28

Post by justizin »

thomasahle wrote: post #21
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #8

There is a very interesting podcast (LSE series about a year ago now), with the chair of the previous round of physical goods talks explaining what has gone wrong, and how to fix it. In essence the idea is a good one - set out worldwide standards of trade - like WTO - for intellectual goods as well as physical. If I remember it's things like having same standards of animal welfare innabbatoirs (the U.S. Think EU chic…

What about if one country wants to highen their standards in a certain area, will all the countries that signed up then immediately have to follow? Won't the other countries bully the first one to stay to the status quo? Also, are there really always such a thing as 'highest standard'? Couldn't it be that more often than not, the rules aim for opposing values?

> Won't the other countries bully the first one to stay to the status quo?

That is _precisely_ what all of these trade agreements are about, TPP, TiSA, etc..

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#29

Post by mohawk »

dmitrygr wrote: post #11

I, for one, am glad to know that that interests of everyone important are well protected in this treaty. I just wish I knew how to join this class of people who are important. Apparently being a citizen is not enough anymore.

> I just wish I knew how to join this class of people who are important.

Here's a rough guide: be willing to spend lots of $$$ on politicians, and more than the other Johns. Own media companies so you can influence what people think. Work together with other rich people with similar goals, it will take some time.

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#30

Post by snowwrestler »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #8

There is a very interesting podcast (LSE series about a year ago now), with the chair of the previous round of physical goods talks explaining what has gone wrong, and how to fix it. In essence the idea is a good one - set out worldwide standards of trade - like WTO - for intellectual goods as well as physical. If I remember it's things like having same standards of animal welfare innabbatoirs (the U.S. Think EU chic…

If the idea is "highest [regulatory] standard wins," I doubt the IP provisions of that new deal would be any more palatable to the folks here on HN than the TPP will be.

The "behind closed doors" concern is mostly fake. "Secrecy" is a story line that tests well with folks who don't know how policy gets made in general. For example, the PPACA (aka Obamacare) and Dodd-Frank bills were extensively negotiated in private before being offered on the House and Senate floors for votes. I don't recall much complaining about secrecy then (edit: I mean from Democrats like Senator Warren).

Generally speaking, people object to private negotiations only if they object to the substance of the negotiations.

Post reply on HN