FTAA Treaty Threatens Innovation

The Importance of writes "IP Justice has published a white paper on the intellectual property aspects of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) treaty, which is an attempt to create a single free trade agreement for the Western Hemisphere. Read the press release. The analysis is pretty devastating. The proposed language of the agreement has a number of serious flaws, including (but certainly not limited to) enhanced criminal penalties, a super-DMCA provision, reduced scope for fair use, and database protection elements. The proposed treaty is supposed to be complete by January 2005 and go into effect December 2005. Now is not too early to let your representatives and others know what a bad idea the intellectual property elements of the treaty are."

Comments

Representatives?

[Jeffrey Baker]

If you live in the USA, contacting your representative will be fruitless. The Senate ratifies treaties without consulting the House. Try contacting your Senator instead.

buh-bye Fair Use

[mabu]

Article 1 of the copyright section in the draft FTAA Treaty proposes the following new definition for "fair use":

"Use that does not interfere with the normal exploitation of the work or [unreasonably] [unjustifiably] prejudice the legitimate interests of the author [or right holder]".

FTAA's proposed definition is dramatically narrower than the current open-ended definition of fair use guaranteed by the US Constitution and codified in Section 107 of the US Copyright Act.[40] The US Supreme Court stated that fair use must be decided on a "case-by-case basis" and that there can be no "bright line rules" for deciding matters of fair use. Fair use is intended to permit unauthorized, but socially beneficial, copies of copyrighted works in cases such as personal use, research, and criticism.

In determining whether a particular use would be fair, traditional US copyright law focuses the question primarily on the use engaged it. In contrast, FTAA's definition for fair use focuses solely on the commercial interests of the copyright holder in determining whether a particular use would be ruled fair. No consideration is given to the social benefits of the use under the proposed FTAA Treaty.

FTAA's narrow definition of fair use also gives short shrift to Americans' freedom of expression rights guaranteed by the US Constitution. For example, copying something in order to criticize it can easily prejudice the rightsholders' interests (since it could discourage patronage); and traditional fair use, which accounts for free speech interests, would permit such copying. But under FTAA's definition, copying for critical purposes will count against the use being considered fair, chilling freedom of expression throughout the hemisphere.

If Fair Use is redefined in this manner, it seems like the FTAA could be interpreted to outlaw public libraries. If you check out a book as opposed to buying it, under the FTAA's new economic-based model of assessing Fair Use, a library would be liable for causing financial damage to the publisher.

Kudos to our corporate overlords for their foresight and wisdom.

Re:Not likely.

[MarkusH]

This isn't the terrorist-frigtened congress of 2001, you aren't going to be able to slip this under people's noses this time like with the DMCA.

Um, the DMCA was passed into law on Oct 28, 1998. It had nothing to do with the terror attacks, and the frightening thereof.

Demonstrations in November

[Anonymous Coward]

Folks, fuck the FTAA. Not only do we get fucked as far as IP-rights and other digital concerns go, farmers, trade unionists and other workers across the hemisphere will suffer. The FTAA is essentially an expansion of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), which cost thousands of jobs in my region (upper midwest US) alone.

There's some great information out there on NAFTA and the FTAA (even though the FTAA is still mostly secret...); read up on it, and come on down to Miami November 19 and 20 to help us shut down the FTAA ministerial. You've seen photos of activists in Europe fighting the new patent laws; take the stuggle off-line and into the streets! Thousands of folks, from hacktivists to anarchists to teachers to your aunt, are mobilizing for the demonstrations. Join us in Miami and help put a stop to the FTAA and its infringements on rights in most every sphere of life, from agriculture to the internet.

Some resources:

ftaaresistance.org , infoshop.org, autonomen.net/madftaa/miami, tallahassee.indymedia.org.

Re:Wow, harsh...

[jrsimmons]

The heading of this particular piece of the outline is a bit misleading. The story summary is also misleading -- this whitepaper is a very biased view of the treaty, not at all what I'm used to when reading a "whitepaper", which is usually from the developers of whatever the paper describes. The actual articles, from the text summary in the whitepaper, state that the concern for P2P filesharers is that they may now be in violation of the artist's new right of communication if they are already in violation of the distribution and reproduction rights. I also didn't see anything that made me thing prison terms would be the likely punishment. This whitepaper is interesting, but I think it was meant to inflame more than to communicate. It's too hard to get to the actual articles and not obvious enough when simple opinion is being offered.

More Details

[Jameth]

IP Justice Presents the Top 10 Reasons to Delete the IP Chapter of the FTAA Agreement:

1.
Threatens to Imprison Millions of People for P2P File -Sharing of Music
One option proposed for Article 4.1 of the intellectual property rights chapter in the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) Treaty would mandate that countries must send noncommercial infringers such as Peer2-Peer (P2P) file-sharers to prison. By changing the standard that triggers criminal penalties from commercial infringements to "significant willful infringements," people will be sent to prison for infringements that have no financial or commercial motivation or gain. An otherwise law-abiding person who swaps dozens or hundreds of songs over the Internet would be subject to imprisonment under this lower standard. An estimated 60 million Americans use P2P file-sharing software in the US alone.

2.
Restrains Trade and Prevents Competition
Mislabeled as a "free trade" agreement, the FTAA Treaty will actually harm free trade and restrict competition in the market. Anti-circumvention prohibitions, such as those contained in the FTAA Treaty, prevent people from bypassing trade barriers like DVD region code restrictions. They also create monopolies for entrenched corporations over the manufacture of compatible or interoperable devices. These provisions prevent consumers from purchasing after market replacement parts in industries completely unrelated to copyright. For example, Ford could embed a chip in a tire in order to require consumers to only purchase Ford tires. In the US where anti-circumvention laws are already in place, they have been used to sue a competing manufacturer of printer cartridges and a competing manufacturer of garage door openers for providing compatible parts.

3.
Chills Freedom of Expression and Scientific Research
Anti-circumvention laws outlaw tools including software and technical data that could help someone to bypass technological restrictions on digital media. Computer programs and research papers that assist in circumventing these restrictions are illegal under provisions against trafficking in circumvention technologies. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) outlawed circumvention in the US , creating a chilling effect for scientists and computer programmers who publish information about the vulnerabilities of media companies' technologies. Many researchers have been threatened with prosecution for their research and one Russian PhD student spent 6 weeks in jail on charges of trafficking in circumvention devices for the legitimate software he had written. Prominent scientists have publicly stated that they will not travel to or publish their research in jurisdictions that have passed anti-circumvention laws out of fear of liability. Scientific conferences are relocating to countries outside the US , where the organizers and speakers will not be subject to imprisonment for disseminating technical papers that describe the weaknesses of certain technologies. The FTAA Treaty threatens to expand these anti-circumvention provisions and extend them to all signatory nations, in violation of both the US Constitution and the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantee of freedom of expression.

4.
Stifles Innovation and Inhibits Free and Open Source Software Development
Anti-circumvention provisions in the draft FTAA agreement limit the ability of innovators to develop media devices that are compatible with existing devices. Companies and individuals are prevented from building new and innovative technologies that would enable lawful uses of media, such as playing a DVD movie on nonproprietary software. Large multinational corporations can build on their monopolies and force small innovators out of the market. Open Source and Free Software developers, a major source of innovation in the software industry, are explicitly discriminated against in one proposed clause to Article 21.1, which provides less protection to software that is not being produced for commercial gain

memories

[barryfandango]

For those who remember, the FTAA was the reason for the massive protests in Quebec City in 2001. It was the biggest shindig since the Battle of Seattle. Ah, the memories of getting teargassed while peacefully protesting... damn that CS gas is wicked stuff.

http://members.tripod.com/infobank1/

Re:"Free Trade" is not about free trade

[TopShelf]

I don't see how you can make the argument that "NAFTA has been bad for... all three countries." Ross Perot's "giant sucking sound" failed to materialize, as the growth in international trade helped create new jobs in the US as many manufacturing jobs headed south. While Perot predicted massive unemployment under NAFTA, in actuality US unemployment hit historic lows throughout most of the 90's, and is still relatively low considering the economy over the last couple years.

To quote from the CBO's analysis of NAFTA's effects:

By CBO's estimates, NAFTA increased U.S. exports to Mexico by 2.2 percent ($1.1 billion) in 1994--an effect that rose gradually, reaching 11.3 percent ($10.3 billion) in 2001. Similarly, the agreement boosted imports from Mexico by amounts that rose from 1.9 percent ($0.9 billion) in 1994 to 7.7 percent ($9.4 billion) in 2001.

Relative to the size of the economy, the increases in exports never exceeded 0.12 percent of U.S. GDP, and the increases in imports never exceeded 0.11 percent of U.S. GDP. The effects were more significant for the much smaller Mexican economy, however. The increase in U.S. exports to Mexico represented 1.9 percent of Mexican GDP in 2001, and the increase in U.S. imports from Mexico equaled 1.7 percent of Mexican GDP.

Free Trade-Mass export of US assets

[randall_burns]

Ross Perot was essentially correct. NAFTA and the US involvement in the WTO has been accompanied by massive transfer of US technological infrastructure overseas. This has been facilitated by substantial government deficits, massive immigration and transfer of US capital and real estate assets(as well as an increasing trend of the US government to vote on the basis of political donations rather than popular will). The problem was less apparent in the 90's because there was a brisk trade associated with facilitating the early parts of this transfer.

The latest "Free Trade" bills also contain provisions that expand L1 non-immigrant visas. These trade deals more or less mandate the US cannot effectively control its borders.

The only candidate for president seriously addressing this issue is Dennis Kucinich(www.kucinich.us).

Slashdotters of the Western Hemisphere:

[speedfreak_5]

It appears that there is a Free Trade of the Americas website. They also have links to who to call if you feel the need to sound off. I trust we all know what to do with this information. :)

Stop the FTAA

[radicalsubversiv]

This is the just the tip of the iceberg with the FTAA, affectionately known as "NAFTA on Steroids." It would wreck havoc on the hemisphere, bringing living standards, wages, environmental protections, etc. down everywhere. This isn't about free trade, it's about a corporate-driven race to the bottom.

Conveniently, the next meeting to plan it is in Miami next month, giving us the convenient opportunity to deliver our thoughts on these matters in person. For more info on the FTAA and the Miamo demonstrations, check out the Citizens Trade Campaign.

Senators?

[ickypoo]

Unfortunately, not even the Senate has the authority to negotiate policy on the FTAA. Why? Because on August 6th 2002 they gave up that right when president Bush signed into law 'Fast Track' trade promotion authority, granting the president the ability to negotiate trade treaties as he sees fit, independant of Congressional input. All Congress gets to do now is vote 'yes' or 'no' on the finalized text of agreements such as the FTAA.

The best action against this corporatization of national policy is to take to the streets. The FTAA's next Ministerial meeting is in Miami on November 20th and 21st. Get some friends in a car, drive there, and make your voice heard by the people making the decisions. Write articles. Put them in your local weeklies and on websites and in flyers and posters and handbills.

The FTAA isn't a national issue because there isn't enough public outcry. There isn't any public outcry because people don't know whats at stake. Educate yourself and others. Support Indymedia.