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

I hate to be so pessimistic/cynical but...

[rhadamanthus]

"Now is not too early to let your representatives and others know what a bad idea the intellectual property elements of the treaty are."

Why bother? Honestly, what is the outcome here? I have written to my congresspeople probably on the order of 10-15 times each about an item specifically regarding the myth of intellectual property and its associated devestation. I have recived neat and grammatically precise responses each time, full of absolutely nothing of value or substance regarding the issues. Not even my representative's opinion on the matter. You don't get congress to go against measures like this (i.e., measures that assure corporate "donations") unless there is a *really* massive demonstration. The kind that the American public has not shown any sort of willingness or poise to do in oh-so-many years.

I will write my congressperson again this time, only with a heavy hand, and a large dose of bitterness in knowing that I don't have the pocketbook required to make a real impact.

Corporate politics is ruining what's left of the U.S., and is pulling a lot of other nations down with it.

--rhad

"Free Trade" is not about free trade

[TPFH]

If these so called Free Trade agreements were really about free trade, they would be a lot less complicated. They would just be about reducing tarrifs. What these "Trade Agreements" are really about is granting special rights and privilages to corporations, sometimes even making them above the law, at the expense of our national sovereignty.

For example, with NAFTA Canada sued the United States saying that banning asbestos is an infringement of Free Trade.

A few years ago before the WTO became a household word (err Acronym) they were trying to pass the Multilateral Agreement on Investment which would have given coporations an explicit Right to Profit above and beyond a citizens rights and privilages.

And just look at the current example. In the name of Free Trade they are trying to make fair use of our own legally purchased IP illegal, such as bypassing DVD Region codes.

It is not a matter of U.S. vs. Mexico or whatever. NAFTA has been bad for the general population of all three countries, and now they want to extend it to the entire western hemisphere.

It is all about the special interests.