Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Announces Global Intellectual Property Plan

Angry_Admin writes "ZDNet is running a story about how the U.S. has announced new plans to expand its crackdown on intellectual-property infringement overseas. From the article:'One program would place intellectual property experts on the ground in regions where infringement is considered a concern. There they would work with overseas U.S. businesses and native government officials to advocate improved intellectual-property rights protection, according to a department fact sheet. Another program, called the Global Intellectual Property Rights Academy, would train foreign judges, enforcement officials and other stakeholders in international intellectual property obligations and best practices.'"

12 of 292 comments (clear)

  1. Its cold here in hell by hackstraw · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From TFA:

    Another programme, called the Global Intellectual Property Rights Academy, would train foreign judges, enforcement officials and other stakeholders in international intellectual property "obligations" and best practices. The academy, overseen by the US Patent and Trademark Office, plans to convene in 24 sessions in 2006, paying all travel expenses for the foreign participants, who will come from many of the same areas where experts will be working.

    I don't know what to even say to that.

    The US Patent and Trademark Office has their own special issues. We are going to "train" people about their laws concerning intellectual property "obligations" and "best practices"?

    Put me in charge of this damn thing. I'll use napalm to train these guys.

    I'm speechless. I don't think I really want to live in this country (USA) any more.

  2. On the sole export of the US by Haiku+4+U · · Score: 3, Interesting
    When all you make is
    crappy IP, you damn well
    gonna do just this.

    I miss the old days
    when we could point to something
    tangible we made.

    Now, all we export
    is bad movies, music, and
    pain and suffering.

  3. Ooh, watch out, Canada! by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm surprised they didn't mention Canada. See, Canada currently has Life+50 copyright (while Europe, for instance, has Life+70); unless someone leans on them, the complete works of A. A. Milne (d. 1956) will become public domain there on January 1, 2007. So, given that Winnie the Pooh is a particularly large cash cow for Disney, who wants to bet that Canada mysteriously chooses to extend their copyrights to "harmonize" (or whatever the bullshit phrase is) their copyrights with ours, or with Europe's?

    --
    Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
  4. Before everyone gets too hot about this... by Kphrak · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've already seen hundreds of "The US is a dictatorship based on world domination, RIAA MPAA Microsoft Bush corporations hate hate hate" comments as a result of this article. Before everyone starts screaming about the same thing in a frenzy of knee-jerk reactions, keep in mind that many developing nations run factories dedicated to producing illegal copies of software, mostly American, Japanese, and European. In Indonesia one used to be able to find whole software stores with not one legitimate copy of a product in them (probably still can; I was there about six months ago). Lawmakers and judges in these countries officially support intellectual property, but wink at it in practice.

    I don't know, let me put this question up to Slashdot's tender mercies: Do we advocate illegal copying of commercial software, and if so, why? Although I know we're supposed to be for the "little guy", and against the corporations, these guys aren't Johnny Downloader; they're companies that make their living solely from copying the products of other people's labor. Is it because "information wants to be free", and that the very idea of exchanging money for software is evil? Is it because Microsoft or Redhat or Oracle are evil, and they should be punished for their crimes by the piracy of their software?

    The United States has a big software business. It has copyright laws that are, on paper, agreed to by other countries by international agreement. So why the big fuss when they want them to be enforced?

    A quick side note: The availability of illegal proprietary software hinders the adoption of open source in developing nations because Windows is so readily available (about $3 in USD per copy). In addition, the GPL is an intellectual property agreement. If we stand for the violation of commercial intellectual property, we must allow for the violation of open-source intellectual property. Legally, they are no different.

    --

    There's no sig like this sig anywhere near this sig, so this must be the sig.
  5. Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries? by lelitsch · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Could you explain that in a bit more detail? Who forces the US to export soybeans and machine tools to China? Oh, you mean because they pay us money for them?

    Seriously, though, since the US is running up a 162 billion dolalr trade deficit with China, a trade embargo would be really successful. You'll stand in an empty WalMart way before anyone in China can't get raw materials. (Hint: they don't that much from the US. Machine tools come from Europe, mainly Germany, ICs are *exported* from China and Taiwan to the US, wood from Canada, oil from the Persian Gulf, and they can live without soy beans, or get them from Brazil).

  6. This is ridiculous! by WidescreenFreak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Karma be damned!!

    Look, W. I voted for you not once, but twice! What the hell are you trying to prove with this latest shenanigan? The U.S. already has a reputation for being a global bully who pushes its views on others. I don't agree with that across the board, but now you're doing nothing more than adding really flammable fuel to that particular fire.

    Let me get this straight. We're going to train foreign individuals who are not in any way U.S. citizens or have any direct link to the U.S. in order to protect U.S. media corporation interests?? And exactly WHY are *MY* tax dollars (as well as the tax dollars of those who already hate you) going to protect the intellectual property of corporations that have enough money to do this on their own?

    The simple fact is that if those other countries gave a rat's rear end about the IP rights of U.S. corporations, they would already be doing more to protect those rights or they would have come to us by now asking for help in accomplishing that task. It doesn't take a brain surgeon, which you are proving more and more that you are not, to realize that they most likely don't care. The only reason why they might care is that they wanted to avoid what you're now doing, thus making this whole thing out to be quite disingenuous.

    We already look like selfish bullies to the rest of the world. This is just going to make it worse. Thanks a lot. I really hope that those other countries tell you to piss off with respect to this particular issue.

    --
    The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
    1. Re:This is ridiculous! by swordgeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Look, W. I voted for you not once, but twice!"

      And you're blaming him? Take a look in the mirror!

      --

      "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  7. Re:When questioned about this plan... by MrLint · · Score: 2, Interesting

    too bad you'll never get to watch it. The media companies will declare it subversive and refuse to sell media to print it on, and your tivo will be directed not to record the static that is broadcast in its place because the jamming satellites will be irradiating the homes of the historians.

  8. Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries? by xiando · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am very glad they can not enforce US law outside the US, even though it seems idiots like BSA does not understand that. Thank heavens we said no to your genetic altered plants. Monsanto and other corporations who can afford to buy US politicians have made sure that if they find that their patented gene-altered weeds has invaded your garden then, in the US, you are responsible for that and they can sue you for damages - which is insanity - in the EU we found that if their weed has infected your garden then they should pay you for the damage their plant has caused to your garden... This can be compared to some company patenting a computer virus and then suing everyone who has been infected by it. I really hope the the equally stupid "best practices" those US delegates mentioned in the article will try to impose on the (in reality) free world are seen as the garbage it is and turned down...

  9. You can cram that Juris-my-diction crap up your... by Suzumushi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Bingo! What authority does the US (or US corporations) have over how law is interpreted or executed in a foreign nation? None whatsoever! In fact, a copyright or patent filed in the US only has effect in the US! Any country that has a shred of independence or self respect would condemn the mere idea of this plan. Normally, in order to dictate policy and law in a country, it requires "boots on the ground." Apparently, these days it only requires "briefcases and fat wallets on the ground."

  10. Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries? by forand · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Are you implying that the current state of the trade deficit is somehow good? Sure some small ammount of money for each article we ship to china comes back to the US but when China ships the finished product back to the US to be sold they are taking a much larger chunk of change back to China than we got.

  11. Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries? by SoSueMe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My wife and I would love to tour America

    Trouble is, it's full of Americans.
    We have no problem with the individuals, they're great.
    It's just that, as a society, their politics really suck.

    WTO ruling against them over a trade dispute and ignoring that ruling is just one example.