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.'"

Comments

That's it!

[Dizzo]

Screw this, I'm moving... oh, wait.

Re:That's it!

[justin12345]

The more you tighten your grip, MPAA/RIAA, the more systems will slip through your fingers.

Re:That's it!

[SatanicPuppy]

I guess that's one way to stop other countries with lighter IP restrictions from out innovating us...take away their advantage!

Re:That's it!

[utnow]

In other news, the US announces to the world how they are going show them the U.S.ofA. way of doing things... which is, of course, the right way.

Re:That's it!

[uncoveror]

This is bigger than frivolous entertainment products like teen pop music and Hollywood movies. The strict enforcement of drug company patents will mean that people in developing nations who need inexpensive generic drugs, not outrageously priced name brand ones, are going to die so that rich bloodsucking businessmen can drink their fill. The body count could easily be in the millions.

Re:That's it!

[Naelphin]

The problem with this is that without the profit motive, big business wouldn't bother to develop life-saving drugs at all.

This has happened already with antibiotics, as they cannot make enough money from making new ones because people demand low prices. So it isn't worth their time and money to make. Why should the spend huge sums of money on something that promptly gets copied by some generic and they get no money at all?

Hence the reason things like Viagra are so popular, they can charge any amount at all, and you won't get people telling them to sell it cheap for all the poor people!

Re:That's it!

[uncoveror]

High price or low price, antibiotics are a cure, not a treatment. After ten days a patient doesn't need them anymore. You can sell a treatment and rake in the bucks for the rest of a patient's life. That's why antibiotics are less profitable to the drug cartels, er, um companies. Also, no one ever died because they didn't have Viagra. It is not a life saving medicine.

Re:That's it!

[rtb61]

I expect the US will combine it with their latest nuclear first strike policy. Copyright infringements are a sin against the current US administration's gods.

Re:That's it!

[macdaddy357]

WTF? AntiBIOTICS kill bacteria. AntiBODIES fight viruses like the common cold. Your own immune system makes antiBODIES. AntiBIOTICS are drugs derived from mold and funguses. Here is an informative link.

Re:That's it!

[pengcheng.song]

something unrelated to the topic, but related to health matter. No matter what antibiotics is ,it's better to turn to traditional Chinese medicine, or even nothing, next time when you get a cold. Modern medicine against cold makes our immune system less protective and induces heavier burden on your liver.

Re:That's it!

[Naelphin]

The reason I mentioned Viagra is that it is easier to make money with. No one will demand that they sell it cheaply for all the poor people. It is recreational, so they can charge anything for it.Compare to AIDS drugs, which cost just as much, if not more to develop, then have people copy it without paying you a dime. If I were a drug company, and I saw my massively expensive AIDS drug being copied by someone else, I would be very unhappy. How are they meant to recoup costs?

Re:That's it!

[uncoveror]

While Viagra, baldness cures and other profitable lifestyle drugs were developed with private funds, the research and development for most life-saving medicines came from taxpayers through government grants. I have no sympathy when the drug companies cry foul over copies of those in developing nations, or for less fortunate people in wealthy nations.

In the United States, advertising of prescription drugs on television adds a huge amount to their prices. I also think advertising of prescription drugs should be banned. You don't just go to a doctor and order pills. He or she diagnoses you, then will prescribe what you need based on that.

I don't have a problem with drug companies developing placebos for rich hypochondriacs to buy from boutique doctors and lifestyle drugs with their own dollars, but what they develop with public funds and with tax breaks should be for the public good only.

Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[HolyCrapSCOsux]

The problem is, other countries have other laws. You can't enforce US law in china. They'll tell us just where we can stick our initiative. I hope that ALL the countries do the same....

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[squidfood]

You can't enforce US law in china.

Why not?? We westerners have always done this kind of thing to Asia! I want my government to promote our monopolies abroad. I offer you five words: British East India Tea Company.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[N1ghtFalcon]

See, Iraq thought the same thing... And look what happened to them.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[justsomebody]

In Europe their Software patents have fallen out too, ... but somehow I feel that US companies are on it again and that this law is nothing but another form of already rejected SoftPatent proposal. It would make no difference for them if they would be allowed to enforce their US patents or if they have to patent overseas, in fact it would be even cheaper.

They could at least wait a year or two.

Personally, I'm developing reflex against US citizens (non-intentionaly against people, I know it should be politics only), there's more and more medling to other coutry affairs and last years it is evolving from noticeable to annoying.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[southpolesammy]

If the Chinese gov't isn't willing to enforce the preservation of US intellectual property rights, then the US ought not have to export machinery and machine parts, integrated circuits, or soybeans to them -- oh wait -- that's much of the raw materials needed by their entire economy.

It's called a squeeze play. Develop the technology yourself, and it's yours, but steal it from others, regardless of national boundaries, and be prepared to suffer the consequences of a global economic market.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[stlhawkeye]

The problem is, other countries have other laws. You can't enforce US law in china. They'll tell us just where we can stick our initiative. I hope that ALL the countries do the same....

We're not going there to enforce our laws. We're sending people to advise businesses on local laws and stump for IP rights for businesses in those nations. Further, there are international IP rights, and the programs in question are intended to serve as training for judges and attorneys in international courts and advocate best practices. Nowhere in here is an attemp to force US IP law on other governments, only to encourage them to abide by the laws of their own countries and those laws that such nations have agreed to abide by in the international arena.

Or you could knee-jerk and flail your arms at the injustice of world, that any company doesn't want its software being sold on the streets of Jakarta for $2, in violation of local law, while police look the other way. I don't think this is unreasonable.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[twosmokes]

Good idea, but as it stands China would put the squeeze on us.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[dmatos]

You are absolutely correct. The US is under no obligations to ship soybeans, machine parts, and integrated circuits to China. However, if the US does stop shipping these products to China, what are they going to do with the vast stockpiles that will build up? How are they going to replace the lost revenue?

A trade relationship only exists (ideally) when both sides benefit. If you think the US is selling products to China, or anywhere else, simply out of the good of their collective hearts, you are sorely mistaken. For every article that leaves a US port, a certain amount of foreign money flows into the US economy. Disrupt this state of events at your own risk.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[lelitsch]

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).

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[brendalson]

Hell, I'm a US citizen and I have a reflex against US citizens.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[xiando]

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...

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[molarmass192]

Ummm, Japan, the EU, Australia, Russia, Canada, etc ... will be more than happy to export machinery and machine parts, integrated circuit, or soybeans if we don't. The US is China's 3rd largest trade partner after Japan and the EU, we don't have much pull to spare over there that somebody wouldn't be more than happy to take off our hands.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[uradu]

You're right, and that's why the next war will be to liberate a country from its oppressive IP-free laws. It's all about bringing freedom to the peoples of this earth.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[composer777]

Iraq is defenseless and small, with a weak, technologically inferior army, China is not, which is why it's not likely that we will go to war with them, especially over IP.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[forand]

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.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[N1ghtFalcon]

Iraq is defenseless and small, with a weak, technologically inferior army

Then shouldn't we have won by now?

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[Fareq]

yes. we should have. kinda sad, really.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[superyanthrax]

You can't enforce US law in China, but you can enforce treaties that both the USA and China have signed, like the international treaties regarding copyrights and intellectual property rights. This is what the Americans are purportedly doing.

Personally, I see this as another thing which will end up on the bargaining table when leaders of the countries meet. In China, for instance, you could very well see under the table agreements where China agrees to tighten anti-piracy enforcement while the USA backs off a bit on Taiwan, or shuts up about the supposed human rights issues for a while. I know that you will say that this shouldn't be happening b/c the issues aren't in any way related, but that's how international politics works.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[timmarhy]

my my you ARE looking at it through rose coloured lenses aren't you. i can't think of any instance where a country sends operatives into another nations borders without pure self intrest. if a US corperation steals the tech of some business in a poor country who is going to go to bat for them in the USA? fuck all is the answer. these operatives are going in in order to try sway local officals infavour of US companys pure and simple. and you wonder why everyone hates america's guts...

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[anicca]

The USA is trying to enforce its drug laws in Canada.

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v05/n1519/a12.html? 397

Is it so hard to believe that they might start extraditing file sharers to extort them into bankruptcy or spend time in an american gulag? Sattelite hobbyists? Other political dissenters? Anybody they don't like and put on a deck of cards???

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[broter]

• British East India Tea Company.

Didn't they cause England to lose the American colonies by inspiring such events as the Boston Tea Party? I'm not sure I want my government to repeat that folly.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[SoSueMe]

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.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[Coryoth]

And everybody gets cheaper goods in return. What's the difference to the American economy if money goes to some rich guy in China as opposed to some rich guy/company in the US?

Because the US pays for those goods with US dollars. A rich guy in China can't spend US dollars on goods where he lives, so those dollars need to get sold. In the end those dollars need to make their way back to US because they can only really buy goods in the US. Normally the money gets back to the US when it is used to buy US goods, and that's how the global economy works. The problem is that if the US is spending more US dollars on imports than it is buying back via exports then there are a lot of excess US dollars floating around out there. What good are those extra US dollars exactly? Well they are good for buying US goods, but there are more dollars piling up than there is value of US goods to buy. This tends to cause depreciation of the US dollar on global markets: people are less keen to buy US dollars because, having already bought all the US goods they want, they really aren't worth anything. As the US dollar depreciates it costs more and more in US dollars to buy foreign goods. That, in turn, promotes inflation in the US. If it gets bad enough total chaos ensues and you end up like Argentina with rampant run away inflation and total economic meltdown.

There are of course, many other factors involved, and many reasons why such economic chaos is quite avoidable, but fundamentally you simply can't keep sending all your money to China via a trade deficit, it just won't work.

Jedidiah.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[SoSueMe]

What right do they have to try to enforce international treaties when they arbitrarily dismiss international rulings against them.
Who the hell would trust a "trading partner" like the good ol' US of A??!!

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[vsprintf]

Then shouldn't we have won by now?

• The British couldn't win in the American colonies.

• We couldn't win in Korea.

• We couldn't win in Vietnam.

• We couldn't win in Somolia.

• We won't "win" in Afghanistan.

• We won't "win" in Iraq.

Note the common theme of a population that views the military force as occupiers rather than liberators. The closest we have come to a recent military success is (discounting the overwhelming victory in Grenada) the previous Gulf War where Bush Sr. wisely decided not to try occupying after the borders had been restored. Instead of forcing a political system on the current Iraq, it should be broken up into the countries it was before the Brits messed with it - there were age-old reasons for those borders. We might have had a chance in Afghanistan if we hadn't previously abandoned the insurgents fighting the Soviets - some people have long memories.

The best we can hope for in Iraq is a near-term orderly withdrawal of our forces, so that we don't have to watch people being evacuated from the embassy by helicopter - again. (Before anyone starts throwing accusations, I volunteered for service back in the day, but I didn't get 8-up either.) I really hope I'm proven wrong, but I'll put my money on history repeating itself.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[vsprintf]

If the Chinese gov't isn't willing to enforce the preservation of US intellectual property rights, then the US ought not have to export machinery and machine parts, integrated circuits, or soybeans to them -- oh wait -- that's much of the raw materials needed by their entire economy.

What a joke. The only thing the Chinese want from us is a market for all the things we used to produce. Look at the trade figures (deficit). You must have been sleeping during the past decade when we became an importer of machined parts from China. I hear Ford is now importing engines from China. I also read somewhere that we are importing cement from China. It that's true, it means we can't process dirt for less than the cost of transporting it half-way around the world.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[mousse-man]

If an oil embargo hit China, they wouldn't have too much chicken sechuan anymore.

If the Germans had some clout, they'd also stop exporting any high-tech stuff to China until the IP situation resolves, but looking at the German situation (especially after the latest elections), things won't improve soon.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[Burz]

I really doubt they need us for anything now. Since 2002 the US has been running a slight trade deficit in farm products with the rest of the world... the first time since the Great Depression.

Oh wait... they 'need' our 'Intellectual Property'.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[falconwolf]

If the Chinese gov't isn't willing to enforce the preservation of US intellectual property rights, then the US ought not have to export machinery and machine parts, integrated circuits, or soybeans to them -- oh wait -- that's much of the raw materials needed by their entire economy.

One BIG problem with that, China is the biggest financier of US dept. Try to squeeze China and all they have to do is refuse to buy any more US Teasury notes, then watch as interest rates rise to the stratosphere. Bush is already selling future generations into slavery, this would only make it worse.

Falcon

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[NoMaster]

Are you implying that the current state of the trade deficit is somehow good?

Sure. Why not? Maybe not from your POV, but from the POV of China it certainly is. And since I'm not from China or the US, I don't care much either way about that particular case.

What you *seem* to be complaining about, really, is that you were sold a pup - you were told all this stuff about free trade, globalisation, etc, being good (and I'm not arguing that it isn't in theory...), and were happy to reap the benefits - but now you see that it has a cost you're not happy with. Well, boo-fucking-hoo, cry me a river.

Congratulations. What you've just discovered is the incongruity between all the rhetoric about the global economy and globalisation, and the self-centredness inherent in people and their constructs (cities, states, countries, trade organisations, companies, etc).

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[Cyberax]

Don't worry, Russia will happily supply China with oil.

See: http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/wjb/zzjg/dozys/gjlb/32 20/3221/t162446.htm

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[pengcheng.song]

Is it true that you can enforce US laws in China? If it is true, please give us a concrete example. And please give us a comtemporal instance,but not the so called British East India Tea Company.

Re:Hmmm. How can we gouge other countries?

[Bob Gelumph]

It sounds like they are trying to enforce international law (not that the U.S. sticks to it unless they feel like it), not U.S. law.

F*** That Sh*T

[bazmail]

Yankee go home!

Re:F*** That Sh*T

[Meagermanx]

...exclaimed the 14-year-old white boy, violently.

Re:F*** That Sh*T

[bazmail]

.....replied the humorless asshat.

When questioned about this plan...

[Suzumushi]

The RIAA/MPAA spokespeople for the US government responded, "We just need some breathing space."

Re:When questioned about this plan...

[ln -sf head ass]

I'd normally shout "Godwin's Law," but I'm too busy laughing! Up next week, RIAA annexes the Sudetenland.

Re:When questioned about this plan...

[antiMStroll]

That's backwards. The US government now proves itself a wholly owned subsidiary of entertainment cartels. Future historians will have a field day with our era, endlessly arguing, picking apart and tracing precisely where and how it was decided to relinquish fundamental rights for the benefit of a tiny minority of business interests specializing in trivialities.

Re:When questioned about this plan...

[MrLint]

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.

Re:When questioned about this plan...

[sd_diamond]

That's backwards. The US government now proves itself a wholly owned subsidiary of entertainment cartels. Future historians will have a field day with our era, endlessly arguing, picking apart and tracing precisely where and how it was decided to relinquish fundamental rights for the benefit of a tiny minority of business interests specializing in trivialities.

Not that this is really terribly new. Read up on the history of the United Fruit Company and Latin America.

Re:When questioned about this plan...

[hawks5999]

Future historians will be employed by the United Corporations of America and all individual rights will merely be the stuff of fable whispered about in the deep forests (away from the VidScreens). Our era will be hailed as the great revolution when, for the common good, the subversive ideas of individual liberty were eradicated by the freedom fighters of our benefactors the RI/MP-AA

Great

[Anonymous Coward]

As if we (the U.S.) didn't have a PR problem already. Now we're going to be viewed as the Microsoft of the world.

"intellectual property experts"

[doormat]

By this, of course they mean representatives from the RIAA/MPAA. So you know that all sides of the discussion on intellectual property will be treated fairly.

Re:"intellectual property experts"

[SirChive]

The RIAA/MPAA bought the laws and pay for Congress so, of course they are the ones to go. Isn't unrestrained capitalism wonderful?

All of a sudden...

[Tackhead]

> One program would place intellectual property experts on the ground in regions where infringement is considered a concern.

...being a mercenary for Blackwater seems positively ethical by comparison!

Re:Way to go, Dunya.

[spauldo]

It's like Vietnam - we just start with advisors to keep the chinese out of it...

The War on Corporations Losing Money!

[garcia]

Experts will be sent to Brazil, India, Russia, Thailand, China and the Middle East and serve a five-year tour of duty, the fact sheet said.

You just *have* love quotes like that. Yay! The War on Drugs and now the War on Software Piracy! Tours of duty, lol!

Re:The War on Corporations Losing Money!

[Hoi Polloi]

Personally I welcome our new carpetbagging overlords.

Is this now the war against foreign cultures? "Sorry, you can't use your god image anymore, it bears too close a resemblence to Mickey Mouse."

Re:The War on Corporations Losing Money!

[Meagermanx]

I'm sure those Mortal Kombat dudes are gonna sue the advocates of Vishnu because he bares too close a resemblance to Goro.

Re:The War on Corporations Losing Money!

[Idarubicin]

You just *have* love quotes like that. Yay! The War on Drugs and now the War on Software Piracy! Tours of duty, lol!

It's okay. As long as the War on Software Piracy is as successful as the War on Drugs or the War on Poverty, we have nothing to worry about.

"Train"

[grub]

would train foreign judges

Yeah, all those years of school and working as lawyers in the field couldn't prepare them enough.

Re:"Train"

[garcia]

Yeah, all those years of school and working as lawyers in the field couldn't prepare them enough.

They have to be "retrained" to start taking money from the "right" people.

Re:"Train"

[SatanicPuppy]

Uh, why is this a troll?

If we're sending people to teach their judges how to judge, then that's what we're doing. We're saying that they don't know what they're doing, and that we, because we're a SUPERPOWER and we're RIGHT, ought to show them how its supposed to be done.

Re:"Train"

[stlhawkeye]

Yeah, all those years of school and working as lawyers in the field couldn't prepare them enough.

It clearly doesn't. While American judges typically attend undergraduate school, law school, and practice as attorneys or are at least involved in the legal system for some kind of tenure before being appointed to courts, judges in many other nations often have far less legal expertise. The standards of American legal knowledge inherent in our court system are not shared worldwide. A handful of nations have judges who are far more knowledgable, but on balance, the nations in question tend to have a relatively large number of people in positions of legal authority whose primary qualification is being related to or owed favor by the right people in power. That does happen in the 'States too, but usually those people have some case for being qualified on their own merits.

For the record, law school trains you very, very little to actually be an attorney, and not at all to be a judge. Lawyering skills are almost entirely acquired on the job. When attorneys and judges "grow up" professional in a corrupt legal system, all the training in the world isn't going to convince them to enforce law consistantly. By international standards, American courts are a model of principle and fairness, as amazing as that may seem.

Re:"Train"

[grub]

The standards of American legal knowledge inherent in our court system are not shared worldwide.

And why should they be? Should every country accept US-centric law as The Way?

Re:"Train"

[xiando]

Training is needed outside the US, the (really, in reality) free world does not teach you the apparently most important US Law lesson: Always judge in favor of the side who can afford to give you to the biggest bribe.

Re:"Train"

[E8086]

Not even all judges in the US have proper training and experience. If I remember correctly from an into to criminal justice class a couple years ago there are places in the US where the judges and sherifs are elected, think of that movie with The Rock. And some of the appointed ones do favors for the politicians who supported their appointment. Would you want to be someone who supported the other guy in an election for the top law enforcement officer and/or judge in your county? Ideally the US legal system is very good, in practice it isn't that good everywhere. We have judges who don't agree with each other here, do you really want that rivalry passed around the world?

Re:"Train"

[A beautiful mind]

"It clearly doesn't. While American judges typically attend undergraduate school, law school, and practice as attorneys or are at least involved in the legal system for some kind of tenure before being appointed to courts, judges in many other nations often have far less legal expertise. The standards of American legal knowledge inherent in our court system are not shared worldwide. A handful of nations have judges who are far more knowledgable, but on balance, the nations in question tend to have a relatively large number of people in positions of legal authority whose primary qualification is being related to or owed favor by the right people in power. That does happen in the 'States too, but usually those people have some case for being qualified on their own merits.

For the record, law school trains you very, very little to actually be an attorney, and not at all to be a judge. Lawyering skills are almost entirely acquired on the job. When attorneys and judges "grow up" professional in a corrupt legal system, all the training in the world isn't going to convince them to enforce law consistantly. "

Do you have ANYTHING to back this up apart from your gut feeling? While you could certainly mention quite a lot of nations whom quite possibly have worse laws in some ways than the USA, let me raise two objections:

1. The laws and the system of law is different in a lot of countries than in the USA. DIFFERENT, not worse. I would think it is highly probable, that a judge knows his/her country's laws better than 99% of judges from an another country.

2. The Northern European democracies also belong into the many other countries, and i would think that being the most stable democracies in the world, if anybody, they could lecture about what it means to practice law.

"By international standards, American courts are a model of principle and fairness, as amazing as that may seem."

Forgive me my gut feeling, but i somehow very much doubt that in the light of recent court decisions in the USA like when some judges said it's OK for the government to detain people for crimes which didn't stand up to a trial for an indefinate amount of time.

Re:"Train"

[stewwy]

these the same people who trained the judges in recent US ' entertainment' trials for murder and child abuse?

Re:"Train"

[Kaorimoch]

I believe most of the "training" for these foreign judges will involve special items such as:

* How to discreetly obtain brown paper bags full of cash from record companies.
* How one might use their position to obtain larger brown paper bags.
* How to use, ahem, "contributions" to improve your lifestyle without being detected.
* How to overcome areas such as "legislation" and "due process" to punish intellectual property violaters.

Re:"Train"

[agoliveira]

American courts are a model of principle and fairness, as amazing as that may seem.

Sorry but I live in Brazil and I'm getting more and more amazed indeed (not in a good way) by USA's legal system. Your Founding Fathers are probably turning over in their tumbs for the way the great principles on what your Nation was founded are been twisted to serve closed groups and corporations. You have been deprived of your individual liberty by things like DRM and Freedom Act based on fears and corporative greedy.
I do really feel sorry for you. We are far from been a perfect country but at least on this point, we are far ahead.

stupid idea

[gcnaddict]

Try this in iran and any chance they have at keeping them from building a nuke will go out the window

it sorta puts our lives on the line., and I care more for my life than i do the MPAA's IP

Re:stupid idea

[Meagermanx]

...or we could just copywrite the shape of a nuclear missile. Or we could copywrite radioactive substances. Hell, we could copywrite steel, so that they can't use microscopes, metal folding chairs, or cars.
That would impede their progress.

Re:Way to go, Dunya.

[op12]

FTA: "The Commerce Department has recently taken other actions intended to combat international intellectual-property infringement. In July, President Bush created within the department a senior-level position -- the coordinator for international intellectual-property enforcement."

So I guess that would make this guy the Wankfest Coordinator. That has a much better ring to it than CIIPE.

So this means...

[kc32]

We're basically invading China with nothing but lawyers.

Re:So this means...

[mangus_angus]

Dear god......

If they were smart they would just ask us to drop a nuke on them and not put them thru so much suffering.

Re:So this means...

[jbeaupre]

Why do you think we have so many lawyers? As everyone is quick to point out, war is bad. Diplomacy goes both ways. But drop 100,000 lawyers on some poor country, and you quickly overwhelm them. No legal system can endure. Not a drop of blood spilled and a country is brought to its knees. Plus the lawyers bill the victim.

Still, it is rather expensive to feed and house a standing army of lawyers.

Its cold here in hell

[hackstraw]

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.

Re:Its cold here in hell

[garcia]

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

That's the worst possible solution -- being speechless I mean.

Re:Its cold here in hell

[Ruud Althuizen]

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.

And who's ideals would that be, the RIAA's or the people's?

Re:Its cold here in hell

[swimmar132]

What the fuck does this have to do with the RIAA?

Are they the only ones with IP now?

Re:Its cold here in hell

[Ruud Althuizen]

Hey, I don't live there. I just named it the first thing that came up. That it was RIAA must be meaning something.

Re:Its cold here in hell

[lullabud]

It's funny, I often think the same thing. I don't want to live in this country anymore. Sure, a lot of the things that get to me are little things, but when you put them all together they make something big. The other thing that gets me is that it often seems that the priorities in the US are all fucked up. We're worried about the rights of an industry built around entertainment. Yes, it's a lot of money, yes, it's a huge export, but it's fucking entertainment. There are places in the world, in the US even right now, where people's lives are at stake. Maybe we should worry more about helping poor nations develop their businesses so that they can enjoy the luxury of entertainment and actually have enough money to pay for things, money they didn't make selling pre-release or pirated versions of movies or OSes on the street corner.

I don't know that it would be necessarily better living in another country, but man, I think it all the same... It reminds me of that Far Side comic where the two guys are fishing and there's a mushroom cloud in the distance. One of them says to the other "I'll tell you what this means, Norm, no size restrictions and screw the limit!"

Re:Its cold here in hell

[Arandir]

Wow. My post gets modded as troll, but the parent post talking about napalming judges gets modded +5 insightful.

Someone remind me again why I came back to Slashdot.

Commandos

[VisceralLogic]

You know those guys who jump out of planes and parachute into heavily defended territories with night-vision goggles and silenced guns? Yeah, them... the RIAA.

How to control the world

[wlvdc]

Hmm, this sounds more like a world domination plan. So the US-government and US-businesses have agreed that all intellectual-property shall be theirs, and their agents ("... train foreign judges") will do the field administration to assure US interests secured. Why is the US so convinced of it's own legal system. Why should it work for the rest of the world?

Re:How to control the world

[Yaa 101]

It doesn't... look at the world trade center...

It is exactly these kind of arrogant things that form a magnet for negativity...

Re:How to control the world

[mtaht]

Next invasion of a country will be to protect intellectually property rights. The marines will go in, followed shortly thereafter by the lawyers. Come to think of it, sending in the lawyers inot the beach would solve a lot of problems for both sides - the enemy military gets in some worthwhile target practice - and our side ends up with less lawyers.

Re:How to control the world

[DarkFencer]

Because that's what the corporations tell them to do?

Re:How to control the world

[wlvdc]

The program is intended to foster proper intellectual property decisions according to international law, and the local law of each nation in question. Whose international law? The US has not signed up to the international (criminal) court. I think the US legal system only works for those have (lots of) money. f you don't care for it, go enjoy some tribal justice elsewhere for a while and then come back and let me know which system you prefer. Little communes full of happy natives sound great until you get your genitals chopped off in a public ritual for winking at another guy's wife. Well, I am from the Netherlands, which is a rather backward nation. I apologise for questioning your superiority.

Re:How to control the world

[rhizome]

Why is the US so convinced of it's own legal system. Why should it work for the rest of the world?

It doesn't have to work for the rest of the world, it only has to work for the US. The trick is to convince these governments that it's in their interests to go along with it, similar to the concept of being "a team player". Those who support the US in their overseas business philosophy will surely reap some rewards for imposing their Brahmin will upon their native peoples.

The key concept seems to be to get foreign governments to listen directly to US businesses, presumably rather than the bureaucratic layers of foreign policy interaction that is necessary these days. Going a bit out on a limb, you could say that the intent is to appoint business leaders as international commerce ambassadors, which would downsize the government's involvement and consequently their responsibility.

Re:How to control the world

[RichardX]

As for our legal system ... we at least have one that functions properly most of the time. You can decry its inadequacies and question our motivations all you want, but on balance the American legal and law enforcement systems are incredible compared to most of the rest of the world. If you don't care for it, go enjoy some tribal justice elsewhere for a while and then come back and let me know which system you prefer. Little communes full of happy natives sound great until you get your genitals chopped off in a public ritual for winking at another guy's wife.

Becuase of course the only two possible options are between living in the US and dealing with brutal and primitive tribal "justice" systems.

Does the term "False dichotomy" mean anything to you?

Re:How to control the world

[NoMaster]

The program is intended to foster proper intellectual property decisions according to international law, and the local law of each nation in question.

Define "proper". Because it sounds like that good old definition of "cheating: somebody's not playing the cards I dealt them."

Re:How to control the world

[Elad Alon]

Maybe it's because half of us non-Americans apply for a greencard each year. Just an idea.

So this *isn't* colonialism, right?

[myowntrueself]

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

*native* government officials?

Lord Blimey, we can't have those nig-nogs and fuzzy-wuzzies running about without proper supervision! They might *violate* our intellectual property!

Send the colonial administrators in to pick out a few of the more obedient and docile wogs and turn them into loyal colonial servants.

(and if you can't spot the sarcasm in that, you'd better bloody well mod me down, hadn't you?)

Re:So this *isn't* colonialism, right?

[Harry Coin]

You've been enjoying Rome too I see...

Re:So this *isn't* colonialism, right?

[A beautiful mind]

Everyone knows that those roman^H^H^H^H^Harabian terrorists ended the great aztec nation!

How dare they?!?

[VAXGeek]

I find it outrageous that these countries not only violate federal law, but they also refuse to obey the causes in our constituition dealing with copyright!

Re:How dare they?!?

[Waffle Iron]

Then the current administration would certainly welcome experts from foreign nations coming here on tours of duty to educate our leaders about their legal obligations with respect to treatment of prisoners. No?

Funny?

[trezor]

The RIAA/MPAA spokespeople for the US government responded

The fact that someone can write this of as a joke makes it sad. (But yeah, I'm chuckling as well.)

On the sole export of the US

[Haiku 4 U]

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.

Re:On the sole export of the US

[kurzweilfreak]

And it's all so bad, which is why everyone wants to copy it. Oh wait...

Why doesnt someone...

[firepacket]

Patent the workings of anti-piracy measures. There could be a big fund to help hold them indefinetly and the industry would help by lobbying for extended intellectual property.

Training please

[SkjeggApe]

I'm a judge in [some foreign country], and would like some training on the global IP rights of US companies, and to join Bushie's "war on piracy" .. Anyone know where I can sign up? Do they offer night classes?

Sincerely,
Gunther "not so smart" Zhang

Oh no !!

[kabz]

Team America: Global IP Police ....

MWAHAHAHAHAHA

[smooc]

What are they thinking? Wow, come of your high horses please!

I mean the Bush administration does not have the most favourable imago right now. But this... this is going to get them ridiculed across the globe. Suddenly mr. Bush turned into a stand-up comedian.

mr. Bush I sincerely think you should have other matters on your mind (Rita maybe?)

Holy crap

[dragonp12]

You're going to try to inflict your crap on us as well? Bring on the colonisation of Mars :-\

Re:Way to go, Dunya.

[Shadow Wrought]

I'm so glad my tax money is being squandered on this joke, rather than going to something worthwhile, like...say...Katrina relief.

Since Katrina relief is now a French concern, you no longer have to worry about misallocation of tax dollars.

One plan to rule them all.......

[Rank_Tyro]

Had to say it...

Join the EFF now!

[StefanJ]

It may not help in the end, but at least you'll feel like you did something while Homeland Security is dragging you away to have a NeuroDongle(tm) installed in your parietal lobe to keep your brain from processing non-DRM equipped media.

Isn't it ironic...

[Enlarged to Show Tex]

...that the US wants foreign judges to consider US law as it judges things in its own jurisdiction, yet doesn't want US judges to consider foreign law as it judges matters here in the US?

E2ST

Re:Isn't it ironic...

[bvdbos]

WHat's ironic? The US don't recognize the international crime court in The Hague either. And they cofounded it. Too bad the formal start of the court was during the time of Bush...

Re:Isn't it ironic...

[o'reor]

Mod parent up. And we're not even talking about Abu Ghraib and Gitmo...

Ooh, watch out, Canada!

[Grendel Drago]

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?

Re:Ooh, watch out, Canada!

[udowish]

I doubt it, we have a slightly different view here, not totally the same as the US but very similar, hence nothing to fear. Its not like we are China and have virtually no copyright laws (or, not laws that they care to enforce). I think the reason they don't want to crack down on copyright issues is because they know it is a significant punch to the face of the yankees.

Re:Western Civilization....

[dragonp12]

And was a good idea.

Inevitable for this to be the norm?

[duerra]

A good point in the article is made in saying that the state's sovereignty trumps intellectual property. It is critical that government agencies remain as open as possible to the needs of the people, and locking them into the use of Microsoft-only formats is not putting you on the fast track to success.

I have to wonder if such action will eventually become the norm - not just in the US, but everywhere. Being tied down to a US corporation that could potentially leave you high and dry doesn't really sound to me like a position that governments would want to put themselves in. And that doesn't even consider the security implications of the closed nature of commercial operating systems.

Now, that isn't to say that a commercial product can't be used. There is no reason that Office couldn't support open standards, but if other states start following suit, I guarantee Microsoft will change their mind on that stance.

Over Paid, Over Sexed, Over Here!!!

[metoc]

At this rate American's won't be welcome anywhere.

Way to Legislate Special Interest

[LordMyren]

I'll repeat it again;
Way to legislate special interest!

What fuck-asses. I cant wait to see the nepharious two-fisted bullshit these content-holder hitmen are going to try to pull on the rest of the world. Once you get past the sickening reality, it should be downright fucking hilarious. They wont exactly have all that much leverage, they're just some random joe show shows up claiming to be defending some other nations interests. Surreee, we'll listen to you.

The US remains the only place in the world where law enforcement considers 100% enforcement their duty. Less barberic civilization seems to have realized that the purpose of laws is for the general goodwill and fortune of the populous, and laws should be enforced or not enforced as such. Its called humanity you nincompoops.

Its kind of scary to think nations might willingly forfeit the sovereignty of letting someone else come in and demand that they start enforcing their laws better. There's cases of defunct government where such aid is needed, but its pathetic that hte only place the US is going to start leveraging such direct extra-national influence is to the cock-sucking lobbyists that've completely monopolized the entertainment sector. Its even more terrifying to think that any self respecting international body would let agents of a single nation impose this policy.

Little more ire than usual, but whatever. "Sometimes you know, I get so pissed off,"
Myren

Myren

Re:Way to Legislate Special Interest

[joebutton]

> What fuck-asses.

What's a fuck-ass?

Where have I seen this before?

[Jason Hildebrand]

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

Hmmm... it sounds like the "judicial version" of the School of the Americas.

So...

[Evil Butters]

[sarcasm]

Well, now that we've captured Bin Laden, resolved all of the problems from hurricanes Katrina and Rita, finally got out of Iraq and solved our crime and unemployment problems locally, I'm glad to see that our country is putting our over abundance of tax dollars to good use!

[sarcasm]

Re:Western Civilization....

[miscz]

No, it was just a good idea.

Makes sense...

[Bogtha]

Over here in the UK, 50 year copyright terms mean that early Elvis recordings etc are entering the public domain. That's about the earliest recordings that USA companies still profit immensely from. Our slightly more sensible copyright laws are now affecting USA company profits, and thus must be "fixed", as every year that passes, the extent to which USA companies can leech off long-dead artists is reduced.

I really can't take any politician seriously when they suggest longer terms for copyright. If the profit you make over the course of fifty years isn't enough, then you are either too greedy or not talented enough to be granted the privilege of being supported by society as a full-time artist.

Property is Theft

[Epeeist]

Proudhon

Too much gin on a Friday night.

Re:Property is Theft

[PhB95]

Has been completed : now sounds "Intellectual property is theft"
Phil

Could be worse...

[thewils]

It could be the Interplanetary Intellectual Property Plan

Re:Could be worse...

[Mathinker]

No, that would probably be much better, since it would mean as a side effect that Bush would be funding NASA to try to get to other planets.

Dear US Govt

[panurge]

I am a foreign judge who urgently requires training in intellectual property laws. Unfortunately I need to bribe dishonest officials to obtain exit visa so I can attend Harvard Business School. Five million dollars in unmarked gold bullion should pay for it nicely. Any laws you want made on my return, just ask.

Judges being influenced by US officials?!

[kwandar]

Train judges in best practises?!!!

I think not!

Best practise for a judge is to follow the law and avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest!!

Winnie the Pooh exists because of Canada!

[metoc]

http://www.pooh-corner.com/pooh.html

Before everyone gets too hot about this...

[Kphrak]

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.

Re:Before everyone gets too hot about this...

[Nomad37]

Fair enough, but think a bit beyond the the specifics of software 'piracy' (yarr!)

Why should judicial systems that are trying to create a culture of constitutionalism (already exists in US, where courts for the first hundred years set up norms subsequently adopted *around the world* in newer democracies and did not enforce foreign copryight *at all*)

What about IP outside of software? Medicines for instance. A Supreme Court ruling in South Africa held that local companies were allowed to make generic versions of patented AIDS drugs under the SA Constitution, which includes a right to health, and under the TRIPs Convention (a US-sponsored international treaty on the enforcement of IP) which has an emergency public health clause. The IMF, which is well-known to pander to US interests, tried to claim that this JUDICIAL DECISION was an unfair impediment to trade!

I could go on, but the basic message is this: no, software piracy (yarr!) is not right, but this War on IP Infringement (tm) goes well beyond that, and blows a relatively unimportant issue way out of proportion.

Re:Before everyone gets too hot about this...

[NoMaster]

Do we advocate illegal copying of commercial software, and if so, why?

Well, if you're interested in an individual rather than groupthink answer here's mine: I don't care. In fact, if you agree to strip away all the artificial constructs that abound in the argument, it comes down to this: There's a market, and it's being filled. That's capitalism. What's the problem, other than that somebody doesn't like it?

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?

Because these copyright laws that are held so dear tend to be one sided, favouring individual organisations rather than the market? Because they have primarily been spread world-wide through fear, threat, misrepresentation and ignorance rather than usefulness or mutual benefit? Because those that demand them most are also quite happy to misrepresent, ignore, or twist them to suit their purposes?

You seem to advocate a purely interpretive view of the structure of copyright law, rather than assesing its suitability for purpose. Unfortunately, while the purpose is still supposedly "for the greater good of mankind", the interpretation has been twisted to become "for the greater enrichment of me, the copyright holder". That's the problem lying under all of this.

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.

Legally, you're right. Morally, you've got a shaky argument. Now, I don't particularly like the GPL myself (in fact, for the same reason I'm about to argue in its defence!), but I have to give it props for this: it's an attempt to use a broken, misused, and abused system to product a more morally correct result.

Re:Before everyone gets too hot about this...

[mabhatter654]

Ahh! but if we weren't exporting the procuduction of the CDs to the forgein countries in the first place it wouldnt' be a problem! The problem is that our customs officals can't tell "offical" forgien made windows discs from pirated ones! Or if our "designer labels" didn't contract all the work to poor countries where they don't enforce OUR WORKER laws. Funny how that all works out.. we like the fact we can exploit their workers, but not the fact that their workers exploit our IP... Darn it!

in reality this is about bigger IP than just entertainment. Things like patents for drought resistant crops, AIDS medicines, electrical generators, machine tools, etc. and other techonolgy we take for granted in our day-to-day life. The chief export of the US is techinolgy tools.. extermely high-end stuff you can't get anywhere else. Of course once you send one of something out of the country, there's notthing stopping them from reverse engineering it and makimg more for their country.

Remember, the "suits" in govt see foreign aid as an "investment" to get the countries paying royalties to our mega corps and providing cheap workers. It's not "fair" to them that they use the money to make their countries self-sufficent.

Excellent

[MemoryDragon]

Good place for US Laywers, Chines Prisons, Russian Gulags... perfect disposal areas for the US waste....

Re:Cool!

[Meagermanx]

America has spoken. Now America has to live with its decision.

hmm...(c) - patent#: 53022946814633

[layer3switch]

"pegged rates of usage of unlicensed software at 90 percent in China, 87 percent in Russia, 74 percent in India, 70 percent in Thailand, 64 percent in Brazil and 58 percent in the Middle East..."
"intellectual property infringement, which the department claims costs US businesses $250bn (£138bn) and 750,000 jobs per year..."
"Experts will be sent to Brazil, India, Russia, Thailand, China and the Middle East and serve a five-year tour of duty..."

So we make up for $250 billion and create 750,000 jobs by "educating" foreign countries about US Intellectual Property Law? hmm... US companies outsource jobs to those same countries stealing US "intellectual properties". Maybe it's time to stop the outsourcing and start thinking maybe and just maybe US "intellectual properties" which may benefit mankind should not be patented and whored by corporate fat fucks.

Perhaps Ben Franklin should have patented lighting rod after all... There are just too many assholes need to be hit by lightening these day and age.

IP is a big American fantasy

[Simonetta]

'Intellectual Property' is nothing more than a big American fantasy invented to compensate for the fact that they don't make anything anymore except ultra-high-tech death machines and recycled entertainment products.
      And frankly, killing can be done, when needed, with the tried-and-true low-tech methods and the recycled entertainment product can all be easily copied by anyone with a $100 PC.

    IP is what you use to try and convince people that you are still relevant in the world when you don't make anything anymore, your people are buffoons living on borrowed money from everyone, and you still have enough hydrogen bombs to make it awkward for anyone to point out the obvious fact that you are nowhere near as important as you were fifty years ago.

    So all this effort to metamorphize a concept like 'intellectual property' into the legal equivalent of actual physical items that have intrinsic value is bound to fail internationally. In more ways than one, people just aren't going to buy it. They'll give you lots of lip service, sign your treaties, stay in expensive hotels for endless international conferences (as long as you pick up the tab), and then, just ignore whatever it was that you were getting so upset about.

    The Americans thought they were so smart by trashing their industrial base, shipping all of their manufacturing jobs overseas, and laying off (or never hiring in the first place) all the people that comprised the only real asset that they ever had...smart people willing to come to termperate North America from all over the world in order to get away from the assholes that were making it impossible to make a good life in the old country. Now the Americans have fucked up their physical country, their economy, their good name, and their middle class.

    So what's left? Intellectual Property! And just what exactly is that? One more illiterate, psychopathic 'rapper'? One more $100,000,000 buddy-cop movie?

    Grow up, fools!

Nothing to make headlines about

[xiando]

The RIAA and MPAA and their members like Fox are greedy evil assholes. Not news. And they don't like piracy. Not news. And they want to do something about it. Also not news. But the most important non-news is that the Internet's biggest Piracy Distribution Site, The Pirate Bay, IS LEGAL because of the glorious and very clever laws. So there is locally nothing to "crack down" on, because even though they may be breaking US Laws they are NOT breaking any local laws. So the US can complain and wine do what the fuck they want, but fact remains that the people of EU are smarter than the US population (Take songs as a good example, people in EU listen to the lyrics and the music, US people judge by the amount of skin shown in the music video) so we will not change our laws no matter how much the US dislikes them - so this is all just not news.

Another example....

[mc900ftjesus]

That the US gov't could give a shit about anything but big business. Fuck you Bush, and quit wasting my tax dollars.

Re:NWO

[Meagermanx]

Even the National Wrestling Association might be able to come up with better ideas than this.

Intellectual Property...

[Snaller]

... isn't. Its mostly an amoral concept.

$250bn ?!

[E8086]

"which the department claims costs US businesses $250bn (£138bn) and 750,000 jobs per year"
I wonder where they got those numbers from. I've seen estimates claiming that they lose 2%-12% a year because of "piracy". That would put their worth at between 2 and 12500 trillion, for some reason I don't think they're worth that much. But lets not forget 42% of stats are made up on the spot. And 750000 jobs a year? I wonder how many of those were "lost" from outsourcing their CD production so they only have to pay the labor 50c a week. I have a better idea, lets modify existing US anti-trust laws and make the RIAA illegal. That way no one will have to waste their time and money having to deal with them and it will cause competition and prices will drop. $250bl can feed and shelter a LOT of people. I've heard software "piracy" is bad in China, but is it really 90% of software? And lets not forget that they have to deal with real pirates, the kind the seize ships and kill people. Maybe it's about time they realize how much money they really have(Bender takes out the monicle) and give some to a good cause. Even Bill Gates has given several hundered million to medical research and other things. When's the last time you heard about the RIAA donating money to take care of the world hunger problem or medical research or a hurricae relief fund? I don't like my donations to the EFF being wasted on countering their billion dollar "anti-piracy" crusades. Their lawsuits are a very big waste of money, people with money throwing money at other people throwing money back at them in an attempt to get more money. And all the money funneled into political funds to get their legislation passed. At least there are tv and movie personalities encouraging charitable donations. But from the RIAA's music industry all you hear is how this rapper popped a cap in that other rapper and some manufactured teenage one hit wonder got knocked up again with her nth kid from her n+2th boyfriend. Ok, maybe that's a bad generalization.

This is ridiculous!

[WidescreenFreak]

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.

Re:This is ridiculous!

[WidescreenFreak]

The buck stops with him and not so critical things that get to the top need to be addressed, but seriously he's just human and a politician at that. Not a savior. It would be more appropriate to go after the branch and actual people that are pushing this.

Your statement is completely valid. This little idea, however, was from someone who answers to the President and it involves matters of international relations. Sorry, but you can't tell me that the President was not aware of this action, particularly where matters of international relations, such as they currently are, are involved.

Re:This is ridiculous!

[Anonymous Coward]

ACK. Fuck Karma for now:

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

You sir, are an idiot. And probably asshole too.

How the hell yould you do this? I mean even a donkey knows not to eat a thornbush if he still has thorns in his mouth from the last time...

Re:This is ridiculous!

[swordgeek]

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

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

Re:This is ridiculous!

[Azarael]

I'd like to point out that it would probably take less than a minute for the US to refuse an initiative from another country (the first 59 seconds of the minute being spent laughing). Isn't it great how the US is happy to impose itself on everyone else, but baulks at it's sovereignty being infringed upon.

Knute RIAAne All American sez

[the darn]

Go out and win one for the G.I.P.R.A. !

the problem with intellectual property law

[circletimessquare]

is that it trades one set of riches (financial) for another (cultural)

it is a fallacy to believe that all works of art are unique and independent. what is true is that for every idea you can conceive of, someone has already thought of something very similar.

so in an ideal world, the artist would have free reign to throw superman and mickey mouse, for example, into their plot or their illustration, and there would be no corporate lawyer pestering them saying "you owe us money".

but the problem is that art is being corporatized, where bean counters instead of creative people say "hey, we have this cash cow... why can't we just make it a cash cow for a longer period of time?"

but they don't see how that financial wealth is being taken out of the expense of our shared cultural wealth.

so yes, artists need their creative works protected to provide some incentive to create above and beyond the simple love of creation, and so that corporations are rewarded for distributing that art for all of our benefit.

but the current climate, where corporatizations are extending protections unnaturally to decades after an artist dies, comes at an expense the corporations do not want to realize or cannot see.

and to me, a little more corporate financial gain at the expense of all of our shared cultural wealth is not a good trade off.

so: intellecutal property laws and effort should be curtailed and retarded, not extended.

we are all made poorer, culturally, so that a few companies can be made a little richer financially.

that's wrong.

I love Euphemism

[stimpleton]

I read some semi-amusing examples of euphemism examples some time ago:
- Refuse collection engineer.....Garbage man. Bin man in the UK.
- Sanitory Landfill.....Garbage dump.
- etc,etc

So from the article,
"advocate....

Hmmmm, lets see, being the US that could be a euphemism for....
- Threaten
- Mobilise military
- Sanction
- Strike preemptively

Who pays, and what do we do?

[Infonaut]

American taxpayers pay to send paid corporate representatives overseas to lobby foreign governments. Like Microsoft, Adobe, Oracle, et. al. aren't strong enough to do their own fuggin' lobbying?

We're already spending ourselves into a gigantic hole.

The tax breaks Dubya gave to the wealthy haven't demonstrably had any effect on the economy.

We're going to throw vast sums of money at Katrina cleanup, likely in the most backwards fashion imaginable, if our infrastructure rebuilding in Iraq is any indicator.

This is about priorities. The Bush Administration has consistently equated corporate welfare with American economic interests, when there is no proof that the two are related. Propping up already successful American companies ultimately makes those companies less competitive. Look at what happened to the automotive industry (and it's happening again - prepare to send some bailout money to Detroit within the next three years).

I know I'll get the usual, "It doesn't work, you're a loser, the political system doesn't care about individuals" rhetoric, but the time is really now. Whether you're a Democrat or a Republican or something else, let your legislators know that you think this is a misallocation of valuable government resources. I'm sending notes to Boxer, Feinstein, and Lofgren as soon as I post this. It may not make a difference, but it beats doing nothing.

If you don't know who your Representative or Senators are, or how to contact them, you can use Thomas to do so.

Re:This is a good thing

[kingj02]

... we're just trying to help other countries enforce existing laws regarding IP. No harm there.

The majority of these existing laws are only in the interest of shareholders and screw over everyone else! Seems like harm to me.

Ik vraag me af...

[scsirob]

... of die fijne Amerikanen dan ook van ons verlangen dat we alles in het Engels doen, of zouden ze dan zelf alle wereldtalen gaan leren?

Ik voel me steeds veiliger met Bush en consorte in het zadel... NOT!

Re:Way to go, Dunya.

[E8086]

now that's a +5 funny

You can cram that Juris-my-diction crap up your...

[Suzumushi]

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."

Welcoming our American Overlords?

[born_to_live_forever]

Another program, called the Global Intellectual Property Rights Academy, would train foreign judges, enforcement officials and other stakeholders

Yes... that's just what we crave, in the rest of the benighted world: for Americans to come over here and tell our judges and police how to enforce American corporations' interests in our countries.

Hmm... let's see... what would be an appropriate response?

Ah, I have it!

YANKEE GO HOME!

Shhhh

[jbeaupre]

Pipe down. Reasoned submissions will not be tolerated. Please refrain from reading the articles and get back to ranting about misconceptions like everyone else.

Don't panic....

[tacokill]

Lots of panic on this thread. Let me try to add a little insight into what OTHER nations will think of this....

They won't.


Thank you. You all have been great. See ya next time.

How US industry was built

[Anonymous Coward]

I listened to a fascinating interview on NPR one day with Patrick Jeffrey "Pat" Choate, Ross Perot's running mate in the 1996 election, and currently a professor of Advanced Issues Management at George Washington University's Graduate School of Public Management.

In his book "Hot Property: The Stealing of Ideas in an Age of Globalization" he describes the ways and means that the United States acquired technology from the Europeans after US independence. Mostly, the ideas (and plans) were stolen. This is how the US developed a textile industry. While cotton was a major crop in the South, the US had no means to spin it into cloth, and textiles had to be bought from Europe in order to clothe the Army. Until one enterprising (and rich) individual used his wealth to insinuate himself into British society, whereupon he toured the UK for several years, visiting textile factories using letters of introduction from his society friends. The owners of the factories would not allow him to make notes, but he had a photographic memory, and upon his return to the US, he built an even better textile mill than the British had.

There are other stories like this in the book. The point Choate tries to make is that developing countires acquire technology through various means, not the least of which is deception, because the more devloped countries will not share the technology with them. He makes the point that this is how it was in the US until the First World War. When a country's technology matures, they then try to protect it by various means including patents and trade retaliation.

The US got where it is technologically by stealing other's technology in the first place. And now it's in the last phase - complaining when the tables are reversed (according to Choate).

Re:Yeah right...

[scsirob]

Since you think this is such a marvellous plan, how about this... Dutch / European IP law works quite well and hasn't as of yet created the mess that the USPTO has for you. I think we should send some Dutch advisors over and tell the American companies exactly how they should apply *our* IP laws as universal guidelines. This will be very beneficial, especially for European companies who have a head start. I'm sure that will be very well recived over there, right?!? No?!? What a surprise...

G.I.P.

[__aagmrb7289]

Ain't that a great acronym?

Re:Yeah right...

[jbeaupre]

They're called lobbyists. There are hundreds, if not thousands, here promoting the agendas of their employers from other countries. They represent governments, companies, and individuals. If you want to send a Dutch advisor, go for it. Very likely there's already one here, but feel free to send another. Nobody will care or notice.

Well, this isn't really a suprise.

[DanielJosphXhan]

Having just read Noam Comsky's "Hegemony or Survival", this doesn't come as a particular suprise.

And as a Canadian, it's worrying. Although ridiculous.

Re:Western Civilization....

[xiando]

Western civilization is the worst thing that have happened to the earth during the last million years. The human species wiped out all the big mammals in all parts of the world except Africa when we spread across the globe 10.000 years ago. Then, when the industrial revolution came about a mere 300 years ago we started wiping out entire habitats and broad ranges of species more effectively and now, today, species are going extinct a thousand times faster than they did before humanity came along. And we are felling trees ten times faster than they are being reproduced. Sorry, but in my humble opinion western civilization was a extremely bad idea and I am, sadly, sure I will be proved right in a mere generation or two. I know this has nothing to do with the US imposing their ridiculous software laws on the free world, but so sorry, it had to be said.

I am the only one who first read it...

[Nahor]

...U.S. Announces Global Intellectual Property Ban?

Then I was wondering when politicians became honest and started to speak the truth. I didn't think it was possible so I reread the subject I saw my error.

Re:This is a good thing

[mosb1000]

"the shareholders" who the fuck are you talking about? Are you some kind of moron? Let me spell it out for you. Due to automation and industrialization the future world economy will be based on ideas instead of commodities. This means that it is vitally important that the people who spend their time and money developing ideas (the number of people doing this will continue to grow) are compensated for their contributions to society.

Right not the US carries out most of the worlds R&D spending, so we have the most of gain from IP, but it will not always be this way. Any country wishing to industrialize and increase the well-being of it's citizens (I think this is just about any country) must recognize and enforce intellectual property rights. Failure to do so will mean a radically stifled economy and an end to economic growth.

Only a moron can not recognize the importance of these simple facts. Some kind of world-wide IP system is absolutely vital to the continued growth of the world economy. That means that IP is essential if citizens of the world wish to see continued improvements in quality of life. Failure to recognize IP is short-sighted and ignorant.

Re:Way to go, Dunya.

[iceanfire]

Ma-ti won't be happy that you just slashdotted his site:

"Sorry, this site is temporarily unavailable! The web site you are trying to access has exceeded its allocated data transfer. Visit our help area for more information."

When did USA become

[IdleTime]

a dictator state that can freely meddle in other countries internal affairs? last time someone wanted to do that with regards to Americans, USA looked more like a kid in the sandbox creaming because someone ELSE wanted their toy. International Court anyone? Kyoto anyone?

It seems to be OK as long as it is making money for Americans, once it requires some responsibility and decency from USA, it's thrown out as not in USA's interest. Well, most of the world think USA is not in the worlds interest and this is just another example of idioctic American corporate dictatiorship. USA - the only country where corporations have more protection and is more important than it's citizens. To bad I live in this shithole.

Re:When did USA become

[udowish]

I can only imagine how frustrating this is for you..ooo wait, I am NOT a US citizen (thank god)...who should be more nervous you...or me? At least you recognize the potential issues with policies such as this, many Americans dont'.

Re:When did USA become

[IdleTime]

I'm not a US citizen either, just live and work here. Would NEVER get American citizenship. Why would I give up my citizenship for an inferior one, namely US citizenship?

Re:When did USA become

[swordgeek]

Well, the current administration really formalised their plans to build a world-wide empire in 1997, when they founded the Project for a New American Century. Here's their policy statement:

Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

          we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
        responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

          we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

          we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;

          we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.


If it sounds like a bunch of nutbars running the organisation, take a look at their founders and board of directors. I'm sure you'll find some familiar names.

Awesome...

[mc900ftjesus]

So, as long as a big company holds a patent, they can make money from it. Otherwise, the government will intervene and call something a secret even though it's available on the internet.

The real question is, what government employees took the money to make sure Lucent can't be sued?

Addendum

[Anonymous Coward]

During its technology acquisition phase, the US had no regard for foreign intellectual property rights. The US patent Office (starting with the Patent Act of 1790) recognized only patents issued within the United States by US citizens. European patents and inventions were routinely copied and re-patented in the US.

Charles Dickens did not receive one penny in royalties from US editions of his works. Now, however, the US demands royalties and enforcement of its intellectual property.

The Reply we'd love to see:

[geminidomino]

Japanese/Brazillian/Chinese/etc... Prime Minister:

"International law, you say? Tell you what, since America is our economic bitch^W^W friend and all, here's a deal: Accept the rulings of international law on your "War on Terror," and we'll protect Mickey Mouse."

Somehow, I doubt it'll happen tho.

For added clarity...

[erroneus]

The Global Intellectual Property Rights (or GIPR) is pronounced "Jih-Per"

Radicalism

[A beautiful mind]

Since the USPTO is playing the honest, I'll be frank too.

I don't observe anyone's intellectual property (the shortening of my constitutional rights (I'm Non-USA before someone cites the USA's constitution for me)), period. I would like to encourage others to protect their own rights too.

The best thing that could have been done to the patent system is to scrap the whole thing. Those who created it didn't go past modern economy 101, because, well, it was created 200-300 years ago (in a much more applicable form than it is in today, if i may add).

It's one thing that the intellectual property system reduces my right for freedom of speech (why can't i "say" data sequences on the net?), but it is also bad for the economy. It is a forced, artificial restriction much like prohibition was. Society can be interpreted as a continuation of evolution on some level. This means, that societies which made murder a "crime", survived better, for example. As a general rule of thumb, while respecting a few basic things, the less restrictive a society is, the better. Creating artificial restrictions is making a society function less optimal. Applying restrictions on computers, which eventually boil down to mathematics are:

a.) Not precise. (I demand to know the sequence of those base two numbers which you hold the copyright/patent on. If you can't reproduce those numbers, your copyright doesn't stand.)

b.) Because of a.), defining a copyrighted work is ambigous. Since what we define those copyrights on are very precise, creating a relation between the two sets are almost impossible. (Could you point me to the database where i can look up a copyrighted set of base two numbers, please, so that i can verify that i can make sure i don't infringe upon someone's copyright?)

Apart from these natural necessities, even if i were to accept the unfair artificial restriction placed upon me by society, i flatly refuse to accept to believe in the pack of _lies_ copyright and patent holders spread in order to protect their own selfish interests against society as a whole.

The dreaded day when someone copyrighted a mathematical expression happened decades ago, when someone decided that people should pay someone for copying specific binary bits apart from the ISP. There is a huge difference between paying for someone to create the knowledge about a sequence of specific bits (writing source code, translating that into binary executable) and for paying someone for the reversal of the artificial restriction of being denied the right to copy already known binary bits from one storage to another.

The paying for copying part is gravely vague too. What constitutes as copying? Installing an operating system is surely copying? Am i not allowed to copy then or not?

Modern communications require freedom of information. On communications i mean digital communication which is starting to gain strength lately, and will hopefully cleanse the world of this medieval copyright nonsense.

Re:This is a good thing

[udowish]

So then why the US system? why not an EU system? this is typical US way or no way thinking. And it's thinking like this that spurred 9-11, etc etc etc

Another corporate welfare program

[Safe Sex Goddess]

If companies want to protect their intellectual property, then they should pay to do it. I'd much rather our tax dollars went to building infrastructure investments here at home rather than trying to protect the property of some multinational company that more than likely isn't even headquartered in the United States of America.

Let them eat cake/coke

[gomel]

We westerners have always done this kind of thing to Asia! I want my government to promote our monopolies abroad. I offer you five words: British East India Tea Company.

All right! That's the fine mercantilist spirit!

While we're at it, let's reinstitute the free trade in opium! I think we could sue China through the WTO Arbitrage Court for unlawful protectionism of their domestic agriculture market.

Re: GPL proves you wrong

[xiando]

Great software is being developed under the GNU GPL and that proves you wrong. The open source movement generally has the attitude that IP and Copyright is a bad thing, but since Copyright exists in this world then one must comply with that and that is why we have the GNU GPL, to make sure that what should be free and in the commons remains free and in the commons even in a world with IP and Copyright. So your argument is totally stupid. Novell makes money off OpenSuSE even though they are not protecting their IP; they are letting people use it. There would be money in software without IP because people need support, claiming they would not develop software without IP when thousands of small corporations is making money off open source software does not hold water.

Property

[Cyno]

We seem to care more about property than people. So people die while we're fighting to protect our and our corporation's property. Yet nobody seems to be concerned that its this capitalist love of stuff and money over people that cause so many problems for so many people.

poverty Audio pronunciation of "poverty" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pvr-t)
n.

      1. The state of being poor; lack of the means of providing material needs or comforts.
      2. Deficiency in amount; scantiness: "the poverty of feeling that reduced her soul" (Scott Turow).
      3. Unproductiveness; infertility: the poverty of the soil.
      4. Renunciation made by a member of a religious order of the right to own property.

We need to teach them to fish again, in our modern society, by giving them the means to fish. They have no fishing poles because they are too expensive. Today the computer is like the fishing pole was 1000 years ago. A car or a method of transportation is like a fishing pole. Housing and education and food are like the fishing pole. But the only hand outs they get from us are our old fishing poles after we've already caught all the big fish.

I would certainly love the comfort of knowing if I lost my job I'd have a free place to stay, free 'net access, free food and transportation until I can get back on my feet and be productive again. But without that sort of love in our society, I doubt we'll ever get a break like that. Not while we're paying for the last 5 years and fighting for more property rights. Whatever happened to Human rights, like the pursuit of happiness..

Re:Yeah right...

[Arandir]

If you want to protect the rights of Dutch/European IP owners in the US, go right ahead! I don't think it's a concern, as I haven't seen that big of a black market in Dutch/European software on the street corners in New York, but if that's what you want to do I won't stop you.

Rest assured, that the US isn't sending people abroad to tell opthers what it can or cannot do with Dutch/European IP. If that was your concern, it was misplaced.

Philosophy

[cnerd2025]

If we remember what American history and philosophy says, as well as "precedents", we'll recognize that in the early years America violated almost every "property right" that there was. We were a fledgling nation and needed to violate the rights in order to establish ourselves. Now because of media dirtbags the ideas have been bastardized and perverted into this "intellectual property" bullshit, that isn't even mentioned in the US Constitution. Contrary to what one poster said, the founders of the US did have economic ideas and they had significant education. Stating that they had taken only "economics 101" is a complete fallacy. Hamilton successfully established our national bank and we are still in his debt, no pun intended. The issue is this: John Locke, an Enlightenment thinker, conceived of the modern ideals of property. He believed that people had the rights to own land and own personal property. This was in stark contrast to the traditional European system where Serfs and Vassals served their Lords and the Lords served the Kings under the feudal system. Locke believed that individual rights encompassed all things, and that every individual, in order to "Pursue Happiness", had the right to make money. This is the birth of the idea of the so-called intellectual property. America's forefathers understood this and therefore they established a clause in the constitution enumerating a system for copyright. What the constitution also enumerates, however, is that the copyright is established for the "the Progress of Science and the Useful Arts." In other words, the authors are not made to benefit alone; science and/or art must also benefit. These are dual requirements, just as "creul and unusual" must both be true. The founding fathers also had no way to conceive the internet or any global communication/integration system. My view is that "intellectual property" is the grey matter in one's head. No one can steal what's in one's head from that person. They have neither the right nor the ability, and even if they did have the ability, they would not have the right. That would undermine the principles of freedom. The idea of a patent is good: it promotes innovation (in theory). What should be provided is a means for less litigation and lawsuits. In other words, the language and interpretation should be radically relaxed. It attacks my freedom to say I can't make a derivative work without paying a royalty. It attacks my freedom to say that I, as a creative individual, cannot take a "patented" device and then make improvements upon it. It infringes on my rights and attacks my freedom that major corporations have the ability to monitor me through the use of "trade secrets" that are part of proprietary programs or devices or whatever. I've heard a lot about these "black boxes" that record car data. I have an inherent right to know what code is running on that machine and an inherent right to know what is being recorded. The final dilema is this: if a third world country is battling the AIDS epidemic and they desperately need medication that is patented, why should they get the permission from the creator as well as pay the creator royalties? They obviously don't have the money to pay for the drugs and could much more cheaply manufacture a generic medication than importing it. It may be one's right to own the individual workings of a physica object, but not at the expence of others' rights or lives.

Bearing the burden

[jdavidb]

United States citizens and United States corporations that want better protection for their "intellectual property" in other countries should hire lawyers and lobbyists in those countries to effect the change they want. My government does not represent me by attempting to effect this change on behalf of those Americans who want these increased restrictions.

Re:You can cram that Juris-my-diction crap up your

[thesaintar]

You're quite wrong, something you patent in Japan, gives you a valid patent in the US, France, Germany, and all the other countries that signed the Paris treaty on IP, several years ago.

Dont we have better things to do?

[nurb432]

While its debatable if 'piracy' should be dealt with, this is not a good use of *MY* tax dollars.

There are REAL threats and REAL problems in the world.

Spending money on this stuff is just silly. And yes i realize that the government has been bought by the corporations. It still doesnt make it right.

Re:This is a good thing

[kingj02]

I think you need to work on your analytical reading skills. Where in my post did I assert that all IP protection is bad? I did assert that most of it is not in the best interest of society, but only those that want a larger return on their profits, i.e., "the shareholders".

Failure to do so will mean a radically stifled economy and an end to economic growth.

One would also think that laying off your employees and opting for the cheap labor over seas would also stifle economic growth, But that's a different issue.

Are you some kind of moron? Let me spell it out for you.

I guess I do need to spell it out for you. Are you not aware of all the zany proposed laws going through parliament right now? Seems to be an everyday front-pager here at Slashdot. Are you not aware of all the bogus patents that are granted? It seems to be about every other day that Amazon/Microsoft/Apple/Intel/ and so on get a patent on some simple and obvious concept. Are you not aware that the mega corporations are pushing to eliminate fair use laws? Do you not realize that their treating consumers as criminals before they even have a chance to do something wrong.

Some kind of world-wide IP system is absolutely vital to the continued growth of the world economy.

Agreed. Unfortunately the negative effects of the current IP system far outweigh the positives and thus should be fixed before we (the U.S.) try to push it onto the rest of the world. I think only a moron would support and try to expand a broken system before fixing it... or maybe fixing it isn't part of the plan...

No suprise

[Sylver Dragon]

The US is basically trying to do, with economics and coersion, what the Romans did by military force: build an empire.

That's actually an issue with the Supremes

[Ungrounded Lightning]

Isn't it ironic...that the US wants foreign judges to consider US law as it judges things in its own jurisdiction, yet doesn't want US judges to consider foreign law as it judges matters here in the US?

That's an issue with the Supremes - and the appointment and confirmation process - right now.

Some of the "Consititution is a Living Document" crowd - who want to bend the protections into any convenient shape so they can be conveniently ignored - DO want the Supremes to "consider foreign law" when they make their decisions.

The problem is: that's ILLEGAL. The US government has ONLY the power granted it by the Constitution, and the whole POINT of the Supreme Court (in the current operation of the country) is to hold it to those limits. All US law derives from the Constitution. Giving foreign law ANY input into the decision-making at the judicial level risks breaking the single defense of citizens' rights (short of violent anti-government action.) Then you get to knuckle under or fight a war, probably lose, and end up broke and exhausted even if you DO win.

Foreign law properly gets incorporated through legislation to fulfill treaty obligations. Then the judiciary determines whether the chosen implementation is within the government's limits and sends it back for a rehack if not. Citizens and lawyers only have to deal with the law of the US.

In the absense of adherence to that set of limits the President can do anything he pleases and the Congress can pass any law they can get the President to enforce. Tyranny with a capital-T.

The Supreme Court puts the brakes on that by knocking down laws, regulations, and executive excesses when they exceed the constitutional bounds. (It keeps working over a significant time because the main source of their power is knocking down improper laws - and being seen as reasonably consistent and true to the meaning of the constitution when doing so.)

But recently a supreme court justice mentioned foreign law in a decision - in a way that makes it appear that it influenced that decision. Now whether new appointees are going to stick to the constitution or "legislate from the bench" by ad-libbing and/or giving foreign law some standing above portions of the Constitution itself is a big issue.

Re:That's actually an issue with the Supremes

[Nomad37]

The basic premise of your post is correct, but you've overstated your argument. Imgaine the following scenario: the US executive (headed by the President) signs a treaty on subject X. The Congress begins to consider the treaty, but does not legislate on it (yet). Thus the treaty has not been ratified by the US and there are no domestic legal rights created.

Subject X actually allows the executive to affect citizens' rights directly. Citizen Joe sues executive in order to stop it from affecting his right apropos subject X.

Shouldn't the court be allowed to refer to the previous actions of the executive and say, you have evinced your intention to adhere to this _international_ treaty. While you're not bound to do or not do anything under US domestic law, as a method of interpretation, we will assume that you do not wish to adversely affect Citizen Joe unless you make it _very_ clear that you want to do that.

This exact scenario occured with regard to the rights of the child in Australia. Google the 'Teoh case' if you're interested.

This points to more fundamental flaws in your argument. Domestic law has *never* existed in a vacuum. And judges have always created law to some extent (derisively, though inaccurately described as judicial legislating). The idea of the judiciary simply mechanically applying legislation without 'creating' legal norms that did not exist prior to a judicial decision is a Victorian-English fantasy long disproved in jurisprudence and philosophy of literature. /rant.

Re:That's actually an issue with the Supremes

[aaronrp]

This is what happens when you take your legal understanding from talk radio.

The purpose of the Supreme Court is to apply the Constitution, but they must first interpret the Constitution to figure out what it means. Much of the Constitution was made deliberately vague, because they knew they couldn't imagine everything that was coming so they left it to "posterity" to figure out.

If you're sitting up on the Supreme Court and are trying to figure out some piece of legal terminology that isn't very well defined actually means, one of the reasonable places to look is at other countries when they've tried to answer the same question. If the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council resolves some question in admiralty law in some way, and US law reads in a similar way, then rather than inventing something from whole cloth, it makes sense for the US Supreme Court to take its interpretation from a foreign case, or the definition found in a foreign law. That is not the same thing as giving foreign law a status above US law.

But the America First crowd doesn't understand this. The US is the greatest country on earth! Rah rah rah! Anything from a foreign country must be bad!

BS

[Dr Floppy]

I dont want my tax dollars going to fund this useless enforcement, It would be worse of a waste than the War on Drugs

NO

[eexlebots]

Yech!

USA's largest industry finally an export

[Forkenhoppen]

It's finally happened, just as we all feared; the USA is exporting lawyers.

They've been sitting on that stockpile for years. It was only a matter of time before they used them.

Damn you, UN!

Re:Yeah right...

[SoSueMe]

A simple phrase comes to mind.
It goes like this: "The thin edge of the wedge"

The real matter of the fact is that trust in U.S. "initiatives" is next to non-existent.

Ahhh, the irony...

[Hosiah]

We can't stop a rag-tag band of thugs from high-jacking our planes. We're helpless as kittens for two weeks dealing with the aftermath of a hurricane. We can do nothing to generate energy but burn more dead dinosaurs. But rest assured that if you try to hide in a hole in the Antarctic ice and play 1 $14.99 CD illegally on your Linux box, our Goon Squad will be all over you like ants on a donut.

World police

[Eldmannen]

And people wonder why they hate America? Always trying to be the world police and dictate others instead of minding their own shit. America is begining to be a synonym for Terrorism.

BROWSE AT 0!

[Hurricane78]

God, you *have* to browse this at 0!

I've never seen so many poeple with really good things to say post as ACs.

Priorities

[Legion303]

As I sit here listening to the new Bloodhound Gang CD (won't hit store shelves until next Tuesday) and watching the new Family Guy movie (see previous parenthetical)--both of which were released by industry insiders--it strikes me that maybe the US in this case, and the RIAA/MPAA in others, might possibly be going after the wrong people.

But don't let that stop you, lawmakers! You give those foreign governments hell!

What bout other countries

[JoeCommodore]

What about other countries, will our juges get training from other countries to enforce thier IP laws and do likewise... you know like we particiapte in the UN with treaties like the Kyoto one.

I'm still not convinced.

[Grendel Drago]

I'd be a lot more convinced if more people actually cared about copyright issues. How many people were even aware that Eldred v. Ashcroft was going on when it was up at the SCOTUS?

British East India Tea Company

[falconwolf]

You can't enforce US law in china.

Why not?? We westerners have always done this kind of thing to Asia!

Another word needs to be added, opium. Because the British imported so much tea they had a serious trade deficit so to even out the imbalance they imported into China opium, thus started the Opium Wars. The Chinese emperor tried to stop the opium and when he did the British sent in troops and they roundly defeated the Chinese and forced the emperor to allow opium. Therefore the saying that the queen was a drug dealer was correct. At the same tyme Britain also forced the lease of Hong Kong.

Falcon

If an oil embargo hit China

[falconwolf]

And who's going hit China with an oil embargo? Certainly not the US. Iran is only too happy to supply China. So is Sudan and Venezuela. If anything China could almost do the opposite to the US. Venezuela is one of the biggest suppliers of oil to the US but Bush keeps antaganizing Chavez, and his buddy US televangelist Pat Robertson of the 700 club says maybe we should assassinate Chavez, so Chavez could easily find China to buy all the oil Venezuela currently sales to the US.

Falcon

Re:Western Civilization....

[Nomad37]

I agree with all your specific observations, western civilization (itself a loaded term) has made a lot of mistakes. If, however, we'd seen the rise of Eastern Civilization (or some other nonsense term) instead, it would have made its fair share of mistakes also.

Importantly, most - actually probably all - civilizations have borrowed from each other, improved on culture, knowledge, etc etc and at some stage passed it back.

Anyway, as a first generation Westerner (there's another weird concept for ya), I prefer what I'm comfortable with. I'd prefer to improve Western society, with all its ills, than swap it for a cultural framework that in offers liberties where we have strictures and strictures where we have liberties, etc.

Re:Yeah right...

[NoMaster]

If you want to send a Dutch advisor, go for it. Very likely there's already one here, but feel free to send another. Nobody will care or notice.

Which is exactly how it should be with this announcement from the US.

What, you don't like that? Well, just enjoy this free sample of the "it sucks to be you" attitude which seems to be the US's major export these days...

China's Announcement

[foreverdisillusioned]

Dear USA:

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Ha.

Seriously though, fuck you.A

Re: GPL proves you wrong

[foreverdisillusioned]

I hate to nitpick, because I totally agree with the gist of what you're saying, but the GPL is only possible BECAUSE of copyright law. Copyright law is the only thing compelling companies to release the source code for their improvements. Now the BSD license on the other hand...

Re:Not the supremes that worry me

[symbolic]

Some of the "Consititution is a Living Document" crowd - who want to bend the protections into any convenient shape so they can be conveniently ignored - DO want the Supremes to "consider foreign law" when they make their decisions.

It's not the Supremes I'd worry about. It's things like Executive Orders that completely bypass the judicial process, effectively removing it as a part of the checks and balances that work to sustain our freedom. How many people know what FEMA's true role is? Probably very few. How many know that it wasn't created by an act of Congress, but by an executive order? How many people know what will happen when a national emergency is declared? THIS is what people should be worried about.

Send us you criminals

[realkiwi]

OK US law applies outside the US then our law applies in the US. I'm coming over to arrest a few people for crimes against humanity. Oh sorry I forgot, the US governement doesn't recognise that law...

And better weather too

[valluvar9000]

The last gasp ?? Maybe the gov can launch a program to train tropical storms as well :)

There's still hope.

[ewe2]

I just want to thank the many infuriated Americans for their comments here, it tempers my cynicism that maybe someone somewhere is willing to stand up and risk having a corporate whipper-snipper lop their heads off. The corporate agenda has gone beyond mere control, it's spiralling into a dangerous self-defeating power vaccum. The haves think they are safe behind their walls but ignoring the havenots outside isn't rational, no matter how economic or conservative.

Good Luck.

[quackerymd]

Good luck with that. The U.S. can't even get France to turn over our murderers to be tried in the U.S. Now they are going to try to get communist countries to stop using the Mickey D'S symbol when they aren't suppose to. Hmmmm I wonder which coporation proposed this plan?

Protectionism by another name

[The OPTiCIAN]

"Intellectual Property" is protectionism by another name, and it's success will be the undoing of the US economy and its allies. One of the emerging powers will decide at some point to stick to their guns on liberalising and eclipse the stupid inefficient practices of IP law as it stands. Of course, in the West (or the North or wheverever - in the established Advanced Industrialised Counties) it will be called 'piracy' and other nasty words and thus go somewhat unnoticed until it's too late.

Re:This is a good thing

[mosb1000]

There's not really anything wrong with our patent laws if you measure them by the same standard all laws are measured. The legal system in general could always use improvement. Criminals get away with crimes every day because of legal loopholes, innocent people are put away for crimes that shouldn't be crimes. All in all, the U.S. legal system is about as effective as those that exist in any other country. Of course, it should be improved, but that doesn't mean we should do away with it while we try to come up with something better. The same applies to patent law and copyright law, just because they could be improved doesn't mean we should get rid of them while we come up with something new.

A lot of patents are granted every day, and only a few of them make it to front page of slashdot, those that do often do so because the are examples of the problems with the patent system. But to be sure, most patents are not bad patents. I think patent reform is important, but I also think promoting IP is necessary right now.

Re:Yeah right...

[PlacidPundit]

I think we should send some Dutch advisors over and tell the American companies exactly how they should apply *our* IP laws as universal guidelines.

We already have that. It's called the U.N.

Actually though, I *would* like to see somebody talk some sense into our legislature's heads on this issue. Of course, if they just read and understood the Constitution it would be great start.

If that's what they need

[rastilin]

If these hypothetical countries are in a position where they need the revenue generated from the sale of pirated discs to help feed their people then I have no compunction against letting them do so. The conditions in many third-world factories are terrible (long workdays, hand to mouth wage, opressive "magagement" (physical enforcement of employee policies)) and local industry, no matter what kind, will help to stop that.