Ambassador Claims ACTA Secrecy Necessary

I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "According to Ambassador Ron Kirk, the head of US Trade Representatives, the secrecy around the ACTA copyright treaty is necessary because without that secrecy, people would be 'walking away from the table.' If you don't remember, that treaty is the one where leaks indicate that it may contain all sorts of provisions for online copyright enforcement, like a global DMCA with takedown and anti-circumvention restrictions, three-strikes laws to terminate offending internet connections, and copyright cops. FOIA requests for the treaty text have been rebuffed over alleged 'national security' concerns. One can only hope that what he has said is true and that sites like Wikileaks will help tear down the veil of secrecy behind which they're negotiating our future."

Comments

Is Kirk hinting to us?

[SlappyBastard]

Just saying that such a statement seems like a quiet -- yet deniable -- way to ask folks to tear down the secrecy. If he really wanted it to survive, you'd assume he'd be a tiny bit more subtle than, "If this shit is known, this treaty is fucked."

Walking away from the table

[DeeVeeAnt]

That would be a bad thing? How exactly?

Re:Should all treaties be public?

[Haxamanish]

The League of Nations (1919-1946) forbade all secret treaties, especially military ones, since they lead to the Great War (WW1) - outlawing secret treaties was pushed by Woodrow Wilson. It was broken by the Hoare-Laval Pact in 1935, which effectively killed the League of Nations.