Slashdot Mirror


US Keeps China, Puts Canada on IP Priority Watch List (reuters.com)

The Trump administration on Friday labeled 36 countries as inadequately protecting U.S. intellectual property rights, keeping China on a priority watch list and adding Canada over concerns about its border controls and pharmaceutical practices. From a report: The U.S. Trade Representative's annual report on global IP concerns is separate from the "Section 301" report on Chinese technology transfer practices that has led the world's two largest economies to threaten each other with tariffs. The so-called "Special 301 Report on Intellectual Property Rights" calls out China for its "coercive technology transfer practices" and "trade secret theft, rampant online piracy, and counterfeit manufacturing." It was the 14th straight year that China was placed on the "Priority Watch List." U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer is due to travel to China next week along with other senior Trump administration officials for talks on U.S. demands for changes in Beijing's trade and intellectual property policies.

39 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. That's OK ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's, OK, you're on our "assholes to try to stop doing business with" list.

    So sorry we won't put our national sovereignty and our own legally enshrined rights behind those of asshole corporations -- as much as that's what they've paid your leaders to try to do.

    It won't be long before the US shoots themselves in the foot and starts losing trade as other countries decide putting up with your bullshit isn't worth the effort.

    But keep on trying to act like we all need you and are willing to sign terrible deals to have the privilege of trading with you.

    1. Re:That's OK ... by BlueStrat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's, OK, you're on our "assholes to try to stop doing business with" list.

      maximum lol
      you go ahead and stop doing any business with the us and see how long you last

      [MIB 'Bug' voice]

      "Your proposal is acceptable."

      [/MIB 'Bug' voice]

      Just remember who the nations are that own all the US debt. If enough nations call a sufficient amount of those securities etc in, the US is in very serious trouble. There's already a strong push on to switch to the Chinese Yuan as the international currency of trade as well. The US needs to be very careful right now. The US Dollar, the economy, stocks & bonds, etc...are all built on fiction.

      Reality must and will come one way or another in the not-too-distant future. It's going to be messy, as at this point it's nearly certain, and in addition, even if those in power cared and tried to do something, the best they could do at this point is soften things a tiny bit.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    2. Re:That's OK ... by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 2

      Foreign nations don't own all the US debt. Most of the debt is actually borrowed against the future value of social security, or some such financial nonsense.

      Honestly I don't understand how it works but as of February only $6trillion or so is owed to foreign countries.

      --
      Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
    3. Re:That's OK ... by neilo_1701D · · Score: 3, Informative

      Foreign nations don't own all the US debt. Most of the debt is actually borrowed against the future value of social security, or some such financial nonsense.

      Honestly I don't understand how it works but as of February only $6trillion or so is owed to foreign countries.

      Considering that the 2017 annual US tax revenue is $1.9 trillion, calling 6 trillion dollars of debt means big problems for the US.

    4. Re:That's OK ... by crunchygranola · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Considering that the 2017 annual US tax revenue is $1.9 trillion, calling 6 trillion dollars of debt means big problems for the US.

      According to that link annual US tax revenue is $3,340.4 trillion. Income tax is not the only Federal tax revenue as that table makes painfully obvious.

      But your point is well taken, it is a good thing that the Republicans cut tax revenue further in December so that debt well pile up even faster. MAGA!

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    5. Re:That's OK ... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      If enough nations call a sufficient amount of those securities etc in, the US is in very serious trouble.
      If the US simply refuses to pay, who is gonna force them?

      There's already a strong push on to switch to the Chinese Yuan as the international currency of trade as well.
      Unlikely, first of all the Yuan is bound to the dollar. Secondly Euro is the second biggest trade currency.

      However you are right, the US is going downhill since 50 years or longer, but they are to stupid to realize it. On the other hand "downhill" in a world where most nations go uphill is perhaps a bit exaggerated. Perhaps the US is simply frozen in their 1050th world view.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    6. Re:That's OK ... by BlueStrat · · Score: 2

      Most of the debt is actually borrowed against the future value of social security, or some such financial nonsense.

      Honestly I don't understand how it works

      They print some documents essentially stating they're borrowing money from one pocket to put in the other and then saying they're now that much richer. It works the same as suddenly adding a bunch of new coins to a fixed-coin-number cryptocurrency after people have bought in.

      It essentially robs everyone holding that currency of some amount of it's actual value. The beauty for governments is they can create money like this and use it for whatever, and they don't have to pass a tax increase and the people aren't required to write a check or even have money in a bank or other institution, etc. It robs the money straight from their wallet by devaluing the money in it, largely without them even being aware of the theft.

      Money and value are separate. A $20 1-ounce gold coin from around 1860 would buy a fine suit. Today, that ounce of gold will still buy a fine suit but is now worth many, many more dollars as is the fine suit. The money is now worth far less. It's one of the biggest reasons Kleptocracies *love* fiat currencies.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  2. Re:Badge of Honour by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In the case of Canada's pharmaceutical practices, they result in prices so cheap that many Americans travel to Canada to obtain drugs. This smacks of corporate cronyism steering Trump's decisions. Drain the swamp... my ass.

  3. Canadian Pharmaceutical Practices? by foxalopex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm going to assume this has something to do with generic drugs? I guess drug companies in the US are more concerned about making a buck than actually helping people. In Canada, most essential drugs have a generic or no-name equivalent which is often cheaper than the brand name drug and works just as well. I sure hope that isn't their complaint because that particular law makes drugs cheaper for the folks who need it.

    1. Re:Canadian Pharmaceutical Practices? by sinij · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I guess this more to do with refusal to implement Mickey Mouse laws. Many things go into public domain much earlier in Canada than in USA. Also, there are Canadian laws that cap consumer liability for pirating to $5K or so, as a result RIAA bankrupt-you lawsuits are not possible.

    2. Re:Canadian Pharmaceutical Practices? by foxalopex · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually when it comes to downloaded pirated videos, there's almost no way for content providers to come after you in Canada. In Canada, content providers are never provided the address or personal information of a subscriber because doing so would be a breach of Privacy. They actually need to be granted a search warrant first which is expensive and time consuming. All ISP's do is forward any warning messages from Content Providers to subscribers but there's no real obligation for a subscriber to do anything other than to toss it in the trash.

    3. Re:Canadian Pharmaceutical Practices? by KixWooder · · Score: 2

      We have plenty of generic drugs and for most every condition. There are a few (very few) drugs in the US that have absolutely no generic or biosimilar counterpart. I would easily say that 95% of the brand-name drugs you hear about or see advertised are designer or a slight tweak to a previous med. There are virtually no novel drugs in the pipeline. Source: I'm a clinical Pharmacist.

      --
      I hate fat people.
    4. Re:Canadian Pharmaceutical Practices? by thomst · · Score: 4, Insightful

      foxalopex posited:

      I'm going to assume this has something to do with generic drugs? I guess drug companies in the US are more concerned about making a buck than actually helping people. In Canada, most essential drugs have a generic or no-name equivalent which is often cheaper than the brand name drug and works just as well. I sure hope that isn't their complaint because that particular law makes drugs cheaper for the folks who need it.

      That's certainly part of it. Their Supreme Court's intolerance of patent abuse, and its willingness to punish it appropriately is, I suspect, also a non-trivial consideration ...

      --
      Check out my novel.
    5. Re:Canadian Pharmaceutical Practices? by mark-t · · Score: 2

      Continued extensions are no longer necessary for that now that Disney has finally gotten around to trademarking the Mouse and its image. Trademarks do not have an expiry, and last for as long as the company is willing to protect them.

      This doesn't technically stop people from freely copying old works whose copyright has expired, even if they feature the trademarked character, but it does stop anyone from being able to utilize the character in their own work, even if that work was derived from one that was now in public domain.

    6. Re:Canadian Pharmaceutical Practices? by AnthonywC · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No shit that US drugs companies care more about $ than helping people, in fact I would say they prefer to make a killing (pun intended) on it. To a greater extent, the same argument goes for/against universal health care as it is really about how much a country values about its citizen's health versus profitability of the its medical/drug industry.

    7. Re:Canadian Pharmaceutical Practices? by mark-t · · Score: 3, Informative

      The ISP can terminate your account if the problem persists enough though.

    8. Re:Canadian Pharmaceutical Practices? by AnthonywC · · Score: 5, Informative

      Because in Canada they actually care more about the common people interests versus big corporations; which is what democracy should strive to be, politicians voted in by the public should actually look after common people's interest. I'd argue it is even common sense that RIAA or whatever big corporation interest group should not have the power to bankrupt an average consumer who is not commercially profiting, but again in Canada it is also quite unheard of for someone to go bankrupt due to medical issue either.

    9. Re:Canadian Pharmaceutical Practices? by mark-t · · Score: 2

      You have been misinformed. Star Trek, even TOS, is still definitely covered by copyright in Canada.

    10. Re:Canadian Pharmaceutical Practices? by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Informative

      We have plenty of generic drugs and for most every condition. There are a few (very few) drugs in the US that have absolutely no generic or biosimilar counterpart. I would easily say that 95% of the brand-name drugs you hear about or see advertised are designer or a slight tweak to a previous med. There are virtually no novel drugs in the pipeline. Source: I'm a clinical Pharmacist.

      One thing Canada doesn't allow is direct-to-consumer drug advertising. US commercials are filled with "Are you feeling XXX? Perhaps you have condition YYYY. Consult your doctor and see if ZZZZ is right for you!". This is one way to bypass generic drugs - if you're asking for them by name, there's no option to buy the generic version of the same drug.

      And pharmacists here are generally quick to ask if you'd want a generic or the branded stuff - it can affect things like extended health drug coverage -

    11. Re:Canadian Pharmaceutical Practices? by Strider- · · Score: 3, Informative

      One thing Canada doesn't allow is direct-to-consumer drug advertising. US commercials are filled with "Are you feeling XXX? Perhaps you have condition YYYY. Consult your doctor and see if ZZZZ is right for you!". This is one way to bypass generic drugs - if you're asking for them by name, there's no option to buy the generic version of the same drug.

      Well, it's a little more complex in Canada. You're allowed to advertise a drug name, but not what it treats, or you can advertise a condition but not a drug to treat it. This is how you get some rather cheeky Viagra and Cialis advertisements, and a lot of advertisements on various conditions that just say "talk to your doctor if you feel this way".

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
  4. Canada's border controls? by dstyle5 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which country is letting large numbers of immigrants illegally cross the border into Quebec and Manitoba the past few years? President Trump doesn't seem to concerned about stopping that from happening. Our current government is also part of the problem.

    As for the "pharmaceutical practices" I don't know about IP issues, but I know the cost of drugs here isn't nearly as ridiculous as things are becoming in the U.S. Sorry we aren't letting drug companies rip off people as badly as they do in your country, Mr. President.

    1. Re:Canada's border controls? by fred6666 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Canada should build a wall and send the bill to Trump.

    2. Re:Canada's border controls? by c · · Score: 5, Funny

      Canada should build a wall and send the bill to Trump.

      Nice try, but we'll wait until you elect someone who actually pays his bills.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    3. Re:Canada's border controls? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      The cost is the thing that got Canada on the watch list. The price disparity is so great that people are smuggling drugs across the border. Cheaper to pay a shady black market dealer to buy your life-saving medication as a generic in Canada and sneak it through the post than to buy exactly the same substance as a brand-name drug in the US.

    4. Re:Canada's border controls? by Piata · · Score: 2

      I have a feeling by "border controls" they mean the extremely low $20 limit allowed on imports before duty fees kick in. The US has very openly criticized Canada for having one of the lowest import limits in the world, essentially blocking US companies from the Canadian market.

  5. Re:Badge of Honour by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ironically enough the countries on the list don't innovate anything, they just steal other's work. Developing drugs costs money. None of the breakthoughs would exists without a profit motive.

    I call bullshit - many many breakthroughs were made by scientists doing 'pure' science. We would NEVER have had, for one random example, lasers, if there had been a profit requirement behind the scientists doing the fundamental science that made it possible.

  6. In other news... by Sebby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The U.S. has now been added to the list of #shithole countries.

    --

    AC comments get piped to /dev/null
    1. Re:In other news... by will_die · · Score: 2

      That had already happen under obama
      https://www.washingtonpost.com...

  7. Re:Badge of Honour by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not at the time they were invented, no. Lasers were originally conceived and the foundation for them laid down in the 1920s. It took until the 1980s when they were actually something you could market.

    You think any company invests into something with a 60 years development period?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  8. Re:Badge of Honour by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Informative

    We would NEVER have had, for one random example, lasers, if there had been a profit requirement

    Lasers were developed at Bell Labs and Hughes Research Lab, which were both operated by for-profit companies. They funded research labs in the expectation that the R&D would be profitable.

  9. pesky job killing regulations by sdinfoserv · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is yet another tale of corporate oligarchy extracting their government sponsored payola.
    A pain killer that as $138 in 2013 is now $2979 (http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/15/investing/drug-prices-vimovo-horizon-painkiller/index.html )
    https://www.chausa.org/publica...

    This is how they (the GOP) will ultimately kill medicare.
    If we ever want to bring health care costs, and being care to the masses, these companies must be broken. This is no longer about profit but gouging. The only way to get this country back is campaign finance reform.

  10. NAFTA by Comboman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Trump is also currently in the process of renegotiating NAFTA with Canada and is prone to slinging a little mud at his opponents during negotiations (right out of "The Art of the Deal").

    --
    Support Right To Repair Legislation.
  11. Re:Badge of Honour by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Nonsense. The "301 report" is, and always has been, crooked.

    See: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2017/03/canadian-government-on-u-s-special-301-we-dont-recognize-validity-of-flawed-report/
    (begin excerpt of Professor Michael Geist's excellent article)
    The Canadian government stance is described thus:

    [Author] recently obtained documents under the Access to Information Act that confirm the Canadian government’s rejection of the Special 301 process. Canada will not bother appearing today largely because it rejects the entire process. According to a memorandum drafted for Canadian Heritage Minister Melanie Joly after last years’ report:

    The Government of Canada does not recognize the validity of the process as the findings tend to rely predominantly on allegations from U.S. industry stakeholders rather than on objective analysis.

    Media lines go even further:

    Canada does not recognize the validity of the Special 301 and considers the process and the Report to be flawed. The Report fails to employ a clear methodology and the findings tend to rely on industry allegations rather than empirical evidence and objective analysis.
    (end excerpt)

    Oh, and while you're injecting your next insulin shot to keep from dying because of diabetes, try to remember that Frederick Banting, the medical researcher and doctor and Nobel Prize winner who figured out how to keep your obese ass alive, was CANADIAN!

    ALSO note: http://clinchem.aaccjnls.org/content/48/12/2270

    "On January 23, 1923, an American patent on both insulin and Toronto’s method of making it was awarded to Banting, Collip, and Best. For $1.00 to each, the three discoverers assigned their patent rights to the Board of Governors of the University of Toronto."

    Back then the researchers weren't so greedy! Mind you, Martin Shkreli wasn't born yet.

  12. It's complicated by Comboman · · Score: 2

    It's complicated. Copyright term in Canada is life of the author plus 50 years for written works and 50 years from first broadcast or recording for other works. If TOS was broadcast in Canada at the same time as the US, the broadcast would be in the public domain, but the scripts would not be (which would prevent anyone from using them without authorization). Gene Roddenberry didn't die until 1991, so anything written by him would be protected until 2041. That's sooner than in the USA but still 23 years away. The 50 years from broadcast rule would probably only apply to unscripted things like sports broadcasts (IANAL).

    --
    Support Right To Repair Legislation.
  13. Re:Illegal immigrants to Canada? by dstyle5 · · Score: 4, Informative

    No hyperbole, it is people crossing the border illegally. I have no problem with people legally immigrating to Canada, the neighborhood I live in is 40% immigrants. But when both US and Canadian governments allow it to happen it is an affront to the people who are legally immigrating, IMHO.

    "Roughly 75 per cent of the 25,000 asylum seekers who crossed into Quebec last year did so illegally and the government is anticipating a surge in migrants arriving again this year."

    https://globalnews.ca/news/415...

    "Officials said Monday it is expecting about 400 people to cross the border through forests and wooded areas every day this summer — up from 250 each day last year."

    https://globalnews.ca/news/414...

  14. Copyright 17 years patent 17 years by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2

    Stick to the Constitutional requirement, not this insane LIFETIME plus 90 years fake US version of copyright and patent that includes "business processes".

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  15. Most of us Canadians by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    have just come to expect Mr Trump to be what could charitably be called erratic.

    I'd think that is similar to the view from the rest of the world as well.

  16. Re:Badge of Honour by Insanity+Defense · · Score: 2

    Ironically enough the countries on the list don't innovate anything, they just steal other's work. Developing drugs costs money. None of the breakthoughs would exists without a profit motive.

    Bullshit. Where do you think the U.S. gets their medical isotopes from? It happens to be Canada mostly. When NASA needed an "arm" for the Space Shuttle who do you think designed and built it? A Canadian Corporation. Know any diabetics taking insulin? Thank Canada for their being alive. How about babies eating Pablum? Invented at the Toronto Hospital for Sick Children. And so on and so forth. I'm sure other countries on the list have their own discoveries.

  17. Re:Only Trump would put Canada on this list -WRONG by Insanity+Defense · · Score: 2

    Seriously, Canada, along with the UK, are our closest allies.
    In addition, neither of them deserve the treatment that Trump has given them.
    I now know how an East Germany felt.

    Canada has been on these U.S. lists for a LONG time. As to the treatment consider how post 9/11 Bush kept thanking the countries that helped and backed the U.S., the only time he mentioned Canada was when questioned by the press for his omission to which he responded "You don't thank family". How dysfunctional is the the Bush family? So yeah we have had this treatment by a lot more than just Trump.

    It isn't even just the politicos like Bush and Trump but also can be the people as in the incident where 3 playoff games played in the U.S. had the Canadian anthem booed but when after the 3rd U.S. game in the 3rd Canadian game the Canadian fans booed back and we got the "HOW DARE YOU!" treatment from Americans for finally booing the American anthem after being provoked 3 times (and this was the final Canadian game in the series so it was the last chance). So yeah we are used to it.

    I myself in my Canadian home town was harassed by a pair of Americans, when I told them off their response was "Here in the U.S.A they had the right to do whatever they wanted". They didn't even know enough to understand that Canada isn't in the U.S.A.

    Answer me this. Why is it that so many Americans come to Canada to celebrate your 4th of July independence from the British Empire? I ask because not only are they really obnoxious when they do but it seems wrong to visit a foreign nation that was Loyalist to that empire when you rebelled (and took in many of your loyalists when you won) to celebrate independence from that Empire. It just seems wrong.