Would US Officials Really Decide Not To Sign ACTA?
from the or-is-that-for-show? dept
Well, here’s a bit of a surprise. We had just been saying that of course the US would sign onto ACTA, but apparently it’s no sure thing. Jamie Love, who is pretty well connected with what’s going on with ACTA, mentioned on Twitter that US officials are seriously considering dropping ACTA, after “losing” to the EU on the question of whether or not patents would be included. The US did not want patents in ACTA, while Europe did and Europe has likely won that battle. While the US is still pushing for them to be taken out, it seems unlikely at this point. Because of that, US officials are apparently honestly thinking about not signing. Love does note that Stan McCoy, who led the negotiations, isn’t too worried about the patent issue, but others in the administration believe it’s a big deal.
This is definitely news — though, in the end I still can’t see the US bailing on ACTA. The USTR has been so involved in the process, and has been so self-congratulatory all along with this latest draft, that it would be a huge political letdown not to sign the document. My guess is that it will get signed (and the US will be among the first to sign it), with those involved suggesting that we’ll just ignore anything we don’t like (as we’ve done in the past on other international agreements). Still, wouldn’t it be something if the US actually bailed out on ACTA?
Meanwhile, apparently in an effort to highlight just how screwed up the whole ACTA process is, the US Patent and Trademark Office, which has been heavily involved in the ACTA negotiations with the USTR as well, has apparently refused to meet with concerned individuals about ACTA until after it’s signed. This is how the US government listens to stakeholers? “We’ll only talk to you after it’s too late to fix?” Comforting.
Comments on “Would US Officials Really Decide Not To Sign ACTA?”
Can we not just shoot the lawmaker with tranqs and kidnap them until this farce is over?
That would be far more sensible than your current system of ‘Bribe everyone to make laws for us.’
Re: Re:
The lawmakers are Congress. This is an executive order. No lawmakers involved, only those who are supposed to be upholding laws.
Disgustingly cheesy on all sides.
Obama's conundrum
It must be a blood pressure buster when one group of your campaign contributors demands ACTA and another group of your donor overlords doesn’t.
Re: Obama's conundrum
If he couldn’t dance the DC Shuffle without imploding, he would never have made a big party ticket. Dichotomy is the root of politic.
Re: Obama's conundrum
Are you kidding, that’s the easiest decision to make. Who ever made the biggest contribution. If by chance they contributed the same, hit ’em up for more.
Re: Obama's conundrum
Hooray for Obama! He’s going to change the US politics for the better! We are going to see a brand new scene!
Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can!
Oh wait, the campaign is over… Okay, stop the propaganda and lie machine, business as usual.
Carry on, nothing to see here.
Well, duh. Now that other countries (like China) who have traditionally been asked to enforce patents are now seeing that they can leverage that request against those doing the asking, those who were traditionally for patents are now seeing them as a problem.
c'mon techdirt
The total references on this post consists of a self-link and links to four tweets. I feel stupider for having read it. Are there no better resources on the whole Internet to provide further reading on this topic? I like TechDirt but the content-to-speculation ratio of this post is terrible…
Re: c'mon techdirt
The total references on this post consists of a self-link and links to four tweets. I feel stupider for having read it. Are there no better resources on the whole Internet to provide further reading on this topic? I like TechDirt but the content-to-speculation ratio of this post is terrible…
As opposed to a traditional news article that links to absolutely nothing and is pure speculation? Jamie is very, very involved and in touch with those involved in the negotiations, and the tweets highlight what he’s learned. No one else has covered what he’s learned, so I wrote the article. Is it somehow less newsworthy because it’s in a tweet, rather than having me call him up and not tell you my sources?
Re: Re: c'mon techdirt
A tweet is interesting much like a text message. A few words, but no substance.
Yes, I can understand some in the US having concerns about the inclusion of patents, but based upon my having followed the trials and tribulations of these negotiations the concerns are likely associated for the most part with pharma issues concerning generics, “in-transit”, etc.
Re: Re: c'mon techdirt
I apologize for being a jerk in my original comment.
Actually, my issue is that Twitter is exceptionally bad at providing context; with the average blog it is usually reasonable to go back and read old posts, with Twitter you just have a jumble of unconnected sentence fragments.
Thus, ideally the journalistic “value add” of TechDirt would be to provide some context, such as who Jamie Love is and what the argument about patents in ACTA involves, for those of us who have not been following the issue obsessively. Two more links to background information embedded in the story is all it would take.
Re: Re: Re: c'mon techdirt
I’m in favor of context too, but I don’t know… if you care who Jamie Love is, google it. Not much harder than following a link. And if you want to know what TechDirt has written about ACTA, just enter that in the TD search box. I would rather people coming in in the middle have to do a little legwork to catch up, rather than recapping everything every time.
Re: Re: Re:2 c'mon techdirt
Agreed. Not to mention that to the left of each post there are tags (look under “Filed Under:”). For example:
http://www.techdirt.com/blog.php?tag=acta&edition=techdirt
Re: c'mon techdirt
Wholeheartedly agreed; this is an interesting post and idea, but without any other sources it seems ridiculously speculative.
League of Nations
The U.S. refused to become member of the League of Nations, while it was an idea of their president (Wilson), so there is a precedent.
Re: League of Nations
Yeah, the US is pretty good at shoving bad ideas into everyone else, and then bailing out when stuff looks bad.
Just an observation but ....
This one administration seems to be trying its best to destroy the United States. Are we sure thats not its official goal?
Re: Just an observation but ....
… did you bother observing the US’s Last administration?
the main difference is sneakyness to explosion ratios…
I think there are reasons
Take this for example:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/10/patent-troll-takes-over-the-web-can-it-be-stopped.ars
Now add that to an international level of play and you will reduce most companies to their legal departments.
I can’t say that there doesn’t need to be protection but I do think that what intellectual rights are being argued and what is currently already killing quite a lot of innovation needs to be addressed before the idea that global agreements are somehow going to make things better.
"apparently honestly" always signals FIX IS IN.
Publicly leaning against another police state measure is sheer lying tactic to quell some dissent, nothing more.
???acta???
dontcha jes love it when they us acronyms without defining them??
is this alameda corridor transportation authority?
alliance for california traditional art?
administrative council for terminal attachments?
american council of trustees and alumni?
or perhaps the anti-counterfeiting trade agreement
Re: ???acta???
You seem to have figured it out OK. This site has been reporting on ACTA for what, 2 years? I don’t know how anyone could “sign” any of those other ACTAs, so I guess it wasn’t too hard to figure out just from the headline.
We'll only talk to you after it's too late to fix
Sounds like someone needs to be fired and replaced.
too late to fix
“We’ll only talk to you after it’s too late to fix?”
No surprise there. That’s how Congress and the President have handled what they call patent reform. Just because they call it “reform” doesn’t mean it is. Please see http://truereform.piausa.org/ for a different/opposing view on patent reform.
Re: too late to fix
I don’t know which is funnier: your laughable spam or your laughable shilling.