Leaked State Department Cables Confirm That ACTA Was Designed To Pressure Developing Nations
from the no-surprise-there dept
The site La Quadrature Du Net has a rather comprehensive look at a series of leaked State Department cables that confirm what many people said from the beginning about ACTA: that it was designed by US special interests as an “end run” around existing international intellectual property groups, since those groups had actually started listening to the concerns of many other nations about how overly strict intellectual property laws were stifling innovation, economic growth and were, at times, a threat to human safety. This point had been made by ACTA critics for quite some time, but now the leaked State Department cables effectively confirm it:
One of the core objectives is to circumvent international organizations in charge of “intellectual property”, where maximalist countries such as the US and the EU have been facing growing opposition from developing countries. Not just WIPO and WTO, but also the OECD: Initially, the Japanese proposed to ask the OECD for some help in drafting the agreement, but US officials suggest a different process, stressing that that they have sufficient in-house expertise, and insist on avoiding any collaboration with international organizations
The full cable on this matter makes it clear that the US had a big plan and that plan involved bringing together only “like-minded” countries, and Japan was gleeful about this, but had originally expected the OECD would help.
From there, the plans become even clearer. The idea is to first do all of this with those “like-minded” (i.e., protectionist) countries, and then use the agreement to try to pressure those developing nations and other nations concerned about the expansive problems of intellectual property law into “joining.” In other words, stack the deck first with those who benefit most, and then use international pressure to force the agreement on those who aren’t comfortable with the end result of such laws.
The cables show that ACTA — although negotiated between “like-minded countries” — is ultimately meant to be imposed on developing countries. Early on, the US and Japan deem necessary to recruit developing countries so as to ensure the “legitimacy” of the agreement. Jordan and Morocco are the first to be mentioned, given their acceptance of tough copyright, trademark and patents provisions in bilateral free trade agreements recently concluded with the US.
However, one key concern for the negotiators is that ACTA might appear for what it is — that is to say an agreement drafted by rich countries to be imposed on the developing world. Mexican officials are especially keen on helping out on this front. During a meeting with US counterparts, Mexicans stress “their willingness to join the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) negotiations and push-back against Brazilian efforts to undermine IPR in international health organizations,” according to the US account of the meeting. Brazil’s push for progressive policies on the international arena is denounced by Mexican officials, who offer to play the “good cops” by acting alongside the US to push for maximal patent and copyright standards at the global level.
Mexico selling out to US interests over its own people — how nice. In fact, in one of the cables, Japan explicitly states that the purpose of ACTA is to impose rules on China, Russia and Brazil.
Oh yeah, remember all those claims from US officials about how ACTA was just an agreement to align “enforcement” techniques and really had nothing (nothing!) to do with changing laws? Yeah, turns out they were lying. In discussing the early plans for ACTA, US officials indicated to Japanese officials that the US was perfectly happy to change its laws to greater protectionism around copyright and patents:
He added that Congress has welcomed the opportunity to engage on these issues, changing laws where necessary. Moore stressed that the United States is keen to move forward quickly, but with an effective, high-standard agreement. As we work together to reach out to other like-minded countries, he said, it will be essential for Japan to consider seriously improvements to its enforcement regime.
Again, almost nothing in these cables is new or a surprise. But it does confirm what many ACTA critics had said early on, and prove that US official statements on ACTA were clearly inaccurate at best, and deliberately misleading at worst.
Comments on “Leaked State Department Cables Confirm That ACTA Was Designed To Pressure Developing Nations”
Sorry, Mike, but you were expecting the best without preparing for the worst on this one.
Now people can just start to ignore the government for real.
They have no intention on doing the right thing ever.
Like minded my ass. More like easily controlled.
They should just go ahead and declare martial law. It wouldn’t even change anything at this point; the only difference would be that they’d stop pretending nobody was noticing what they were doing.
Besides, you never know. The next president might not toe the line like Dubya and Obama. A lot of things can happen in four years…
Would complaining help ??
Would filling a protest with WIPO, WTO, and OECD help kill ACTA? They are trying to do an end run around existing treaties.
What is really funny here is the attempt to paint strong patent or copyright laws as evil, which is very much unproven (but admittedly the popular stand around here). Countries that have strong IP laws and strong inventment in research and development are often undermined by countries who refuse to join the party. Most of these countries are down the poverty scale, and are trying to claw their way up, mostly by taking from others and mass producing cheaply (China, India are current prime examples, Japan in the past).
What is key is the shift in China. They are already seeing that they have gone through their adolescence and have moved on to being young adults, not only cloning the work of others cheaply, but now also putting money into research and development. China is very much a world leader in alternate fuels and energy systems, such as solar and roof top water heaters, more and more common in China these days. They are no longer just producing other people’s products, they are developing their own. They now realize the value of protecting that development work.
The idea that small nations are being “pressured” is sort of obvious, as those are the nations most likely to abuse IP and hurt economies worldwide. The whole China issue over the last 10 – 15 years is very much a key part of the trouble in the US, as the trade gap has been huge. Billions of dollars out outflow which drains the US economy like a leaky swimming pool.
Mike, would you care to address the issue of trade imbalance? I am sure you studied it in school.
Re: Re:
“(…Japan in the past)” “What is the key shift in China”
China is indeed mimicking Japan’s entry into the world market. The “down the poverty scale” countries have no way to enter the world market except to sift through the detritus of the 1st world countries and sell the results to their poor neighbors.
How is a country supposed to gain traction against a corporation that refuses to offer its products at adjusted prices and also refuses to negotiate with countries who endeavor to create their own products?
this goes much further than your simple-minded ‘copy-and-produce’ scenario. There are sciences and technologies that save thousands of lives everyday in modernized countries but are kept out of the hands of third-world doctors because their government refuses to pay a “copyright tax.” That is why many things are copied and ACTA (particularly in the Brazil/Mexico scenario,) would make it a crime to save lives with “copied” medicine.
ACTA defenders
I’m interested in the defenders’ of ACTA take on this evidence of disrespect for the rule of law. Not sure they will show up in this thread though, as this is pretty damning.
How do we deal with these companies/ organizations here in the US? Just let them overrun our government with self-serving policies? Awareness may be the first step, but what are the second and third steps?
Re:
“What is really funny here is the attempt to paint strong patent or copyright laws as evil, which is very much unproven”
There’s plenty of research saying that stronger IP laws (yes, I’m bundling it together for convenience) does nothing but hinder actual innovation. You should read American history more closely. We were a part of that phenomenon around the time of Mark Twain.
“They now realize the value of protecting that development work.”
Protecting an idea rarely gives the results you desire.
“The idea that small nations are being “pressured” is sort of obvious, as those are the nations most likely to abuse IP and hurt economies worldwide.”
[citation needed]
Further, economies aren’t “hurt”. The money goes elsewhere. If I spend money on milk, that’s one area of the economy. But if I change my mind and spend it on chicken, it goes to another area.
The problem you’re having is that you’re not seeing the money go to monopolistic entities (ie lawyers) who sue for the litigation fees.
Re:
The trade imbalance is down to China being the main producer of components for American companies. The fact that Chinese companies were genuinely innovating in increments before they joined in on the patent train should speak volumes.
China would be leery of following the US method of innovation.
Re:
You’ve just given a very good argument against patents right here.
China, as you said, has the habit of “borrowing” ideas that are protected, while ignoring those protections itself. Now, after securing their leadership in a variety of fields, they want to start enforcing those protections on others (while keeping up with the violations).
If the patent systems did not exist, the pool of inventions would be open to everyone, without extra forbidding costs, eliminating the risk of the strong (and greedy) nations blocking out the smaller and less able nations from competing. And, in this case, China has become a far stronger nation that the US. Therefore, by supporting strong IP laws, you are actually shooting yourself in the foot (you have nothing to gain, but everything to lose).
the USA lying to others to protect the interests of it’s own businesses? never!! (sarcasm intended). there has never been any other objective than to force all nations to do exactly what the USA (and in particular the entertainment industries) want. there has never been any thought for free speech, net neutrality and personal privacy or the practices within other countries, whether right or (in some eyes) wrong. the bottom line has always been and still is control of the world’s internet and ‘the bottom line!’ regardless of the consequences to other countries and their citizens, whether economic or otherwise!
Re:
What’s funny is how you constantly lied about this and have now been proved to be the lying sack of shit that you are.
Almost as funny as it is warped that you don’t even blink in light of being shown to be a complete shillboy, but just continue on lying and lying as if nobody will notice.
That’s hilarious.
Re:
All the time you spent crafting this would have been better spent masturbating.
Re:
“The whole China issue over the last 10 – 15 years is very much a key part of the trouble in the US, as the trade gap has been huge. Billions of dollars out outflow which drains the US economy like a leaky swimming pool.”
IP is not the sole nor even in the top 10 reasons why we have a trade imbalance with China or any other country. American companies openly decided that they would being producing their goods in other countries and then ship them back to the US because cost and political issues. Cost will always be a major factor and by importing their products to the US, companies can blame the government for the higher prices (over the cost of production) that consumers pay. The political issues, including union labor issues, are numerous but they are a cost of doing business. But as a company, if I can find a way to minimize the political issues, I will.
The biggest problem I see, both with most of the AC posts by “THE” AC, as well as posters that tend to reply to him, are that things have to be all or nothing. We have to begin to work to find the middle ground in our issues. People are going to have to start to be willing to give as much as take or we will keep wasting time and resources on topics such as IP.
Re:
The results would still be the same. The US is a “high wage” country, and China is a “low wage” country. By nature, without protection, low wage countries take advantage of lax IP laws to be able to produce goods and “innovate by box design” to dominate markets. They make it cheap because the people are working cheap, and they make it cheap because they don’t have to do development. In fact, the very IP they need is handed to them to product the goods, which makes it even easier for them to steal it.
China isn’t a “far stronger nation”, rather they are a nation that was so far behind everyone else that their progress is entirely amazing. But just like Japan before them, they are working a serious bubble economy as people step up from dirt farmers to a new middle class. As that happens, just like Japan, the authorities are realizes that providing only the sweat labor for the rest of the world doesn’t cut it, that true innovation comes when you can actually afford to do research and then use that research to move forward.
When all you have to offer is sweat, IP laws look bad. When you start to actually produce IP, IP laws look good. Even China has figured that out. I wonder when Techdirt will.
ACTA defenders
“Awareness may be the first step, but what are the second and third steps?”
For the record labels, and TV studios, we wait. They have a limited time span due to competition from inside and outside their fields.
For Pharma a couple things could destroy them.
1) compete using a world wide consortium holding patents and selling everything as generic reducing their profit margins and allowing for the laws to be changed.
2) WikiLeak every document they have, from legal, to internal memos, to the actual studies on the effectiveness of the drugs they sell. It would bankrupt them with class action lawsuits and bring about change.
3) Immortality, as the majority of drugs are for conditions that occur when we age. Reversing the aging process would remove these conditions. This would kill their profits and allow for generics to take over in 15-20 years.
4) Buy them up, take them private, and change the way they do business.
Re:
What most of us realize that you do not is that a company or individual can continue to innovate, rather than litigate. When relying on IP enforcement rather than innovation, a company will knee-cap itself.
There are many ways a company can differentiate itself and compete: good customer service, continual feature additions and improvements, branding as “made in the US,” etc.
Trying to teach people to rely on ever-increasing IP laws only retards progress, and attempts to prevent the inevitable. The only people that gain in that scenario are lawyers, and even for them the benefits are short-term.
Re:
Here is the bare truth for ya about balance-of-trade.
If you don’t produce something people want to buy you don’t get money, if you can’t produce wealth, producing something you don’t get money, is not China’s problem or anyone else’s, also an imbalance is a problem mostly when the jobs go elsewhere just like American industries are doing right now and securing the rights of productions through patents, so patents is the thing holding back America, big business don’t care in which country they operate and they found ways to exclude all other without the means to produce and create their own things citizens are left with few choices.
Imbalances also auto regulate themselves in one way or another no amount of magical moves will change the end of it, which is balance, those who have more money expend more bringing the others who have less into the fray, they could both grow but only if cooperation exists, where everybody can produce things and create wealth, that depends on shared knowledge and that is exactly what IP laws are supposed to stop.
Also the U.S. was against economic reform that would put responsibility on trade on both ends the creditor and the debtor.
The last surplus America saw was in 1975, 35 years ago.
Don't believe everything you read
As I looked at the first linked article I noticed it could hardly be called objective. (e.g. calling ACTA “dangerous” is clearly an opinion).
And that made me wonder. How do we know everything on Wikileaks is a real document?
Answer? We don’t.
How do we know they weren’t manipulated in order to further an agenda? It’s not like anyone can just come out and say “No, no no that’s not really what we said. I’ll prove it by showing you what that ‘cable’ really said.”
It seems to me that people’s opinion of ACTA and other IP law are influencing what they believe about it (and not just regarding wikileaks docs but also the very premise that IP laws are bad in the first place).
The arguments are interesting and sometimes make valid points but I’m unconvinced that companies shouldn’t be allowed so retain IP that they’ve developed.
IMO, too much of this attitude stems from the heavy-handedness of the RIAA and the vast pirating of music and movies. For some this seems to have spread to an attitude of ‘screw any law protecting IP’.
Don't believe everything you read
Poor countries deserve to be poor and rich countries deserve to be rich.
Don't believe everything you read
Snappy comeback but should a “poor” country be allowed to sell pirated movies or counterfeit knockoffs of merchandise developed in a “rich” country?
Should they only be allowed to sell it in their own “poor” country? What if they try to export it back to the “rich” country and undercut the original developer who still holds patents/copyrights/trademarks?
Would complaining help ??
given the USA’s habit of conveniently ignoring any part of such things it doesn’t like…
maybe?
Don't believe everything you read
We’re not arguing that they can’t retain the IP. For the msot part, we argue that IP is protected for far too long, combined with an unwillingness to adapt to the customer’s needs.
And the US Government can refute these anytime they want. They just chose, instead, to bury their heads in the sand. ACTA is a terribad piece of agreement.
Don't believe everything you read
well, if they Can, it’s a good sign that the original creators are failing at selling their product at a price/quality/convenience that customers are willing to pay for it, isn’t it? the first trick would be doing away with the bloody ‘windowed’ mentality and realising that people outside the USA want to buy the thing in the first place, so give them a legitimate method to do so (without insane price gouging). that right there would cut a surprisingly large amount of ‘piracy’.
and trademark is an entirely different thing Anyway, being not ‘intellectual property’ but ‘consumer protection’ when applied properly.
Don't believe everything you read
If “insane price gouging” is going on then people can simply not buy it. You’re right that market forces will lead to piracy if a company sets an unfair or unrealistic price but I don’t see that as a justification for piracy.
The first movie my parents ever bought (for their first Betamax) cost $80 and the movie was nearly 10 years old at the time. (Today it’s $14 on Blu Ray – seems high for a 40 year old movie but is it “insane price gouging”?).
Re: Don't believe everything you read
Hmm well for a 40 year old movie that has presumably long since recouped it’s production costs? Cost of a master? Oh I don’t know google suggests around $3,000 so let’s say $20,000. Cost per unit? Again google suggests around $2 – seems high to me but let’s say $4 including all distibution costs etc. Assume 10,000 units sold worldwide – hardly a stretch – makes maybe a generous $6 costs. You don’t think 130% profit qualifies as price gouging?
OK, then how about DVD’s initially costing up to 50% more for the equivalent title in the UK compared to the US? Does it cost that much to ship? Oh, no wait they press them in, um Germany I think. Still not price gouging?
Don't believe everything you read
I’ve seen very few people actually arguing the length of IP retention and even fewer people making suggestions for alternate retention times.
Instead I see a lot of people just talking about how evil it is and coming up with things like Mike’s original post which links to an opinion piece which more or less says “See, I told you the ‘rich countries’ were just trying to keep the ‘poor countries’ down.”
Re: Don't believe everything you read
Well then I don’t think you’re looking too closely. I’ve noticed quite a few people (including myself) mention that they don’t think copyright per-se is necessarily evil and should abolished entirely.
You might have a point about the alternative lengths though. I can certainly remember 1 thread that discussed at length the merits of a 5 year term, but most threads that look like they might go that way usually get lost in the refutation of the “You bunch of freetards just want somethign for nothing it’s the law so shut the f*ck up and get over yourselves you bunch of freeloading… (continue as long as desired)” rants.
Re:
I understand (even through your horrible sentence) the idea that you can keep innovating to try to stay ahead. But when that innovation is expensive and without return, it isn’t any better than failed litigation. Not all products or technology lend themselves to rapid innovation that would really matter (justify higher price for the original goods), and many investors would consider it “throwing good money after bad”.
rying to teach people to rely on ever-increasing IP laws only retards progress
Yup, that is why we still use Motorola Brick cell phones. Because of patents in the cell phone and smart phone area, there is absolutely no innovation at all, no new products, and everyone is watching the countdown on the patents to be able to move forward.
Now that we have debunked that piece of logic… 🙂
Re:
Indeed, the trade imbalance issue with China and India is the real key, here, in the long run.
The current trade imbalance consists of the US exporting IP at a significantly lower rate than it’s importing non-IP from places like China and India. What do you suppose will happen in the coming decades when China and India become exporters of IP rather than importers, with 8x the population of the US? Now the US’ is going to be importing huge amounts of IP from them, grossly increasing the trade imbalance further, and pushing the US economy to the edge of bankruptcy.
I fear we (the US) will be the biggest losers in ACTA in the end, and China and India the biggest winners.
Re:
Considering how much litigation is going on among Nokia, Motorola, Apple, Palm (HP) and others right now, I don’t think you’ve proven anything at all. If there were small startup company involved in any of the lawsuits, they would have been seriously taxed.
You are obviously a bloodsucking lawyer that would prefer this bullshit continue for selfish reasons. You are a liar, and a douche. In fact, I’m nominating you for Biggest Douche in the Universe.
Re:
Nice bit of sarcasm there.
You do know that “retard” doesn’t mean stop, right?
And do you also know that progress doesn’t only mean make something better. It can also mean make the same thing cheaper. RIM paid over $600 million to NTP when they could have spent that money on research or reduced the cost of their phones. You’ll note that NTP spent nowhere near $600 million on research nor will they now that they have that money. So there you go. Once again, patents “retard progress”.
Don't believe everything you read
If their laws allow for it, then by all means yes.
If the laws of the country they are trying to sell it in allow it, then yes.
My guess is they’d be infringing. At least in the US. Other “rich” countries might feel differently.
Don't believe everything you read
If the actors involved with ACTA want to look good, all they ever had to do was be more open. They’ve never done that, so it’s all their own fault.
This is something that’s been talked about here and elsewhere often. When you make ridiculous laws, people start to have contempt for the law. We see the ridiculousness of copyright/patent durations, we see the ridiculousness of penalties for infringing, we see through DMCA claims that are really about censorship, so we just start to say screw it to all of it. It’s what happens. The farther the pendulum is pushed one way, the farther it swings back the other.
Don't believe everything you read
Now there’s a thought to strike terror into the hearts of big content people.
For anyone who doesn’t know, the “bad man” tradition is a part of black culture that glorifies lawlessness and brutality toward police. This arose in the south of the US, where, after the abolition of slavery and later of segregation, racists sought other means to suppress blacks. One common form of this was constant harassment by white police. As a result, blacks came to view the law as fundamentally unjust and police as the embodiment of that injustice, and fighting both as a righteous cause. Well, in the half century since the civil rights movement, the situation with racism has significantly improved, but the distrust of the law still hasn’t completely faded.
That’s right, we could be looking at decades of the current hate for IP laws, even after reforms begin (whenever the heck that will be). Think happy thoughts; bunnies and kittens.
Would complaining help ??
No … Those organizations are manned by people that sing to the tune of industry-multinationals (they have open doors to their lobbyists) and the spread certain govts. propaganda. And I’m speaking especially about the Heads of these organizations. If you want to complain – just have a twitter and facebook revolution! Good Luck!
End Game
Clearly the point of such an agreement is not to share standards. When enough big boys control the playground, they will require anyone wanting to play to follow their rules.
“You want to export to us? Then let us control what you develop and produce. If not, stay home.”
It worked in stripping privacy. It is working at tax equalization between nations. The mid game is over, tyranny is winning.
Don't believe everything you read
Since this reply is so late I doubt anyone will read it, but here goes anyway. (sorry, you’ll just have to put up with crappy quoting….been up too long)
“
should a “poor” country be allowed to sell pirated movies or counterfeit knockoffs of merchandise developed in a “rich” country?
If their laws allow for it, then by all means yes.
Of course, which is exactly why the US and other countries are putting pressure on them to change their laws.
Same answer to your next query.
“
What if they try to export it back to the “rich” country and undercut the original developer who still holds patents/copyrights/trademarks?
My guess is they’d be infringing. At least in the US. Other “rich” countries might feel differently.
“
That’s your guess? Really?
How did this hypothetical “poor country” get ahold of this pirated copy of something in the first place?
Re: Don't believe everything you read
Nice spin. Until the copy arrives in a country that has laws against its existence, it’s not a “pirated copy”.
It’s easy for them to acquire. The USPTO is not only visible to citizens of the US upon proof of citizenship and the signing of an NDA. So that takes care of how they might acquire a patent or a trademark. As for copyrighted works, they might buy it off of Amazon or any other website or show up in the US and buy it from a store and take it back to their country. So no piracy had to occur for them to acquire it.
Don't believe everything you read
I’m surprised I missed this earlier but you are the worst type of person to make this racist.
I’d use stronger language but to be honest I have not read any TOS if there are any for this site.
But I will say you are racist.
Don't believe everything you read
Thanks for the pathos. If you happen to run across any logos, let me know.
Wow
I never thought about it liek that.
http://www.internet-privacy.tk