$17,000+ Bounty Offered For Leaks Of TPP Negotiating Texts
from the go-ahead-and-claim-the-money-ustr dept
We’ve talked about the ridiculous secrecy around the negotiating texts for the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement. It makes no sense to have these documents secret and out of the view of the public, but it’s what’s happening. Because of that, we’re forced to deal with very occasional leaks to get a partial view of what’s being negotiated in our name without any oversight. ACTA was a somewhat similar situation, but there were more regular leaks there — and we’ve heard that the USTR, in particular, has taken great pains to make it much more difficult to leak TPP text without revealing who leaked it.
However, it appears that some are (in some ways, quite literally) upping the ante in trying to pressure people into leaking the text. The folks over at ZeroPaid point us to some group that claims to have raised over $17,000 as a bounty for leaked TPP negotiating texts. They’re asking for more pledges, though I have no idea whether or not the effort is legit. ZeroPaid points out that the site appears to be a project of Just Foreign Policy, which seems to at least be a legitimate organization, according to Guidestar. For what it’s worth, the site also claims that you won’t actually have to pay until the text is leaked, at which point they will ask you to fulfill your pledge.
The group’s concerns seem reasonable as well:
The TPP negotiations have taken place under an unprecedented shroud of secrecy, denying all but a very few any input into the terms of the agreement. The chapters that have been leaked are quite disturbing, revealing plans that would threaten public health, the environment, internet freedom, and the general well-being of perhaps billions of people. Here’s a little taste of what the agreement would include: foreign investor protections that would help corporations offshore jobs, powers that allow multinational corporations to challenge domestic regulations before international tribunals, a strengthening of patent and intellectual property rules which would, among other things, raise the price of life-saving medicines in third world countries, and the ability for Wall Street to roll back safeguards meant to restore financial stability worldwide.
Will this be incentive enough for someone to leak the text? I’m not so sure. I’d think that someone’s basic conscience about having access to such a document should be a better reason, but you never know…
Filed Under: bounty, secrecy, tpp, transparency
Comments on “$17,000+ Bounty Offered For Leaks Of TPP Negotiating Texts”
I’d think that someone’s basic conscience about having access to such a document should be a better reason, but you never know…
I’m actually interested to know, if it is leaked, who cracked first. A representative in government, who we shouldn’t have to pay to release public information (isn’t it illegal for them to accept that money, anyway?) or one of the industry shills in it for the cash?
It’s disappointing either way. This initiative shouldn’t have to happen.
Re: Re:
It should be fairly obvious that anyone with access to TPP that hasn’t leaked it has no conscience. So offering them money to leak it should be right in line with their beliefs.
Re: Re: Re:
This needs a Sad But True button.
TPP is the one piece of evidence to showcase the downfall of democratically elected governments. With this, we now have a fucking bounty, just to see the texts of bills that more than likely will be signed by people who are not in fact representing their constituent’s views, and yet somehow expect the people to willingly abide by.
Yes, it has to come to this. People are offering to pay big money just to see bills.
Re: Re:
The people who put up the bounty better get the hell out of the United States, before the FBI comes knocking at their door. They have already committed a laundry list of federal cimes including:
RICO
Conspiracy to commit RICO
Conspiracy to violate the CFAA
If I were in their shoes, I would be getting the hell OUT of America right now to a country where there is no extradition.
Re: Re: Re:
I can see how this pans out:
“I AM ABOVE THE LAW!”
(what’s left of hair falls on face)
(readjusts with hair gel)
(carries on as feds leave)
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“YOU BETRAYED THE LAW!”
“LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWUGHGGHHGHGH”
Re: Re: Re:
Please, explain your reasoning for both of these. Not everyone is going to understand what you’re thinking, here.
Re: Re: Re:
“The people who put up the bounty better get the hell out of the United States, before the FBI comes knocking at their door” … doing what, demanding money or threatening to take them to jail? The FBI and other agencies (especially the FDA) are bought, if the people offering the bounty can simply pay more I think the FBI will happily get lost.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Seriously, if we are going to offer a bounty, why don’t we simply buy all the politicians? It’s a win-win situation, the politicians act in the public interest in return for money. They get their money, we get good laws. I doubt our bought politicians will pass a law against that, they couldn’t be happier. If they want money for laws then why not just give it to them? The public just has to outspend the RIAA.
Re: Re:
Motherfucking Eagles!
Ahem. I’d say it’s about time we started lobbying via crowdsource.
I’m just relieved that this article wasn’t about Ron Kirk offering a bounty for finding out who leaked parts of the TPP.
Re: Re:
That’s how I read the title. I’m glad to know it’s not the case, but the whole situation is pretty terrible anyway.
Re: Re: Re:
Incidentally, in before “Mike wrote the title that way to stir up his rabid TD pirate dogs hurr durr.”
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Love it:
Rabid TD Pirate Dogs
Can I use it?
Almost as good as Lord high Pirate Apologists.
And yes, it appeared to me that way too.
Re: Re:
I also read it that way. Gave me chills.
Re: Re: Re:
I got chills when I realized it WASN’T that way.
As in, THATS MOTHERFUCKING EAGLES, THEY WANT TO LEAK IT TO THE PUBLIC!
Re: Re:
Why don’t we just offer Ron kirk some money to step down. The only reason he’s doing what he’s doing is for his personal benefit, he doesn’t give a darn about the public interest. If we can gather enough money to outspend the RIAA/MPAA and offer him more than what they are offering I’m sure he would have no problem stepping down. It’s not like he has moral standards.
Re: Re: Re:
(and, BTW, my suggestions are all tongue and cheek. I don’t really believe we should collectively buy our politicians and I am not suggesting we should. We absolutely shouldn’t, we already pay taxes and we should expect, demand and force, them to act in the public interest without separately buying them again.
I am merely suggesting that our politicians are so bought that buying them to act in the public interest is probably a more effective method of getting them to act in the public interest than actually trying to convince them that it is the morally right thing to do. These people don’t give a darn about morals, the only morals they care about is their own personal benefit and if you show them what’s in it for them they’ll act in the public interest).
Why do they need a leak? According to the post yesterday, the EFF already knows everything there is to know about the deal.
Just send them the 17k and call it even.
Oh wait, are you suggesting that the story that ran yesterday was full of shit? NAhhhhh!
Re: Re:
The secrecy surrounding ACTA worked out really well.
Re: Re:
So let me get this straight: you’re suggesting that the EFF, which released an infographic that encourages citizens to protest the secrecy surrounding the TPP negotiations and push for more transparency, actually knows the content of the TPP agreement?
Why, then, would the EFF waste their time with the infographic – why wouldn’t they just share the details? Surely the facts would speak better to the situation, even if, as I’m sure you will claim, the EFF’s goal is to spread FUD?
Please explain how this makes sense.
Re: Re: Re:
The EFF info graphic draws all sorts of conclusions and makes definite statements about the effects of the TPP, which would be impossible without knowing the content.
Thus, either they know it, and they should get the 17k, or they don’t know it and they are full of shit on the issue.
Which one do you think it is?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think they’re drawing from strong indicators in the past to form an educated guess that’s likely not to be too far off the mark. I think the way TPP and other secretly negotiated legislation is being handled is downright disgraceful by our elected officials. I think you’re a fucking shithead.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Lol, so fighting something means that you have to know every detail about it? There has already been leaks and that is what they are basing their fury on. To oversimplify the world like you do is the worst lack of tact on this issue…
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The infographic is based on earlier leaks.
The EFF info graphic draws all sorts of conclusions and makes definite statements about the effects of the TPP, which would be impossible without knowing the content.
Then why don’t the UTSR make it transparent and available to the public already to dispel all these full of shit statements?
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
“Then why don’t the UTSR make it transparent and available to the public already to dispel all these full of shit statements?”
I think they are doing it this way to keep the noisy minority (like the people around here) from hijacking the discussions and turning it into a shitfest. Basically, they want to avoid getting into long, drawn out, emotional discussions about which i should be dotted first, and actually get on with getting things done.
Put out in public for discussion at every turn, it would be endless. It would reach a point where “why bother” would come to mind. Sometimes thing just have to be done without consulting the masses on every little item.
Sorry you were left out, but that is why you elect your politicians to do the work for you, so you won’t have to micromanage them.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
When your employee starts fucking up, they need to be micromanaged. Then fired.
Politicians are fucking up. They need to be fired.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
The problem is that several other interests are getting consulted. Why should they have a say in this when others do not? The interests they choose to consult before these sessions are pretty clearly able to sway the results from the negotiations in their own favour while not caring about basic rights. It has been pretty clear from the previous leaks of TPP that is where ACTA went problematic and it is where TPP is also heading…
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
So you’re admitting that they are intentionally leaving the public interest out of these negotiations because they want to ram-rod bad legislation that will harm the general public through? Good to know.
Yeah, if the system still worked, I suppose, but none of those buys are in on these things.
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
“So you’re admitting that they are intentionally leaving the public interest out of these negotiations because they want to ram-rod bad legislation that will harm the general public through? Good to know.”
No, they are intentionally not allowing this to turn into an emotional cry baby process. If you can imagine, there are groups in each country who might not like to see this happen, or might want it the be MORE restrictive. If you give each of those groups (and each person for that matter) a “seat at the table” it turns into something like the comments here on Techdirt.
It’s very easy for 1%’ers like Mike Masnick to hijack a process, and turn it into a shambles. Multiply that by the number of countries, and you can see where this can go.
In every treaty negotiation, there is some good and some bad for each country at the table. The question isn’t individual gain or loss, but a question of a group advancement, or finding a way that the group as a whole can work together.
You don’t need 300 million back seat drivers swatting the negotiators on the head every time they suggest something.
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
Yeah, wouldn’t want it to turn into another SOPA/PIPA/ACTA.
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
It’s very easy for 1%’ers like Mike Masnick to hijack a process, and turn it into a shambles.
Mike Masnick, 1% of what exactly?
No, they are intentionally not allowing this to turn into an emotional cry baby process
Right, so why do the special interest groups’ reps get access then?
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
No, that would be democracy.
Every other bill in existence is something I can go and readily read up on at a moments notice. Even ACTA allowed me to read it before my representatives signed it. Why can’t I do that here? Is it because they’re trying to “git hurr dun” or it’s because they have something to hide?
Careful when answering because your answer might reveal to everyone the true scope of how misled and stupid you are.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
When even the NZ STG gets it better then the representatives of your nation, when even al-Qa’ida get the message of transparency defeats deceptions, you have a major problem.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
“noisy minority”
[citation needed]
Remember, the petitions opposing SOPA received many (millions of) signatures very quickly and the opposition resulted in many phone calls. The RIAA/MPAA tried to set up an astrotufring group to try and get signatures supporting the petition and it completely failed. Many people who did sign the petition were mislead into doing so and the RIAA/MPAA were even initially misleading about the number of people who signed the petition, suggesting a much higher amount (and even the Techdirt IP extremist shills didn’t suggest the MPAA’s response until after the MPAA released it, so their response was not at all obvious). They even tried to pay people to get signatures supporting the bill and that failed.
Where are all the protesters in support of these laws? There were many protesters opposing laws like ACTA all over the streets all throughout the world.
How much noise can such a small minority make? Are you seriously suggesting that the majority are the ones who want 95+ year copy protection lengths? Are you seriously suggesting that the majority want these negotiations to be made secret? You are truly deluded … or bought. No, the reason that these negotiations are occurring in secrecy is because our bought politicians know very well that the public doesn’t want these laws. It is a very very small minority of interests that are being invited to these negotiations and those opposing it far outnumber them.
“Basically, they want to avoid getting into long, drawn out, emotional discussions about which i should be dotted first, and actually get on with getting things done.”
and what if the public doesn’t want anything done? Why must something be done? and why should something be done just because a few industry interests want them done despite the fact that the public doesn’t. Why must something be done at the discretion of a few industry interests?
Something does need to be done. Copy protection lengths need to be substantially reduced or IP laws need to be abolished. You want something done, lets do something. Abolish IP. That’s something.
” Sometimes thing just have to be done without consulting the masses on every little item.”
If the objective is to serve someone other than the masses, then I absolutely agree. Are you suggesting that industry interests are somehow more capable of determining what’s in my best interest than me? That’s ridiculous.
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
(and many people who did sign the petition who were mislead later demanded their signatures be removed *)
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
(that is, the petition in support of SOPA)
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Sorry you were left out, but that is why you elect your
politicians to do the work for you, so you won’t have to micromanage them.
Sorry people will respect your laws even less since you willingly kept them in the dark.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
” but that is why you elect your politicians to do the work for you”
I did not elect politicians to pass laws for me without my consult or input. That’s not how democracy is supposed to work.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
…Or they have access to the little bit of information that was leaked. You know, like everyone else does at this point.
But that’s okay, you can continue to be ignorant on the internet, it’s not like anyone needs to know more than the small document or two in a likely thousand-page-long bill.
Who knows?
Maybe someone, somewhere will make the mistake of having an underpaid kid make copies of parts of the agreement for them? Some of the politicians involved seem stupid enough to do something like that.
I am Cornholio! I need TPP for my bunghole. =P
Funny how even 20 years later, Bevis still manages to find a way to pop back into your mind.
I hope for the sake of any leaker that the information is not considered classified. That would find both the leaker and those paying a bounty for classified information in hot water. For that matter, if this is classified material, I’d guess that it is illegal to seek to purchase it already.
Re: Re:
Conspiracy to defraud! Extradition to Great Britain?
Re: Re:
If the leaker is in Russia, the USA would never get them, since Russian law prohibits the extradition of its citizens.
Re: Re: Re:
Assuming he makes it back to Russia before his name is revealed
Re: Re: Re: Re:
This could probably encourage a foreign hacker somewhere to break into the USTR’s computer network and get the document. I would not be surprised if a Russian hacker did this, being that we would never be able to extradite them, and that the Russian government is not likely to be to cooperative with the American government. The bounty could simply be converted into Rubles and wired to his or her bank account in Russia.
Re: Re:
Sad state of affairs when bills and agreements that are passed into law in this country are considered classified information. Laws that the public can’t actually read seems a little on the nose, even for an Orwellian society.
Re: Re: Re:
When V for Vendetta becomes a guidebook, rather than the warning and satire of authoritarianism it is, you have major problems.
there shouldn’t be any need for this at all. the negotiations should be out in the open and all stakeholders should be able to join in and be active in those negotiations.
What happens when a copy leaks?
A copy of the TPP agreement is leaked.
Someone makes a claim on the 17K bounty.
Group pays bounty to claimant.
Government gets a court order for the name of the claimant.
Claimant is caught in the same situation as all the other whistleblowers.
Why would anyone want to try claiming the bounty?
Re: What happens when a copy leaks?
The claimant will probably be someone not living in the USA and not a US citizen. If, say, somebody in Russia does this, there is nothing the USA can do to the claimant itself, since Russian law prohibits the extradition of its citizens.
It would be more likely that the people who paid the reward would go to jail for 45 years, 20 years for RICO, 15 for CFAA, and 5 years each on two conspiracy counts.
i have the text, here it is:
now.. how do i collect the bounty?
i have a tired cat to feed :p
“Will this be incentive enough for someone to leak the text? I’m not so sure. I’d think that someone’s basic conscience about having access to such a document should be a better reason, but you never know…”
Well, you know, if I was in some of these meetings and had the text but my conscience wasn’t quite enough for me to choose to leak it, $17,000 could definitely tip the scale in favor of leaking it.
Who pays more?
Is the $17k enough to out-bid those who wish to keep TPP secret? How much are the negotiators being paid by those who are pushing this?
Re: Who pays more?
Most likely much more, but the scumbags who are pushing for this wouldn’t mind getting paid a little under the table if they thought they could get away with it.
Re: Re: Who pays more?
Then they leak it using AES-1024 encryption. Problem solved.
need to know
As one of the candidates for president of the US recently said, these things are best discussed, “in quiet rooms”.
Apparently things like the future are on a need-to-know basis, and we just don’t need to know. The future isn’t for us, it’s for those that deserve it. You know, the “job creators”.
Our economic elite are a bunch of sociopaths who mean us no good. I think it’s long past the time for us to make them fear us instead of the other way around. I guess this is something that needs to happen a few times a century, and this is certainly one of those times.
Re: need to know
And I happen to agree with you.Things are going to get very bad for these assholes who have screwed over not only us Americans but also the greater World.Their greedy behavior and unfair ripoff version of Capitalism opened the floodgates back in the 70’s.Is there anything Made In America any longer because I never see it in a Store shopping as I look at Labels.I am in my late 50’s and remember how all the TV’s,Radios,Clothing, ETC were all made in our Nation.
And how about the growing Profit the Upper Class gets while the poor get poorer and the middle class disappear.
The day is going to come !
"Back seat drivers"?
Back seat drivers? Those pesky “back seat drivers” are called “citizens” and they happen to be paying the salaries of those public servants involved in the governmental side of these negotiations?
Are you kidding? Who the fuck are you that you believe laws of this magnitude should be done in Mitt Romney’s “quiet rooms” well out of the public view? You’ve got to be kidding. Maybe I’m missing the joke, but that is very disturbing.
Re: "Back seat drivers"?
You do realize that stakeholders (the public included) can register and speak with the delegates from around the world at these meetings, right? The usual piracy apologists will be there representing you. And as we live in a representative democracy you do have a say in things… every four years. You don’t like Obama IP policy, vote for Romney. But don’t cry when you discover that Romney and the Republicans love these trade agreements are hardcore law and order. Plus, the Chamber is the biggest proponent of tightening up IP law and coincidentally has more than a little influence in republican circles.
Re: Re: "Back seat drivers"?
You do realize that stakeholders (the public included) can register and speak with the delegates from around the world at these meetings, right?
So why again, do lobbyists get to see the text instead?
Re: "Back seat drivers"?
I am fairly confident in saying that if you have to have secrecy in negotiations you’re hiding something hence screwing us all!
they dont have to receive the leaked information to be in breach of Federal law, just by asking for the information, you are inciting people to commit a crime, which in itself is a crime.. not to mention a very very stupid thing to do.
Just Foreign Policy: "we are indeed a legitimate organization"
1. Allow me to assure you that Just Foreign Policy is a legitimate organization.
2. Our effort is legit: we plan to do exactly what we’ve said we’ll do; if WikiLeaks publishes the TPP negotiating text, we will write to everyone who made a pledge to donate to WikiLeaks and encourage them to fulfill their pledge, giving them the information on how to do so.
3. We certainly agree with everyone who says that the TPP should never be secret in the first place and no-one should have to issue a reward for it and whoever has it should certainly leak it by any means they have available. But, since it had not leaked so far, we thought it was a good idea to “up the ante,” as you say.
4. Note that our reward is not for the leaker, but for the publisher. So, the dynamic of the leaking act is still loyalty to the public interest.
There is a way that a way that leaks could be done without finding out who did the leak. Anyone with access can just simply copy the text to the clipboard, then paste into Windows Notepad, and then save it as a normal text file. This will get rid of all the watermarks, then they could upload to WikiLeaks, then WikiLeaks gets the $21,000+ bounty. As long as the file is sent as a raw .txt file, and the user is using a VPN to hide their identity, it will be all but impossible for the USTR to find out who did it.
Pasting it as a raw .txt file will get rid of the “watermark” making the actual leaker impossible to trace.
re: "There's a way leaks cld be done w/o finding out who did the leak"
Thanks, FritzOwl, for those suggestions.
Here are some further considerations:
– It may be that the document is a PDF, not a Word file.
– It may be the case that the PDF that someone has access to is not text-copyable.
– So, it might be the case that as a first step a person with access to the document might need to first get it on an unsecured computer, transfer it to a thumbdrive, take the thumbdrive to another private computer with OCR software, and do OCR on the copy of the PDF to get ASCII.
But then I think the rest of your suggestions might work; though I should stress that the world is full of people who know more about this than I do.