In reading through the patent-specific parts of the leaked TPPA IP Chapter to undertake yesterday's analysis, I noticed something the implications of which concern me greatly.
I reproduce Article QQ.A.8 below for your reference (original is on page 4 of the leaked chapter):
Article QQ.A.8: {International Agreements}
1. Each Party affirms that it has ratified or acceded to the following agreements:
(a) Patent Cooperation Treaty (1979);
(b) Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1967); and
(c) Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (1971).
2. Each Party shall ratify or accede to each of the following agreements, where it is not already a Party to such agreement, by the date of entry into force of this Agreement forthe Party concerned:
(a) Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the InternationalRegistration of Marks (1989);
(b) Budapest Treaty on the International Recognition of the Deposit of Microorganisms for the Purposes of Patent Procedure (1977), as amended in 1980;
(c) International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants(1991) (UPOV Convention);
(d) Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks (2006);
(e) WIPO Copyright Treaty (1996); and
(f) WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (1996)
So, by signing the TPPA, we are implicitly accepting the terms of these 9 prior agreements.
I presume similar references to other prior agreements exist in other sections of the TPPA text (which, of course, we haven't seen).
What relevant requirements are contained in those agreements, which we "shall ratify or accede to"? How does ratifying or acceding to them force us to change our laws, policies, jurisdictions, practices or expectations?
Nevermind how appalled I am by the secrecy of this entire TPPA process - is it conceivable that our handful of negotiators - the only people in NZ who had access to this text - know all of these agreements and their legal ramifications?
By all accounts, our negotiators are clever, dedicated civil servants, but I don't think it is conceivable that they really understand the technical implications of the TPPA text, much less all these ancilliary agreements.
To me this demonstrates that - like a software user who just wants to run a piece of software to solve a problem - our government is hell-bent on clicking "I ACCEPT" on the mother of all End User License Agreements: the TPPA.
That thought terrifies me, and should petrify you, too. This isn't just a piece of software we're talking about... with your precious computer, files, music collections, and family photo galleries hanging in the breach. This is our nation, our homes, our future, and that of our children. I think it's time to get very very angry about this.
Read Full Story from Latest News https://nzoss.org.nz/content/the-tppa-is-only-part-of-the-story
This article by dave originally appeared on nzoss.org on October 11, 2015 at 12:18PM
