The Trans-Pacific Partnership, December 2013

The Trans-Pacific Partnership
December 2013












Patrick deHahn
Internet and society


The Internet has become something close to a lifeline in today's society. People in communities across the world access the Internet day to day for everything from communication services to viewing entertainment. While the World Wide Web was first created as a governmental tool in the United States, it has since evolved into something close to a free-for-all virtual space for everyone to use and create content in building onto the overall space. However, despite the government's loss of control and governance, there has been a large increase in attempts to strengthen control of the Internet. Looking at recent international bills, most importantly the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Internet users are increasingly worried about their freedoms which seem to be in peril.
Currently in negotiations for years now, the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement involving twelve countries has stirred up controversy within the geographic region. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was created to form a free trade area between multiple countries in the Asian-Pacific. The twelve countries include Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam and the United States. Free-trade agreements are often between two states, but the Trans-Pacific Agreement looks to clump the large region in order to reap benefits from one another. The TPP aims to focus on trade agreements and country relations. On the other hand, there is growing concern over provisions included in the partnership that suggest other political aims.
Negotiations for the TPP started back in 2005, according to the New Zealand government, between the first four states that started developing the agreement (New Zealand, 2013). Brunei, Chile, Singapore and New Zealand began inviting other members to strengthen the trade pact as official negotiations grew to include more and more nations. After joining the TPP, the United States called the partnership plan an "ambitious, 21st century" agreement. The pact, according to the United States, will "enhance trade and investment among the TPP partner countries, promote innovation, economic growth and development and support the creation and retention of jobs" (U.S. Trade Representative, 2011).
Almost eight years later, there have been 19 rounds of negotiations as of December 2013, says the Office of the United States Trade Representative. It is also reported the agreement may be completed and signed in the near future. Another document, the updated "TPP Frequently Asked Questions," from the United States government further describes the Trans-Pacific Partnership for anyone who is interested,

"The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a vehicle for Asia-Pacific-wide economic integration, which will strengthen U.S. ties to the robust economies of this region. The initiative starts with an economically-significant group of countries that share our vision of negotiating a high-standard, 21st century regional agreement. The goal is to include additional Asia-Pacific countries in successive clusters to eventually cover a region that represents more than half of global output and over 40 percent of world trade" (United States, 2013).

Another nation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership is Canada and they've also shared some information on the negotiations. They state the group of nations collectively represents "a market of 792 million people and a combined GDP of $27.5 trillion" (Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada, 2013). These numbers shows the wide reach the agreement would have when signed. Whatever regulations, kinds or relations, trade agreements and provisions they include in the final version of the partnership draft could affect a massive population of 792 million people and growing. Canada also adds that the last meeting took place November 19-24 this year in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Despite all the information the governments are sharing on their official websites and in public press releases, details of the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement are very well kept under wraps. This means vital press freedoms and citizens' right to know have been barred in the years-long talks. Media and public access have been denied to negotiations as meetings have been private and governmental statements come across as propagandized with very limited and vague information.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a nonprofit organization that aims to defend people's rights in the digital world, warns online users against the TPP agreement. They comment on it by saying it is "secretive" and "has shut out multi-stakeholder participation and is shrouded in secrecy" (EFF, 2013). There was once a chance for some change regarding transparency in negotiations. The group states, "TPP negotiators apparently discussed the requests for greater public disclosure during the February 2011 negotiations, but took no action." The partnership and topic of discussion affects such a large portion of the world's population that it is alarming that such a free-trade agreement would not be shared with the millions who would be affected if the deal were to pass.
Interestingly, The Office of the United States Trade Representative has a fact sheet out on "Transparency and the Trans-Pacific Partnership" (2012). In it, the document tries to explain its progress thus far with the talks and then scratches the surface on transparency issues brought up by stakeholders and rights groups. The United States clarifies that all the nations involved in the TPP negotiations agreed on confidentiality and decided the negotiations should be held in private, just like any other American free-trade negotiations. At the end of the fact sheet, they add that they've responded to calls for transparency by sharing what they can share with constituents, as well as, discussing issues with stakeholders. The U.S. Trade Representative says they "will continue to engage with stakeholders to find ways to increase transparency in the TPP negotiations" (United States Trade Representative, 2012).
In addition to the huge lack of transparency of the agreement process, the text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement is kept secret. This was true until activist organization Wikileaks obtained what is the current draft text of a full, pivotal chapter of the TPP agreement. The text released by Wikileaks is the "Intellectual Property [Rights] Chapter" of the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (2013). The website published the document just before the most recent TPP negotiation meeting in November 2013. The organization also sent the documents to various news establishments – including print, online, etc. – in order for it to reach the mainstream audiences not too keen on Wikileaks.
Intellectual property is a difficult concept to master in regulation. In order for the world to grow in so many different sectors including business, technology and art, everyone would need the freedom to create without restriction but also without violating the intellectual property of others. What the TPP chapter shares are highly controversial proposals on freedoms people have now in regards to intellectual property. The EFF group states the chapter has "extensive negative ramifications for users' freedom of speech, right to privacy and due process, and hinder peoples' abilities to innovate" (EFF, 2013). Any further action on this would only proceed to limit growth as a global society.
What's controversial about this clause being proposed is the fact that peoples' rights as simple human beings would be violated. The freedom to create, build and debate would be hindered by the new intellectual property proposal. Laws on copyright, trademarks, patents and others based on intellectual property do exist today; however, the TPP intellectual property chapter suggests something else. EFF says the "U.S. negotiators are pushing for the adoption of copyright measures far more restrictive than currently required by international treaties" (EFF, 2013). The intellectual property chapter shows stricter intellectual property takedown notice terms, stronger copyright wording with huge repercussions and new rewording of fair use.
The proposal destroys people's civil liberties and the freedom of expression. Evan Greer, a campaign manager for Fight for the Future, adds his thoughts, "While claiming to champion an open Internet, the Obama administration is quietly pushing for extreme, SOPA-like copyright policies that benefit Hollywood and giant pharmaceutical companies at the expense of our most basic rights to freedom of expression online" (Hern & Rusche, 2013). The online activist group for Internet rights also announced an online petition that currently has more than 120,000 signatures against Internet censorship in the TPP plan (Open Media, 2013).
This is not the first time this has happened. The United States has tried to put in nearly identical intellectual property clauses in other bills. In recent years, similar wording can be spotted in the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) and the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). All of these attempts failed. Susan Sell, a George Washington University political science professor, comments, "The United States appears to be using the non-transparent Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations as a deliberate end run around Congress on intellectual property, to achieve a presumably unpopular set of policy goals" (Farrell, 2013). Sell adds how the three previous attempts were hacked down by an overwhelming disapproval by the public commenting, "it appears that the U.S. administration is negotiating for intellectual property provisions that it knows it could not achieve through an open democratic process" (Farrell, 2013). Sell shares she is already seeing actions by activist groups brewing, similar to anti-SOPA, PIPA, ACTA opposition. The query here is whether or not TPP will be another defeat for the United States government in intellectual property.
If it so happens that the controversial clauses in the Trans-Pacific Partnership don't pass, the Internet will remain a vital part of society. The Internet has created heightened interest and watchfulness on issues like this. It was Wikileaks that sprouted on the World Wide Web and it was online where the activist group shared the leaked documents. Wikileaks posting the TPP negotiation documents has brought about a debate in society. With all of this together, the web created and maintained a successful discussion regarding politics and important matters across the world. The Internet, human rights groups and the general society have banded together in an attempt to learn more about the non-transparent Trans-Pacific Partnership to stand up for a strong international community of billions online.

Works Cited
Australian Government, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. (2013). "Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement negotiations." Retrieved from http://www.dfat.gov.au/fta/tpp/index.html
Electronic Frontier Foundation. (2013). "Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement." Retrieved from https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp
Farrell, H. (2013). "Five key questions – and answers – about the leaked TPP text." Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2013/11/15/five-key-questions-and-answers-about-the-leaked-tpp-text/
Gillmor, D. (2013). "Thanks to WikiLeaks, we see just how bad TPP trade deal is for regular people." Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/13/trans-pacific-paternership-intellectual-property
Hern, A. & Rusche, D. (2013). "WikiLeaks publishes secret draft chapter of Trans-Pacific Partnership." Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/nov/13/wikileaks-trans-pacific-partnership-chapter-secret
Ministry of International Trade and Industry. (2013). "Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)." Retrieved from http://www.miti.gov.my/cms/content.jsp?id=com.tms.cms.section.Section_ccec2a77-c0a81573-f5a0f5a0-6f87fd6f&rootid=com.tms.cms.section.Section_8ab48a0a-7f000010-72f772f7-4dc62890
New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. (2013). "Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP Negotiations." Retrieved from http://www.mfat.govt.nz/Trade-and-Economic-Relations/2-Trade-Relationships-and-Agreements/Trans-Pacific/index.php
Office of the United States Trade Representative. (2013). "Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)." Retrieved from http://www.ustr.gov/tpp
Office of the United States Trade Representative. (2012). "Fact Sheet: Transparency and the Trans-Pacific Partnership." Retrieved from http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2012/june/transparency-and-the-tpp
Office of the United States Trade Representative. (2011). "Outlines of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement." Retrieved from http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2011/november/outlines-trans-pacific-partnership-agreement
Open Media International. (2013). "Say No to Internet Censorship." Retrieved from https://openmedia.org/censorship
Wikileaks. (2013). "Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)." Retrieved from http://wikileaks.org/tpp/#start