Sif14 How Trade Agreements Mess Up with Internet Freedoms
How Trade Agreements Mess Up with Internet Freedom Time and time again, abusive copyright provisions have been successfully reproduced to multiple trade agreements. These binding instruments are expanding to cover core topics that traditionally were part of the broader internet governance sphere. The impact of these provisions on human rights and Internet are disastrous, but so few are paying attention. Forum shopping and policy laundering are happening at alarming rates as unpopular policies that would likely fail in national public forums are being cycled through non-transparent international negotiations that do not have the same standards of democratic oversight. Clear examples are the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, Korea-US trade agreement, the Canadian-EU Trade Agreement (CETA) and the Transatlantic Partnership. But the list goes on. In a world of policy laundry and forum shopping, this panel aims to identify the challenges ahead for public interest organizations and build a strategy, created through dialogue, on how we should deal with the issues that will arise from these agreements. Speakers will provide perspectives from different countries, but will foster debate on what could be core coordination and strategy efforts
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
En vedette
En vedette (8)
Similaire à Sif14 How Trade Agreements Mess Up with Internet Freedoms
Similaire à Sif14 How Trade Agreements Mess Up with Internet Freedoms (20)
Plus de Carolina Rossini
Plus de Carolina Rossini (16)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Sif14 How Trade Agreements Mess Up with Internet Freedoms
- 1. How Trade Agreements Mess Up with Internet Freedoms Carolina Rossini Vice President, International Policy Public Knowledge http://www.publicknowledge.org + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini
- 6. • US – Oman RTA : (Article 15.10.29) provides for extensive procedures regulating internet service providers who, among other obligations, are required to cooperate with copyright owners and play an anti-piracy role.
- 8. • Freedom of Expression
- 9. TPP article 16.3 mandates a system of ISP liability that pushes a framework beyond ACTA and possibly the spirit of the DMCA, since it opens the doors for: • Three-strikes policies and laws that require Internet intermediaries to terminate their users’ Internet access on repeat allegations of copyright infringement • Requirements for Internet intermediaries to filter all Internet communications for potentially copyright-infringing material • ISP obligations to block access to websites that allegedly infringe or facilitate copyright infringement • Efforts to force intermediaries to disclose the identities of their customers to IP rightsholders on an allegation of copyright infringement.
- 10. The Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement seeks to adopt a general prohibition on restrictions to the free flow of online information, raising several questions regarding the role of trade agreements. While the free flow of information has undeniable economic and trade benefits, it is also inextricably linked with complex social and political considerations that might not be best resolved in secretive, exclusive closed door trade negotiations.
- 11. • Data Protection, Privacy and Free Flow of Information
- 12. Forum shopping on Data Privacy • The total number of new data privacy laws globally, viewed by decade, shows that their growth is accelerating, not merely expanding linearly: 8 (1970s), 13 (1980s), 21 (1990s), 35 (2000s) and 12 (2 years of the 2010s), giving the total of 89. [3] • Is TPP the right place for this discussion???
- 13. • countries should not use trade agreements to challenge privacy laws as trade barriers • we need to make clear about what type of information we are discussing when discussing “free- flow”, which historically is related to cross-personal- data flow • and if we want the language to go beyond cross-data- flow and actually deal with freedom of expression, the e-commerce chapter is a limited venue for that
- 16. Other resources • https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/International_Digital_Rights#F oundational_Materials • World Trade Organization - Economic Research and Statistics Division - INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROVISIONS IN REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS WTO, Manuscript date: 31 October 2012http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/reser_e/ersd201221_ e.pdf
Notes de l'éditeur
- In the first two years of this decade 11 new laws have been enacted (Faroe Islands, Malaysia, Mexico, India, Peru, Ukraine, Angola, Trinidad & Tobago, Vietnam, Costa Rica, Gabon and St Lucia) and the Russian law came into force, making this the most intensive period of data protection developments in the last 40 years. Geographically, more than half (56%) of data privacy laws are still in European states (50/89), EU member states making up only slightly more than one third (27/89), even with the expansion of the EU into eastern Europe. The geographical distribution of the 89 laws by region is therefore: EU (27); Other European (23); Asia (9); Latin America (8); Africa (8); North Africa/Middle East (5); Caribbean (4); North America (2); Australasia (2); Central Asia (1); Pacific Islands (0). So there are 39 data privacy laws outside Europe, 44% of the total. Because there is little room for expansion within Europe, the majority of the world’s data privacy laws will soon be from outside Europe, probably by the middle of this decade.