This section released is extremely concerning for users and a big win for major corporations and other copyright holders.
In effect, the TPP will do away with public domain and fair use. The bill offers no protection for small or independent entities who would use previously available content to innovate and create something new.
The intellectual property chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership will hit artists, libraries, archives and journalists especially hard.
Companies who buy the copyright for content created by an individual, or their estate, will be retained for the life of the holder, and an additional 70 years after their death.
This restricts content creators from sampling or quoting or referencing works that would otherwise be in the public domain.
Additionally, the more restrictive copyright laws would restrict access to medicine and increase their cost.
“If the TPP is ratified, people in Pacific Rim countries would have to live by the rules in this leaked text,” said Peter Maybarduk, director of Public Citizen’s Global Access to Medicines program.“The new monopoly rights for big pharmaceutical firms would compromise access in TPP countries. The TPP would cost lives.”
“These final TPP rules would lengthen, strengthen and broaden special patent and data protections, which pharmaceutical companies use to delay generic competition and keep drug prices high,” said Maybarduk.
Most concerning of all, this bill could heavily restrict free-speech and whistleblowing.
TPP allows governments to shutdown trials and due-process for whistleblowers if the information they released is “detrimental to a party’s economic interests, international relations, or national defense or national security.”
“The text of the TPP’s intellectual property chapter confirms advocates warnings that this deal poses a grave threat to global freedom of expression and basic access to things like medicine and information,” said Evan Greer, campaign director of internet activist group Fight for the Future.
“But the sad part is that no one should be surprised by this. It should have been obvious to anyone observing the process, where appointed government bureaucrats and monopolistic companies were given more access to the text than elected officials and journalists, that this would be the result.”
[EFF] [The Guardian]