Revealed Emails Show How Industry Lobbyists Basically Wrote The TPP

[friendly_iconoclast]

(This got locked in LBN, so I'm reposting it here)

From Techdirt:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150605/11483831239/revealed-emails-show-how-industry-lobbyists-basically-wrote-tpp.shtml

Back in 2013, we wrote about a FOIA lawsuit that was filed by William New at IP Watch. After trying to find out more information on the TPP by filing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, and being told that they were classified as "national security information" (no, seriously), New teamed up with Yale's Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic to sue. As part of that lawsuit, the USTR has now released a bunch of internal emails concerning TPP negotiations, and IP Watch has a full writeup showing how industry lobbyists influenced the TPP agreement, to the point that one is even openly celebrating that the USTR version copied his own text word for word.

What is striking in the emails is not that government negotiators seek expertise and advice from leading industry figures. But the emails reveal a close-knit relationship between negotiators and the industry advisors that is likely unmatched by any other stakeholders.

The article highlights numerous examples of what appear to be very chummy relationships between the USTR and the "cleared advisors" from places like the RIAA, the MPAA and the ESA. They regularly share text and have very informal discussions, scheduling phone calls and get togethers to further discuss. This really isn't that surprising, given that the USTR is somewhat infamous for its revolving door with lobbyists who work on these issues. In fact, one of the main USTR officials in the emails that IP Watch got is Stan McCoy, who was the long term lead negotiator on "intellectual property" issues. But he's no longer at the USTR -- he now works for the MPAA...

...Perhaps the most incredible, is the email from Jim DeLisi, from Fanwood Chemical, to Barbara Weisel, a USTR official, where DeLisi raves that he's just looked over the latest text, and is gleeful to see that the the rules that have been agreed up on are "our rules" (i.e., the lobbyists'), even to the point that he (somewhat confusingly) insists "someone owes USTR a royalty payment." While it appears he's got the whole royalty system backwards (you'd think an "IP advisor" would know better...) the point is pretty clear: the lobbyists wrote the rules, and the USTR just put them into the agreement. Weisel's response? "Well there's a bit of good news..."

Searchable versions of the emails are available through the Electronic Frontier Foundation's
website:

https://www.eff.org/cases/ip-watch-v-ustr

https://www.eff.org/document/foia-released-emails-between-ustr-and-lobbyists-searchable-1-4

https://www.eff.org/document/foia-released-emails-between-ustr-and-lobbyists-searchable-2-4

https://www.eff.org/document/foia-released-emails-between-ustr-and-lobbyists-searchable-3-4

https://www.eff.org/document/foia-released-emails-between-ustr-and-lobbyists-searchable-4-4


Us proles need to remember that we're not important enough to see these drafts- nor are
Congressional aides, for that matter

But lobbyists are...

[Katashi_itto]

1. K&R!

[msongs]

2. thanks, Obama! nt

[WillyT]

3. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[Wellstone ruled]

4. From the get go,many of us had a hunch

this piece of junk had the finger prints of the Corporate Lobby groups. The more I read this thing,one can see the Harvard Legal Language used. So many phrases and paragraph's carry more than one meaning. Many hours of billable work on this baby. Appears this thing is a Attorneys gift that just keeps giving.

[1StrongBlackMan]

5. I wonder if these emails represent ...

the same access that Labor has, or something more. I know we are being led to believe, otherwise; but, I am not/have not found anything to counter it.

I’ve heard “labor” has a seat at the table and gets to see the TPP texts. Is this true?
No. Under U.S. law, there are several trade advisers—private citizens appointed by the President—who advise on trade policies. Of these advisers, the vast majority
(85% according to the Washington Post) represent businesses. About 5% of the advisers represent labor. The other 10% represent local and state government officials, academics, think tanks and non-governmental organizations. Labor advisers are allowed to review and advise on draft U.S. proposals—advice that the United States Trade Representative (USTR) can freely ignore. But we are locked out of the negotiating room and cannot see the actual negotiating texts, which combine the proposals from all 12 countries and evolve over time as negotiations progress. Nor can we share what we learn with members without violating national security laws.

http://www.aflcio.org/Issues/Trade/Fast-Track-Legislation/Labor-s-So-Called-Seat-at-the-Table-at-TPP-Negotiations

Is there anything to suggest that this emails are anything more than a review and advising on draft U.S. proposals?

Has/did the FOIA request seek communications/emails from the Labor Advisors? ... If not, why not? Doesn't that suggest an agenda, i.e., proving the corporate influence, by not seeking information that shows that corporations receive no advantage ... other than, in terms of numbers/representation?

If so, did New include the Labor Advisors' emails/communications in the release? If not, why not? And, wouldn't a disclosure that the Labor Advisors communications were sought; but, none found, make the corporate chicanery narrative stronger?

[Marr]

7. Weak conspiracy theories to avoid discussing actual leaked information.

Also, kick.

[hifiguy]

6. Rec'd and kicked for visibility

Can't believe this is sinking.