<story><title>Updated Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement – IP Chapter</title><url>https://www.wikileaks.org/tpp-ip2/</url><text></text></story><parent_chain><item><author>teachingaway</author><text>As an IP lawyer, I&amp;#x27;d like to say that reading this draft document is super boring. The parts that I skimmed (less than 10%) was all just harmless procedural rules. Can someone point out or quote the controversial parts? Here&amp;#x27;s the skeleton ToC and a few highlights:&lt;p&gt;A: General Provisions [seems boring]&lt;p&gt;B: Cooperation [seems boring]&lt;p&gt;C: Trademarks&lt;p&gt;D: Geographical Indications&lt;p&gt;E: Patents [including genetic stuff - probably controversial]&lt;p&gt;- Article QQ.E.2387: {Traditional Knowledge, Traditional Cultural Expressions and Genetic Resources}&lt;p&gt;F: Industrial Designs&lt;p&gt;G: Copyright&lt;p&gt;- [basically Fair Use:] - Article QQ.G.Y: {Limitations and Exceptions} - &amp;quot;Each Party shall endeavor to achieve an appropriate balance in its copyright and related rights system, inter alia by means of limitations or exceptions...  including those for the digital environment, giving due consideration to legitimate purposes such as, but not limited to: criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, research, and other similar purposes...&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;- [DRM stuff:] -  Article QQ.G.10: {Technological Protection Measures}&lt;p&gt;H: Enforcement</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>bazzargh</author><text>This:&lt;p&gt;1.	Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2 and 3, each Party shall make patents available for any invention, whether a product or process, in all fields of technology, provided that the invention is new, involves an inventive step, and is capable of industrial application.&lt;p&gt;which appears to mean software patents in the EU; and &lt;i&gt;mathematical&lt;/i&gt; patents in the US (because MX specifically try to exclude that below)&lt;p&gt;Also this:&lt;p&gt;[CL&amp;#x2F;NZ&amp;#x2F;PE&amp;#x2F;MY&amp;#x2F;BN&amp;#x2F;VN&amp;#x2F;CA&amp;#x2F;MX oppose: Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, including Article QQ.G.8 (Berne 18&amp;#x2F;TRIPS 14.6),] a Party shall not be
required to restore protection to subject matter than on the date of entry into force of this Agreement has fallen into the public domain in its territory.&lt;p&gt;So the Govt&amp;#x27;s of CL&amp;#x2F;NZ&amp;#x2F;PE&amp;#x2F;MY&amp;#x2F;BN&amp;#x2F;VN&amp;#x2F;CA&amp;#x2F;MX appear to want to reprotect parts of the public domain?</text></comment>
<story><title>Updated Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement – IP Chapter</title><url>https://www.wikileaks.org/tpp-ip2/</url><text></text></story><parent_chain><item><author>teachingaway</author><text>As an IP lawyer, I&amp;#x27;d like to say that reading this draft document is super boring. The parts that I skimmed (less than 10%) was all just harmless procedural rules. Can someone point out or quote the controversial parts? Here&amp;#x27;s the skeleton ToC and a few highlights:&lt;p&gt;A: General Provisions [seems boring]&lt;p&gt;B: Cooperation [seems boring]&lt;p&gt;C: Trademarks&lt;p&gt;D: Geographical Indications&lt;p&gt;E: Patents [including genetic stuff - probably controversial]&lt;p&gt;- Article QQ.E.2387: {Traditional Knowledge, Traditional Cultural Expressions and Genetic Resources}&lt;p&gt;F: Industrial Designs&lt;p&gt;G: Copyright&lt;p&gt;- [basically Fair Use:] - Article QQ.G.Y: {Limitations and Exceptions} - &amp;quot;Each Party shall endeavor to achieve an appropriate balance in its copyright and related rights system, inter alia by means of limitations or exceptions...  including those for the digital environment, giving due consideration to legitimate purposes such as, but not limited to: criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, research, and other similar purposes...&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;- [DRM stuff:] -  Article QQ.G.10: {Technological Protection Measures}&lt;p&gt;H: Enforcement</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>wavefunction</author><text>Personally? You just listed one:&lt;p&gt;Section E: Patents (including genetic stuff)&lt;p&gt;I don&amp;#x27;t think genetics should be patentable.  The thinking behind patenting genes is repulsive to me.</text></comment>