Speaker: TPPA: It's Extreme
72 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last
-
Danielle, in reply to
I believe "bloody Yanks" are defensive. Americans are delightfully logical and levelheaded. Particularly if they're also New Zealanders. #biteme
-
Sacha, in reply to
Sorry, didn't mean to be rude. Paul probably got the tone I was aiming for but not clear to everyone else.
-
Back to geographically generic labels which subject - aside from bloody @C writing matters- is what fascinates me most...
Advertising boffins changed 'chinese gooseberries' (the name they were known as from before my birth) into 'kiwifruit' - the push went on for that name after (I understand) it became completely & publically obvious that the artificial name was a dog's dinner. Not to mention a dog's breakfast- 'zespri' was a computer generated thing...
-
So, yeh, now you'll get fined a hundred thousand dollars for reading the wrong pdf on your iphone, so that various foreign companies can better extract monopoly rents on their "incompatible" electronic products, and we can start getting those rentals six months after everyone else in the world again.
Bonus material: healthcare costs will rise, all the names on the cheeses will change to confuse all the tourists, and I won't be on the internet for very long.
-
the glittering prizes... and other fuzzy logic
mind you, “Zespri"TM was far worse (and totally unsuccessful.)
and how about all those Cervena®©TM Stalkers, too?
neither here nor there, there deer...
From the wide open pastures of New Zealand comes a venison so good they gave it another name. Cervena® Natural Tender Venison
I hear they have their own specialist hunting show these days
- Hind Sight ... eat lead Bambi ! -
I believe "bloody Yanks" are defensive.
It's an especially confusing and ultimately annoying insult to people from the southern states.
-
Maybe I'm reading this all wrong, but does this mean that some US company will be able to copyright something another company does, and then sue that company for using the name and/or producing their product? As in the case of the company that trademarked the name "bismati" and then threatened to sue the Indian rice growers?
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
Maybe I’m reading this all wrong, but does this mean that some US company will be able to copyright something another company does, and then sue that company for using the name and/or producing their product? As in the case of the company that trademarked the name “bismati” and then threatened to sue the Indian rice growers?
You’re confusing patent, trademark and copyright, for one thing. Trademark protects identifying marks in trade, such as words (which cannot be merely descriptive. Frucor failed to get a trademark on “Just Juice” because of this), colours (purple confectionery wrapping is trademarked by Cadbury) designs (Lamborghini car designs are trademarked). You cannot copyright most of those things, though the design work that goes into a Lamborghini is copyrighted in its physical form – the design papers, etc.
The Basmati issue was a patent on the gene structure of Basmati rice, and was ultimately defeated. The patent was only ever granted in the US (in 1997), and in the end the holder lost all their rights because India threatened to take the US to WIPO for granting an invalid patent.
A person (legal or natural) cannot copyright the work of another person. They can only copyright their own work – for the sake of simplicity I’ll ignore works-for-hire – and then enforce that right if someone else copies their work. And it’s a defence to have come up with the same work from your own efforts, though with the internet it’s hard to argue that you had no exposure to the other party’s ideas.
So, yes, you are reading this all wrong, but I think that’s mostly down to a misunderstanding of patents, trademarks, copyrights, and how they come into being and can be enforced.
-
Matthew Poole - is there any brief way of describing where e-bookrights&the Google Settlement sit within this? (Will donate modest amount to charity of your choice for amounts to picking your brains-)
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
Thank you, Matthew.
And of course, it's not bismarti, it's bAsmarti. (I knew that!) Must have been having Germanic (germane?) thoughts. Bismarck.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
Not a really easy way, no. Wikipedia does a far job, and much of what I would say is just reproducing what’s in that article since I don’t know enough of the details to give you a really accurate answer.
That said, they’re purely issues of copyright. Google allegedly breached copyrights by scanning in some books that weren’t public domain (along with many books that were, and for which there’s then a potential breach of the publisher’s copyright in the typography and layout but which wasn’t raised AFAIK), and settled a lawsuit with its payout. TPPA cannot change the applicability of the settlement, because it’s a contract between private individuals. TPPA could require signatories to create book registries, or join up to one of the existing registries under the settlement, but cannot bind Google to recognising those jurisdictions. The sanctity of the individual prevents a treaty from forcing a private person to engage with any other private person in a particular way.
So to answer what I took to be the unstated question within your question, TPPA doesn’t change your relationship with Google Books. If you weren’t published in the US, Australia, Canada or the UK, your books aren’t covered by the settlement and Google has no rights granted to digitise them. TPPA can’t change your publishing contracts, in the same way it can’t change the settlement agreement.
What can happen is that our illustrious government could change NZ copyright law in a manner that’s advantageous to Google and disadvantageous to you.Very succinctly, there is no global copyright law and TPPA won’t be creating one. The US will push for harmonisation of regimes, but the last word is still domestic law. Google’s settlement was not a matter of legislation, only of legal action, and thus cannot forcibly be modified by treaty.
My charity of choice would be NZ Red Cross, but I don't feel like I've done anything that I wouldn't have done otherwise.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
And of course, it’s not bismarti, it’s bAsmarti
Doesn't have an 'r', either ;)
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
O-arrrrr!!!???
Well, I guess in its original form, it doesn't have any of those funny little squiggles we westerners can read..... (lameness ensues, further than earlier and probably digs even deeper spelling and grammar hole.) :)
-
Rich Lock, in reply to
@Rick Lock/Chris Bell GIs aren't actually listed
No, some informed googling post-comment implied as much.
The WIPO page on geographic indicators is here. More Euro-specific info here.
**What is a "generic" geographical indication?**
If a geographical term is used as the common designation of a kind of product, rather than an indication of the place of origin of that product, then the term no longer functions as a geographical indication. Where this has occurred in a certain country, then that country may refuse to recognize or protect that term as a geographical indication. For example, the term “cologne” now denotes a certain kind of perfumed toilet water, regardless of whether or not it was produced in the region of Cologne.
To me, it looks like it is the responsibility of interested national organisations to defend what they consider to be their GI rights in order to stop these becoming genericised. I'm pretty comfortable with this - it's fairly clear from the examples given that the product needs to be strongly associated with a location in order for protection to be considered. I doubt very much that something as generic as stilton or cheddar would get very far. A trader is not stopped from selling Parma-**style** ham or sparkling champagne-**style** wine by this, but they do have to make it clear that it doesn't come from a particular area.
-
3410,
A trader is not stopped from selling Parma-**style** ham or sparkling champagne-**style** wine by this, but they do have to make it clear that it doesn't come from a particular area.
.......................................................................
Even the term "méthode champenoise" or "champagne method" was forbidden consequent to an EU court decision in 1994.[11] As of 2005, the description most often legally used for sparkling wines not from Champagne yet using the second fermentation in the bottle process is "méthode traditionnelle".
-
Learn more about the TPPA:
NEW ZEALAND IS NOT FOR SALE
Murray Horton, spokesperson of the Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa (CAFCA), is touring the country and will speak on:
• The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement and the dangers it poses to our economy and democracy.
• Privatisation of our public assets.
• The relentless takeover of NZ businesses and land by transnational corporations.
• The re-absorption of NZ into the US Empire.
• And, importantly, how the New Zealand people can fight back; it’s too important to be left up to politicians.
There are some differences between National and Labour on these issues, but only ones of degree, not principle. A change in government will not, be enough to change the disastrous course on which this country is set.NORTH ISLAND SPEAKING TOUR ITINERARY
Tuesday April 5, Auckland – 7.15 - 8.30pm AUT WT1004, AUT Tower Building, Rutland St entrance. Room is next door to Pacific Media Centre; take lift to 10th floor. AUT University, 2 Rutland St (opposite Aotea Square). This is a free entry public seminar. Contact Lynda Boyd 0274 797789; lyndab@slingshot.co.nz
Wednesday April 6, Whangarei – 7pm, Manaia PHO Rooms, 28 Rust Ave, Central Whangarei Contact Tim Howard 027 3089216; the.farm@ihug.co.nz
Thursday April 7, Hamilton – 7 pm, Waikato Trade Union Centre, 34 Harwood St. Contact Bob Anderson 021 826 558; (07) 834 9221(h); Robert.Anderson@wintec.ac.nz
Saturday April 9, Thames – 7pm, Grahamstown Hall, 768 Pollen St. Contact Gordon Jackman (07) 8685248; 021 1018948; gjackman@clear.net.nz
Monday April 11, Whakatane – 7pm, finger food; talk starts at 7.30, Eastbay REAP, 21 Pyne St. Contact Pip Wonacott (07) 3070515; 027 2864549; pip@wonacott.com
Tuesday April 12, Gisborne – 8pm. Holy Trinity Church (upstairs) Derby St. Contact Darryl Monteith 0274844580. This meeting is sponsored by Green Party as part of the “Keep It Kiwi” Campaign
Wednesday April 13, Hawkes Bay – 2 pm at the Havelock North Club, Campbell St, Havelock North (this is a meeting of the Hawkes Bay branch of the NZ Institute of International Affairs, which is open to the public; $5 admission).
PLUS: – 7pm in Lecture Theatre One, Block K1, Eastern Institute of Technology (EIT), Gloucester Rd, Taradale. $5 admission charge to cover branch costs & refreshments. This meeting is also open to the public. Contact for both meetings Ken Aldred, Chairman, Hawkes Bay Branch, NZ Institute of International Affairs (06) 8366914; 021 1872677; ken.aldred@xtra.co.nzThursday April 14, Palmerston North – 7.30pm, Catholic Diocesan Centre (Te Rau Aroha), 33 Amesbury St. Contact Dion Martin 021 776029; Dion.Martin@ndu.org.nz
Friday April 15, Whanganui – 7pm, Josephite Retreat Centre, Mount St Joseph, 14 Hillside Tce. Contact Adrienne Smith 06 345 5047 extn 3; ssjoseph@xtra.co.nz
Monday April 18, Wellington – 6 - 7.30pm, Main Hall, St John’s Church, cnr of Willis & Dixon Streets. Contact Kane O’Connell 021 1863430; kane.oconnell@gmail.comTuesday April 19, Petone – 7.45pm. Petone Community House, 6 Britannia St. Contact Grant Brookes 021 053 2973; grant_brookes@paradise.nt.nz
read CAFCA's Watchdog magazine
-
As an aside, some unexpected copyright enforcement:
In May 2010, geneticist J. Craig Venter and his team made news by creating the first “synthetic life form,” replacing the genetic code in a bacterium with DNA they’d composed on a computer.
...
In order to distinguish their synthetic DNA from that naturally present in the bacterium, Venter’s team coded several famous quotes into their DNA, including one from James Joyce’s A Portrait of the Artist of a Young Man: “To live, to err, to fall, to triumph, to recreate life out of life.”
After announcing their work, Venter explained, his team received a cease and desist letter from Joyce’s estate, saying that he’d used the Irish writer’s work without permission. ”We thought it fell under fair use,” said Venter.
Some lawyers really do have too much time on their hands.
-
There’s quite a bit of discussion on how this could affect access to medicines. There was some suggestion (on Radio – verbal reference) that allowing Pharmac to lose it’s control over the import of medicines, or the use of generics, could cost us 100s of millions per year.
There’s a briefing paper linked off several sites, including the nursing council.
Explain how a TPPA could stop us providing medicines through Pharmac?
Pharmac identifies a list of medicines that are priority for government spending and negotiates the price it will pay for them with the drug companies. The Big Pharma lobby expects the intellectual property chapter of the TPPA to restrict the government’s ability to import cheaper generic drugs that keep prices down and to give companies more power over Pharmac’s decisions. Subsidies to reduce the cost of drugs could also come under attack.
What would that mean for New Zealanders’ access to medicines?
The health budget won’t go so far if the government has to pay more for medicines, meaning it would either have to spend more, fund fewer medicines or require people to pay more. Those who can afford increased premiums for private health insurance would get access to lifesaving medicines, while the poor would have to choose between paying for food, rent or medicines.
There’s also a list of New Zealanders views on it here. Martin Henderson? Probably didn’t need to know what he thought, but Jeanette Fitzsimmons and a few others interesting, although these seem like extreme interpretations in some cases.
ETA: Those quotes were from an ad last December.
-
Rich Lock, in reply to
Some lawyers really do have too much time on their hands.
Hey, don't blame the hammer for the hand that wields it.
-
Rich Lock, in reply to
The key quote in that wiki article is this:
Regardless of the legal requirements for labeling, extensive education efforts by the Champagne region and the use of alternative names by non-Champagne quality sparkling wine producers, some consumers and wine sellers continue to regard champagne as a generic term for white sparkling wines, regardless of origin.
The champagne enforcers have to work double-hard to stop everyone thinking it's generic, and they're more or less fighting a losing battle. As a consequence, they're going to be jumping hard on every possible infringement to stop their unique identifier going the same way as the 'Hoover' trademark.
I still think you'd have a defence if you called your sparkling wine 'champagne-style', but you'd probably spend an awful lot of money to find out one way or the other.
Not quite my area of expertise, anyway.
-
Islander, in reply to
I once won a very good bottle of champagne (yep, French) for suggesting that English-language writers simply drop the 'g' and call our stuff (some of which is excellent) 'champane.' We've already done this deliberate mis-spelling with port and sherry (for examples...)
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
After announcing their work, Venter explained, his team received a cease and desist letter from Joyce’s estate, saying that he’d used the Irish writer’s work without permission. ”We thought it fell under fair use,” said Venter.
James Joyce died in 1941, so that means his works would theoretically come under public domain this year. At least according to EU copyright law.
-
3410, in reply to
Not quite my area of expertise, anyway.
Nor mine. Thanks for addressing that. I see what you mean.
-
the hammer
heh
-
BenWilson, in reply to
How about Champers...lots of people already call it that. For a more edgy modern twist Sh@mpz.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.