Japanese demonstrators protest the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) after the May Day rally in Tokyo, Japan, 01 May 2013.

Wikileaks công bố Bản Thảo Bí Mật của Âm Mưu Hiệp Ước TPP

Wikileaks vừa đăng tải bản thảo của kế hoạch thành lập “hiệp ước hợp” tác giữa 12 quốc gia vùng cung Thái Bình Dương (Trans-Pacific Partnership) viết tắt là TPP.  12 quốc gia tham dự gồm United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Mexico, Malaysia, Chile, Singapore, Peru, Vietnam, và Brunei. 

Bản thảo được Wikileaks công bố cho biết những thương thảo trao đổi thật gắt gao về cái gọi là “bản quyền trí thức”, một loại bản quyền mơ hồ nhưng rộng mở có khả năng áp đặt một qui chế  độc quyền hóa, khống trị không chỉ một lãnh vực khoa học công nghệ, nghệ thuật mà còn những lãnh vực liên quan, và TƯỚC QUYỀN SÁNG TẠO TƯ DUY CỦA NGƯỜI KHÁC nhân danh “bảo vệ tác quyền trí tuệ”. Bộ mặt thật của cái “tác quyền trí tuệ” này đã bị tiến sĩ Vandana Shiva vặch mặt.

Vấn đề chính ở đây NÓ là HIÊP ƯỚC KINH TẾ XÃ HỘI hợp tác công khai giữa nhiều quốc gia, và kết quả sẽ ảnh hưởng trực tiếp đời sống sinh hoạt hàng ngày của quần chúng khắp thế giới, thì tại sao lại THƯƠNG THẢO BÍ MẬT? Tại sao KHÔNG DÁM CHO QUẦN CHÚNG BIẾT? Theo đúng nguyên lý dân chủ, nó phải được công khai bàn thảo tranh luận dưới ánh sáng quan sát, tham dự của báo chí và quần chúng- Nó phải được tham khảo ý kiến quần chúng, và cuối cùng để QUẦN CHÚNG sẽ có QUYẾT ĐỊNH ĐỒNG THUẬN hay PHẢN ĐỐI .
 

Vậy “Dân chủ” ở đâu, khi những quyết định liên quan và ảnh hưởng trực tiếp lớn lao đến đời sống sinh hoạt sáng tạo hàng ngày của người dân lại chỉ được một nhóm “chuyên gia chính phủ” trao đổi kín bí mật, sau lưng quần chúng và “rất bất bình đẳng”. Vì như lịch sử bang giao quốc tế từ thế kỷ 20 đến nay cho biết, hầu như giới tập đoàn chủ nhân Âu Mỹ sẽ dùng mọi thủ đoạn tạo đủ mọi áp lực để ÁP ĐẶT ĐIỀU KHOẢN KHỐNG CHẾ và RÀNG BUỘC NHÂN DÂN của những quốc gia nhỏ yếu khác cho QUYỀN LỢI của nhóm tập đoàn này.

Đó chính là trọng điểm mà những nhóm quần chúng nhận thức cao đã biểu tình khắp nơi như tại Tokyo, Kula Lumpur, Seattle, Dallas, San Diego, Chicago, Detroit, Spokane,, Bellingham, Olympia, Portland để phản đối và cảnh cáo nhân dân thế giới toàn cầu về âm mưu HIỆP ƯỚC có cái tên lừa đảo mỹ miều này: Hợp Tác Hữu Nghị Liên Hợp Thái Bình Dương. 


Càng ngày tính PHI DÂN CHỦ của NỀN DÂN CHỦ GIÁN TIẾP càng rõ rệt, và tính tàn bạo trấn áp độc tài của định chế nhà nước chính phủ càng mạnh và rõ rệt.


Thế nhưng đại đa số quấn chúng vẫn chỉ muốn an phận và mặc nhiên ủy quyền hết mọi quyết định sống chết của họ cho một nhóm cực nhỏ là “chính phủ” như những bậc siêu nhân, thần thánh quyền năng.  


Nghĩ cho cùng những tai họa chiến tranh khủng hoảng v.v. xảy ra đều do chính người dân đã tin mù quáng vào định chế nhà nước chính phủ như con nghiện ma túy: thấy, biết là nguy hại tán mạng, nhưng cứ dùng, cứ lệ thuộc càng ngày càng nhiều hơn.
Thí dụ như ở Philippine, cơn siêu bão đã tàn sát cả khu vục phố xá, với hàng chục ngàn người dân chết, kẻ sống đói khổ không nhà cửa… nhưng Nhà nước chính phủ tỉnh bơ tham nhũng, để mặc dân và chỉ gửi quân đội cảnh sát đến để TRẤN ÁP sự đòi hỏi của quần chúng.


Đấy là chứng cớ rõ rệt  KHÔNG CÓ MỘT NHÀ NƯỚC CHÍNH PHỦ NÀO là BẢO VỆ CHĂM LO DÂN hết. Bọn chúng KHÔNG CÓ KHẢ NĂNG, và KHÔNG CÓ CHỦ TRƯƠNG, tất cả chỉ là HUYỀN THOẠI MÊ TÍN ĐỒN THỔI và NHỒI NHÉT bằng GIÁO DỤC qua hàng ngàn năm…


Chính người dân mới thật sự tự lo cho chính họ trong bất cứ tình huống nào. Họ phải trả giá tất cả mọi mặt, nhưng bọn chính phủ lại nhân danh để thánh hóa sự tồn tại của vai trò chính phủ nhà nước. Thật sự chính định chế nhà nước chính phủ đã ngăn chặn khả năng tự lập, tự trách nhiệm của người dân, để buộc họ có cảm giác “nương nhờ” vào Nhà nước.

Hãy lấy thí dụ Việt Nam. Cái gọi là “chính sách Mở Cửa” thực chất là gì? Trước khi mở cửa, bọn nhà nước Việt Cộng ra luật ngăn sông cấm chợ tự do buôn bán kinh tế v.v đủ trò. Một kýgạo, một ký trà, một ký cà phê đều là quốc cấm! Mở một dịch vụ, công ăn việc làm, sản xuất chế tạo v.v đều bị ngăn cấm, chỉ là độc quyền của quốc doanh.

“Mở cửa” là tháo gỡ những luật ngu xuẩn phản tự do tiến bộ này để người dân tự do kinh doanh trao đổi sáng tạo, mở dịch vụ v.v  Nghĩa là “hợp pháp hóa” những thứ ‘bất hợp pháp” trước đây, để người dân tiếp tục CÔNG KHAI (không còn phải làm “chui” nữa) tự quyền lo cho đời sống kinh tế trao đổi của họ. Chứ không phải “Mở Cửa” là nhà nước đem tiền của đến tận cửa phân phát cho từng cửa nhà!!!

Giờ đây, ở mức độ quốc tế, tập đoàn nhà nước chúng đang lại tiếp tục trò bí mật thương thảo cùng nhau để đặt ra những LUẬT LỆ RÀNG BUỘC SINH HOẠT KÍNH TẾ SÁNG TẠO của QUẦN CHÚNG khắp nơi cho quyền lợi và quyền lực của tập đoàn cầm quyền, rồi BIẾN ÂM MƯU này thành LUẬT QUỐC TẾ, luật pháp QUỐC GIA để  áp đặt nhân dân quần chúng phải chấp nhận nai lưng và trả giá cho quyền lợi của bọn chúng .

nkptc 

=====

WikiLeaks publishes secret draft chapter of Trans-Pacific Partnership

Treaty negotiated in secret between 12 nations ‘would trample over individual rights and free expression’, says Julian Assange

WikiLeaks has released the draft text of a chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement, a multilateral free-trade treaty currently being negotiated in secret by 12 Pacific Rim nations.
The full agreement covers a number of areas, but the chapter published by WikiLeaks focuses on intellectual property rights, an area of law which has effects in areas as diverse as pharmaceuticals and civil liberties.
Negotiations for the TPP have included representatives from the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Mexico, Malaysia, Chile, Singapore, Peru, Vietnam, and Brunei, but have been conducted behind closed doors. Even members of the US Congress were only allowed to view selected portions of the documents under supervision.
“We’re really worried about a process which is so difficult for those who take an interest in these agreements to deal with. We rely on leaks like these to know what people are talking about,” says Peter Bradwell, policy director of the London-based Open Rights Group.
“Lots of people in civil society have stressed that being more transparent, and talking about the text on the table, is crucial to give treaties like this any legitimacy. We shouldn’t have to rely on leaks to start a debate about what’s in then.”
The 30,000 word intellectual property chapter contains proposals to increase the term of patents, including medical patents, beyond 20 years, and lower global standards for patentability. It also pushes for aggressive measures to prevent hackers breaking copyright protection, although that comes with some exceptions: protection can be broken in the course of “lawfully authorised activities carried out by government employees, agents, or contractors for the purpose of law enforcement, intelligence, essential security, or similar governmental purposes”.
WikiLeaks claims that the text shows America attempting to enforce its highly restrictive vision of intellectual property on the world – and on itself. “The US administration is aggressively pushing the TPP through the US legislative process on the sly,” says Julian Assange, the founder and editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks, who is living in the Ecuadorean embassy in London following an extradition dispute with Sweden, where he faces allegations of rape.
“If instituted,” Assange continues, “the TPP’s intellectual property regime would trample over individual rights and free expression, as well as ride roughshod over the intellectual and creative commons. If you read, write, publish, think, listen, dance, sing or invent; if you farm or consume food; if you’re ill now or might one day be ill, the TPP has you in its crosshairs.”
Just Foreign Policy, a group dedicated to reforming US foreign policy, managed to crowdfund a $70,000 (£43,700) bounty for Wikileaks if the organisation managed to leak the TPP text. “Our pledge, as individuals, is to donate this money to WikiLeaks should it leak the document we seek.” The conditions the group set have not yet been met, however, because it required the full text, not individual chapters.
Related to the TPP is a second secret trade agreement, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), which ties together regulatory practices in the US and EU. George Monbiot, writing in this paper, referred to the treaty as a “monstrous assault on democracy”. Ken Clarke, the minister without portfolio, replied that it “would see our economy grow by an extra £10bn per annum”.
Campaign group Fight for the Future has already collected over 100,000 signatures in an online petition against what it calls the “extreme Internet censorship plan: contained in the TPP.
Evan Greer, campaign manager for Fight for the Future, said: “The documents revealed by WikiLeaks make it clear why the US government has worked so hard to keep the TPP negotiatons secret. While claiming to champion an open Internet, the Obama administration is quietly pushing for extreme, SOPA-like copyright policies that benefit Hollywood and giant pharmaceutical companies at the expense of our most basic rights to freedom of expression online.”

Cities Mobilize For Coordinated Actions Against TPP

Print Friendly

Over 10 Cities Mobilize Coordinated High Visibility Actions To Shine a Light on Secret TransPacific Partnership Trade Deal
TPP protest sign from Petrovich lawn
[Seattle (and 10 other cities)]– To pull the TPP out of the shadows and into the light of public scrutiny, citizens in over 10 cities are taking their messages to interstate overpasses, prominent monuments, and busy city streets using coordinated daytime and nighttime high visibility tactics. They will deploy giant 30-foot banners saying No New NAFTA, mobilize LED light panels saying “(thumbs up) Democracy, STOP The TPP,” and bright light cannons with messages like “Corporate Tribunals WTF?.”
The TPP has been called NAFTA on steroids, a “corporate coup,” and concerned citizens from across the nation are calling on congress to Flush It. The TPP, the largest ever of it’s kind, is a race to the bottom international agreement on domestic and international policies of food safety, internet freedom, medicine costs, financial regulation, and the environment.
Masked as a trade deal, the agreement has been negotiated under supervision of 600 unelected corporate “trade advisors” while the text has been hidden from members of congress, the press, and the public. What has been learned about the TPP has come through leaked texts, and is alarming to members of congress worried about sovereign powers being negotiated away, public health officials, labor representatives, environmental groups, and advocates of consumer issues.
While Congress is constitutionally required to negotiate any international treaties, Fast Track would forfeit the Congress’ responsibility and the public’s right to weigh in on the TPP negotiations.
TPP protestsThese coordinated citizen’s actions coincide with ongoing TPP negotiations taking place in Salt Lake City, Utah from November 12th – 24th and with a anticipated release by congressperson Rosa DeLauro and George Miller detailing the historic opposition to “Fast Track” among congress. In September, to the surprise of secret service, members of the Backbone Campaign “redecorated” the United States Trade Representatives office by scaling the building and unfurling giant banners demanding a release of the TPP text. The coordinated day of action and the anticipated statements by congress reveals the growing opposition to the TransPacific Partnership.
WHO: Backbone Campaign, Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch, Washington Fair Trade Coalition, Popular Resistance, and more.
WHAT: Visibility Actions in Seattle and over 10 cities shining a light on secret trade agreement.

WHERE: SEATTLE (Other locations can be found at event pages below) I-5 Overpass at NE 50th Street and 7th Avenue NE Seattle WA
WHEN: 5 – 6 pm (in Seattle)
VISUALS: Giant Light Projections on public and government buildings, bright LED activist scrabble on freeway overpasses, and giant freeway overpass banners with messages like “NO New NAFTA,” “TPP Dismantles Democracy,” and “Corporate Tribunals WTF?” (A sampling of what to expect can be found here.

To speak with organizers of the day of action please contact Bill Moyer at 206-356-9980 or Eric Ross at 805-776-3882
Info and Collaborator Web Sites:
FlushTheTPP.Org
Popular Resistance
Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch
Washington Fair Trade Coalition
Oregon Fair Trade Coalition
TPP Talking Points
Expose The TPP 

dfsfdfd

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (IPRs)By Dr Vandana ShivaToday the economic survival of third world communities is under severe threat from the new monopolistic protections being carved out for transnational corporations (TNCs), through IPR regimes. In fact, in the free trade and trade liberalisation regime, which is supposed to end protectionism, IPRs are the main instrument of this new form of protectionism.
The new protectionism for TNCs through IPRs is becoming the major means of dismantling both local and national economies as well as national sovereignty; through piracy of both material as well as the intellectual and cultural resources.
IPRs: The Privatisation of Biodiversity and Biodiversity Related Knowledge
The thrust of the western IPR regimes in the area of biodiversity is diametrically opposed to indigenous knowledge systems. Knowledge is considered to be the product of individual creativity, based on western scientific thought and systems of knowledge creation and gathering whereby the resource base is merely viewed as ‘raw material’. In this paradigm IPRs represent the property rights to the products of mind, thereby resulting in knowledge and creativity being so narrowly defined that the creativity of nature and non-western knowledge systems have been ignored.
The two categories of IPRs that have a direct impact on the erosion of prior rights of communities, are patents and plant breeders’ rights. Plant breeders’ rights negate the contribution of Third World farmers as breeders and hence undermine farmers’ rights. Patents allow the usurpation of indigenous knowledge as a western invention through minor tinkering or trivial translation.
The UPOV (Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plant) Convention represents a western devised form of plant variety protection, other than patenting. This form of intellectual property rights protection, referred to as a Plant Breeders’ Right (PBR), is being promoted as the most favourable form of adoption under the sui generis option for developing nations by the developed nations. But according to the 1991 Revision of the UPOV Convention, newly introduced clauses severely restrict farmers’ rights by removing all rights for them to save seed for sowing for the following year, as well as removing researchers’ rights to save the seed of new protected varieties. The protected variety may still be used as an initial source of variation for the creation of new varieties but such new varieties cannot be marketed or sold without the plant breeders’ rights’ holder allowing it.
There now exists very little difference in restrictions set by Plant Breeders’ Rights and that set by patents for farmers. UPOV is a monopoly system that embodies the philosophy of the industrialised north who want to protect the interests of corporate biotechnology and powerful seed companies. If India does not evolve its own sui generis system centred on community intellectual rights of farmers and adopts the UPOV model, a rights regime will have been created that protects the rights of the seed industry but offers no protection to the rights of farmers. This in turn will allow a free flow of agricultural biodiversity based on centuries of breeding from the fields of Indian farmers, while the farmers have to pay royalties to the seed industry for the varieties derived from farmers’ varieties.
A frequent comment heard in scientific and lay circles, is that “we should patent all our traditional knowledge and biodiversity.” However, neither traditional knowledge nor biodiversity can be patented by indigenous practitioners because for indigenous societies, it is not ‘novel’, it is ancient. The reason that the collective and cumulative innovation of millions of people of thousands of years can be ‘pirated’ and claimed as an ‘innovation’ of western trained scientists or corporations, is because of two reasons. The first reason is the colonial hangover of the idea that science is unique to the west, and indigenous knowledge systems cannot be treated as scientific.
The second reason is that countries like the US, where most pirated indigenous innovations are filed for patenting, do not recognise the existing knowledge of other countries is prior art. Thus, while patent regimes offer no protection to indigenous communities for their common innovation and their common resources, they allow the appropriation of their biodiversity and knowledge by scientists and commercial interests of other cultures, including members of the ‘modern’ scientific culture in their own societies.

IPRs: An Instrument of Piracy
IPR regimes in the context of ‘free trade’ and ‘trade liberalisation’ thus become instruments of piracy at three levels:

Resource piracy in which the biological and natural resources of communities and the country are freely taken, without recognition or permission, and are used to build up global economies. For example, the transfer of basmati varieties of rice from India to build up the rice economy of the US; the free flow of neem seeds from the farms, fields and commons to corporations like W. R. Grace for export.
Intellectual and cultural piracy in which the cultural and intellectual heritage of communities and the country is freely taken without recognition or permission and is used for claiming IPRs such as patents, and trademarks even though the primary innovation and creativity has not taken place through corporate investment. For instance, the use by US corporations of the trade name ‘basmati’ for their aromatic rice, or Pepsi’s use of the trade name ‘Bikaneri Bhujia’.
Economic piracy in which the domestic and international markets are usurped through the use of trade names and IPRs, thereby destroying local economies and national economies where the original innovation took place and hence wiping out the livelihoods and economic surivival of millions. For example. US rice traders usurping European markets; Grace usurping the US market from small scale Indian producers of neem based biopesticides.
Common Property Rights: An Alternative to IPRs
IPRs systems evolved in industrialised countries reflected in the TRIPs agreement only recognise western knowledge systems as scientific and formal and non-western knowledge systems are regarded as unscientific and informal. The creation of monopoly rights to biodiversity utilisation through its claim to the creation of ‘novelty’ can have serious implications for erosion of national and community rights to biodiversity and devaluation of India’s indigenous knowledge. TRIPs gives countries the option of formulating its own sui generis regime for plants as an alternative to patent protection. Collective rights can be a strong candidate for such sui generis systems for agricutural biodiversity and medicinal plant biodiversity. Therefore, it is crucial that community held and utilised biodiversity knowledge systems are accorded legal recognition as the ‘common property’ owned by the communities concerned. Building such an alternative is essential to prevent biodiversity and knowledge monopolisation by an unbalanced mechanistic and non-innovative implementation of TRIPs or in response to Special 301 threats from the US.


Recommended Literature on Intellectual Property Rights:

  • Protection of Plants, People and Intellectual Rights: Proposed Amendment to the Draft Plant Varieties Act by RFSTE
  • The Enclosure and Recovery of the Commons by V. Shiva, A. H. Jafri, G. Bedi, R. Holla-Bhar
  • Protecting our Biological and Intellectual Heritage in the Age of Biopiracy by Dr Vandana Shiva
  • Future of our Seeds, Future of our Farmers: Agricultural Biodiversity, Intellectual Property Rights and Farmers’ Rights by V. Shiva 

This article was orginally published at the website of Dr Shiva’s Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, URL: http://www.indiaserver.com/betas/vshiva/
Published here with the permission of the author


“Genetically Engineered Food – Safety Problems”
Published by PSRAST
Siteguide   Starting points   Website search   Site Map   Home page

News   Introductory articles   Health hazards   Environmental hazards

Global issues   Safety issues   Alternatives to GE   FAQ

About us   What You can do   Membership   E-mail   How to sponsor us