Click here to show or hide the menubar.

Spy in a Bag

A picture named NA-565-Art-SM.jpg

Direct [link] to the mp3 file

ShowNotes Archive of links and Assets (clips etc) 565.nashownotes.com

Sign Up for the newsletter

New: Directory Archive of Shownotes (includes all audio and video assets used) nashownotes.com

The No Agenda News Network- noagendanewsnetwork.com

RSS Podcast Feed

Get the No Agenda News App for your iPhone and iPad

Torrents of each episode via BitLove

New! BitTorrent Sync the No Agenda Show

NA-565-Art-BIG

Art By: James V

See All The Art in the Generator

Spy in a Bag

Executive Producers: Yakov Kravets, Sir David Foley Duke of Silicon Valley, Sir Lennart Renkema, Luke Rayner, Sir Random Hillbilly, Elena Cvecko

Associate Executive Producers: Sir Werner Flipsen, Kevin Hart, Sir Sander Hoksbergen, Sir Gene Naftulyev Baron de Marriot Sherrif of Texas, Dame Joan d'Audiffret, Andrew Wilson, Anonymous

565 Club Member: Executive Producers: Yakov Kravets, Sir David Foley Duke of Silicon Valley

Become a member of the 566 Club, support the show here

Knighthoods: Sir Werner Flipsen --> WiFi Knight

Art By: James V

ShowNotes Archive of links and Assets (clips etc) 565.nashownotes.com

Sign Up for the newsletter

New: Directory Archive of Shownotes (includes all audio and video assets used) nashownotes.com

The No Agenda News Network- noagendanewsnetwork.com

RSS Podcast Feed

Get the No Agenda News App for your iPhone and iPad

Torrents of each episode via BitLove

New! BitTorrent Sync the No Agenda Show

Search

PR

The Black Cat & The Raven | Carolina Theatre - Downtown Durham, North Carolina

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Nov 2013 03:57

RetroClassics Film Series presents

Universal Monsters Collection

UNIVERSAL MONSTERS COLLECTION

THE BLACK CAT(US, NR, 66 min, 1934)Bela Lugosi and Boris Karloff square off as decades-old nemeses who meet for a fateful showdown on the very battlefield where Karloff's dark priest sacrificed his own army and framed Lugosi's good doctor for the crime. Karloff plays a demonic architect who stole Lugosi's wife and built his home on the graves of his victims. One of the finest horror films to emerge from Universal's golden age of horror.

THE RAVEN(US, NR, 62 min, 1935)Dr. Vollin (Bela Lugosi) comes out of retirement to save the life of a wealthy judge's daughter. After restoring her, he cooks up a scheme to kidnap the woman and kill her fianc(C) and father in his Edgar Allen Poe-inspired torture dungeon. To do his dirty work, Vollin turns a wanted criminal (Boris Karloff) into a hideous monster to guarantee his subservience.

What Jim Says...What more can I say about the inclusion of the Universal Monsters Collection? What surprises me most is how many films are part of the series. According to some lists, there are more than 70 movies in the official canon. (I thought there was only a dozen or so.) Going in, I knew it would probably be unwise to expect Universal to have 35mm prints of these lesser-known works, and I was not proven wrong. Thankfully, the studio did have a lot of these titles beautifully re-mastered for digital projection and, most likely, that's the only way we're ever gonna see them on a big screen from this point in time onward. I polled the Retro fans about which films to select for this season's Universal Monster program. I really expected a strong showing for 1943's The Phantom of the Opera. Instead, the voting was overwhelmingly skewed toward this billing of Karloff and Lugosi.

namoviepr.curry.com

Distraction of the Week

BBC News - MI6 spy Gareth Williams 'probably an accident', police say

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 11:37

13 November 2013Last updated at 06:28 ET The death of MI6 spy Gareth Williams, whose body was found in a padlocked sports bag, was probably an accident, UK police have said.

Last year, a coroner said it was likely Mr Williams, 31, from Anglesey, had been unlawfully killed.

But Deputy Assistant Commissioner Martin Hewitt said a review of evidence had found "it was more probable" no other person was present when he died.

The code-breaker's body was found naked at his London flat in August 2010.

At the time of his death, Mr Williams - originally from Holyhead in north Wales - had been on a three-year secondment with MI6 from his job as a communications officer at the GCHQ "listening post" in Cheltenham, Gloucestershire.

Police officers had gone to his flat in Pimlico after colleagues raised concerns for his welfare.

His body was discovered inside a zipped-up red North Face sports holdall, in the empty bath of his bathroom.

It had taken a week for MI6 to investigate Mr Williams' disappearance, meaning a post-mortem was carried out nine days after he died - when there had already been extensive decomposition of his body.

The examination by a Home Office pathologist failed to determine the cause of death.

Deep-clean 'fallacy'During a seven-day inquest in May 2012, the question of whether Mr Williams could have padlocked himself into a bag in a bath was central.

Coroner Fiona Wilcox concluded that "most of the fundamental questions in relation to how Gareth died remain unanswered".

But she said he was, "on the balance of probabilities", unlawfully killed.

At a briefing on Wednesday, DAC Hewitt said he was satisfied that it was "theoretically possible" Mr Williams could have padlocked the bag from the inside.

But he said there was no evidence that the MI6 officer had intended to take his own life or that his death was connected to his work.

There were about 10 to 15 traces of DNA in the flat from which it had not been possible to gain full DNA profiles, but all other DNA profiles and fingerprints had been eliminated, said DAC Hewitt.

He also said there was no evidence that Mr Williams' flat had been forensically cleaned, adding it was a "fallacy" that it had been deep-cleaned in such a way that only certain DNA was left in the premises.

Mr Williams' family are understood to be standing by the coroner's findings.

MI6 spy found dead in a bag 'died in a tragic accident after locking himself in holdall', police will say in official verdict.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: WT news feed

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 12:03

Gareth Williams found dead in his Central London flat in August 201031-year-old's death was ruled to be 'probably' foul play by a coronerBut Scotland Yard announced that he seems to have locked himself in bagFamily believe he was killed and refuse to accept result of investigationBy Hugo Gye

PUBLISHED: 03:16 EST, 13 November 2013 | UPDATED: 06:16 EST, 13 November 2013

20shares

70

Viewcomments

Finding: Police have announced that MI6 spy Gareth Williams probably locked himself in the holdall where he was found dead in August 2010

The MI6 spy found dead in a holdall bag probably locked himself in and died by accident, police said today.

Gareth Williams' mysterious death has been the subject of fierce speculation since his body was found in his Central London flat three years ago.

A new review of the case by the Metropolitan Police has concluded that there is no evidence his death was the result of foul play, although they were unable to say for sure how he died.

The finding contravenes the verdict of a coroner who last year ruled that Mr Williams had 'probably' been killed by someone else.

Scotland Yard detectives said that since it was possible for the codebreaker to climb in to the bag and lock it unaided, it is not necessary to posit any outside involvement.

They added that there was no evidence of anyone else being in his flat at the time of his death, and no sign that the home had undergone a 'deep clean' to avoid incriminating a third party.

Deputy Assistant Commissioner Martin Hewitt said: 'With the conclusion of the investigation, the Metropolitan Police's position is that, on balance, it is a more probable conclusion that there was no other person present when Gareth died.

'But the reality is that for both hypotheses, there exist evidential contradictions and gaps in our understanding.'

Although he said that Mr Williams' death was 'most probably' an accident, he admitted: 'No evidence has been identified to establish the full circumstances of Gareth's death beyond all reasonable doubt.'

However, the family of the 31-year-old disagree with the verdict, according to police, and continue to support the coroner's theory that he was unlawfully killed.

They said in a statement: 'We are naturally disappointed that it is still not possible to state with certainty how Gareth died and the fact that the circumstances of his death are still unknown adds to our grief.

'We consider that on the basis of the facts known at present the coroner's verdict accurately reflects the circumstances of Gareth's death.'

Mystery: Last year a coroner ruled that someone else was involved in the codebreaker's death

Mr Hewitt admitted that the police and MI6 had failed to co-operate fully, but said it was 'beyond credibility' that his investigation had been deliberately deceived by anyone trying to hide the truth about Mr Williams' death.

'I do not believe that I have had the wool pulled over my eyes,' he said. 'I believe that what we are dealing with is a tragic unexplained death.'

Mr Williams, who was found dead inside the locked bag in the bath of his flat in Pimlico in August 2010, is known to have had an interest in escapology.

Coroner Fiona Wilcox last year ruled that the spy would not have been able to lock himself in the bag and was therefore likely to have died at somebody else's hands.

But within days of the verdict investigators claimed that it was in fact possible for a skilled escapologist to climb in to the red North Face holdall and lock it from the inside.

Last image: Mr Williams pictured on CCTV at a Tube station shortly before his death

Police launched a review of the case following the inquest, over concerns that some evidence had been handled improperly.

The investigation apparently included interviews with senior officials from MI6, where Mr Williams was working on secondment from GCHQ.

Confirmation that the spy's death was nothing more than a tragic accident could put to rest the various theories which have attached themselves to the case.

It has long been suspected that Mr Williams could have been targeted by foreign agents because of his highly sensitive MI6 work.

Another theory was that the Russian mafia assassinated him in a bid to stop him investigating money-laundering networks.

Others suspected that his death might have been the result of a sex game gone wrong, after it was claimed that he had close links with London's drag and bondage scenes.

Share or comment on this article

"Probably an Accident," Say Police About Death of Spy Found Inside Locked Bag - Lowering the Bar

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Nov 2013 00:02

After a three-year investigation, the Metropolitan Police have concluded that their initial suspicions of foul play were unfounded in the case of Gareth Williams, a 31-year-old intelligence agent whose naked body was found in his bathtub inside a padlocked bag.

Although a spokesman acknowledged that some people'--like the coroner'--had drawn what seemed to be the "logical inference" that someone else was involved, he said that based on all the evidence, or actually the lack of it, police had decided that the death was "probably an accident" and were closing the case.

Williams, described as a "math genius," was a communications officer at GCHQ, the UK's equivalent of the NSA'--"equivalent" in terms of its respect for the law as well as its function. See, e.g., "Leaked memos reveal CGHQ efforts to keep mass surveillance secret," The Guardian (Oct. 25, 2013) (quoting memos expressing concern about a "public debate which might lead to legal challenges"). He had been "secunded" to the Secret Intelligence Service, often known as "MI6," at the time of his death, however. Because MI6 handles primarily foreign intelligence (MI5 is the domestic agency), it works closely with CGHQ, as you would expect.

Occasionally their directors are even forced to testify together, as happened last week. See Michael White, "Britain's spy chiefs make daylight debut like a trio of Draculas in winter sun," The Guardian (Nov. 7, 2013).

After Williams had failed to show up at work for a week, an officer found his body in the tub inside a fully zipped-up bag, the zippers of which had been locked with a padlock. None of his DNA was found on the lock and his prints were not found on the edge of the bathtub. No drugs or alcohol were found in his system. There were some traces of DNA in the flat from which "it had not been possible to gain full DNA profiles," but no conclusive evidence that third parties had been present. There was some evidence that Williams may have engaged in certain bondage practices'--he once had to call for help after tying himself to a bed'--and police apparently believe this might explain why he might have sealed himself in a duffel bag.

Still, there was that nagging issue as to how he might have locked the bag from the inside.

At the coroner's inquest, an expert witness (described as "an expert on confined spaces") who is about the same size as Williams said he had tried and failed to do this no fewer than 300 times. The bag is big enough, he testified. "You can get into the bag and you can zip the bag up. That's not a problem."

So what IS the problem?

Turns out the problem is locking yourself in, although you wouldn't think it'd take 300 attempts to be sure of that. "You can't access the lock from the inside without damaging the bag, so it cannot be padlocked from the inside," he said. "Even Harry Houdini wouldn't have managed it."

Houdini could not be reached for comment.

The coroner concluded that Williams had been "unlawfully killed" by a person or persons unknown, and his body then put inside the bag after his death. But after another year of investigation'--and an unspecified level of "co-operation" from MI6'--it seems that a small thing like absolute physical impossibility has not deterred the police from concluding that Williams managed to do this himself. In fact, the spokesman said he was satisfied it was "theoretically possible" that Williams had locked himself inside the bag, although the report did not explain why. Maybe the 301st time is the charm?

I'm sure this sequence is coincidental

"Now at the end of our investigation," the spokesman said, "based on the evidence, or where we have been unable to find positive evidence, we believe that it is a more probable conclusion that there was no other person present when Gareth died." Well, "more probable" than what? If the only other hypothesis was that "Voldemort did it," I would agree. Otherwise I think the only conclusion you can draw from the lack of evidence is that you can't draw any conclusions at all.

Maybe I'm being too cynical here, though, because it's not like this is the first time this sort of thing has happened. See "Police Pretty Sure Man Tied Himself Inside Sack and Shot Himself Before Jumping Into River," Lowering the Bar (Aug. 19, 2013). On the other hand, that sequence of events was at least physically possible. Just really, really unlikely.

TPP

------------------------------------------------

WikiLeaks Releases Full Text Of Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) - disinformation

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:24

The perceived ills of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) has been well documented here at disinformation, but until now the text has not been publicly available. WikiLeaks has rectified that:

Today, 13 November 2013, WikiLeaks released the secret negotiated draft text for the entire TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) Intellectual Property Rights Chapter. The TPP is the largest-ever economic treaty, encompassing nations representing more than 40 per cent of the world's GDP. The WikiLeaks release of the text comes ahead of the decisive TPP Chief Negotiators summit in Salt Lake City, Utah, on 19-24 November 2013. The chapter published by WikiLeaks is perhaps the most controversial chapter of the TPP due to its wide-ranging effects on medicines, publishers, internet services, civil liberties and biological patents. Significantly, the released text includes the negotiation positions and disagreements between all 12 prospective member states.

The TPP is the forerunner to the equally secret US-EU pact TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership), for which President Obama initiated US-EU negotiations in January 2013. Together, the TPP and TTIP will cover more than 60 per cent of global GDP. Both pacts exclude China.

Since the beginning of the TPP negotiations, the process of drafting and negotiating the treaty's chapters has been shrouded in an unprecedented level of secrecy. Access to drafts of the TPP chapters is shielded from the general public. Members of the US Congress are only able to view selected portions of treaty-related documents in highly restrictive conditions and under strict supervision. It has been previously revealed that only three individuals in each TPP nation have access to the full text of the agreement, while 600 'trade advisers' '' lobbyists guarding the interests of large US corporations such as Chevron, Halliburton, Monsanto and Walmart '' are granted privileged access to crucial sections of the treaty text.

The TPP negotiations are currently at a critical stage. The Obama administration is preparing to fast-track the TPP treaty in a manner that will prevent the US Congress from discussing or amending any parts of the treaty. Numerous TPP heads of state and senior government figures, including President Obama, have declared their intention to sign and ratify the TPP before the end of 2013.

WikiLeaks' Editor-in-Chief Julian Assange stated: ''The US administration is aggressively pushing the TPP through the US legislative process on the sly.'' The advanced draft of the Intellectual Property Rights Chapter, published by WikiLeaks on 13 November 2013, provides the public with the fullest opportunity so far to familiarise themselves with the details and implications of the TPP.

The 95-page, 30,000-word IP Chapter lays out provisions for instituting a far-reaching, transnational legal and enforcement regime, modifying or replacing existing laws in TPP member states. The Chapter's subsections include agreements relating to patents (who may produce goods or drugs), copyright (who may transmit information), trademarks (who may describe information or goods as authentic) and industrial design.

The longest section of the Chapter '' 'Enforcement' '' is devoted to detailing new policing measures, with far-reaching implications for individual rights, civil liberties, publishers, internet service providers and internet privacy, as well as for the creative, intellectual, biological and environmental commons. Particular measures proposed include supranational litigation tribunals to which sovereign national courts are expected to defer, but which have no human rights safeguards. The TPP IP Chapter states that these courts can conduct hearings with secret evidence. The IP Chapter also replicates many of the surveillance and enforcement provisions from the shelved SOPA and ACTA treaties.

The consolidated text obtained by WikiLeaks after the 26-30 August 2013 TPP meeting in Brunei '' unlike any other TPP-related documents previously released to the public '' contains annotations detailing each country's positions on the issues under negotiation. Julian Assange emphasises that a ''cringingly obsequious'' Australia is the nation most likely to support the hardline position of US negotiators against other countries, while states including Vietnam, Chile and Malaysia are more likely to be in opposition. Numerous key Pacific Rim and nearby nations '' including Argentina, Ecuador, Colombia, South Korea, Indonesia, the Philippines and, most significantly, Russia and China '' have not been involved in the drafting of the treaty.

In the words of WikiLeaks' Editor-in-Chief Julian Assange, ''If instituted, the TPP's IP 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.''

Current TPP negotiation member states are the United States, Japan, Mexico, Canada, Australia, Malaysia, Chile, Singapore, Peru, Vietnam, New Zealand and Brunei.

Read the full secret TPP treaty IP chapter here

Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:03

WikiLeaks Release of Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)Advanced Intellectual Property Chapter for All 12 Nations with Negotiating Positions (August 30 2013 consolidated bracketed negotiating text)

This Document Contains TPP CONFIDENTIAL Information

TPP Negotiations, R18

MODIFIED HANDLING AUTHORIZED

IP Group

Intellectual Property [Rights] Chapter

30 August2013

For the purposes of this Chapter:

Intellectual propertyrefers to all categories of intellectual property that are the subject of Sections 1 through 7 of Part II of the TRIPS Agreement [].

[NZ/CL/PE/VN/BN/MY/SG/CA/MXpropose; US/JP oppose: The objectives of this Chapter are:

Enhance the role of intellectual property in promoting economic and social development, particularly in relation to the new digital economy, technological innovation, the [PE: generation,] transfer and dissemination of technology and trade;

reduce impediments to trade and investment by promoting deeper economic integration through effective and adequate creation, utilization, protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights, taking into account the different levels of economic development and capacity as well as differences in national legal systems;

maintain a balance between the rights of intellectual property holders and the legitimate interests of users and the community in subject matter protected by intellectual property.

protect the ability of Parties to identify, promote access to and preserve the public domain;

Ensure that measures and procedures to enforce intellectual property rights do not themselves become barriers to legitimate trade;

Promote operational efficiency of intellectual property systems, in particular through quality examination procedures during the granting of intellectual property rights.]

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY/VN propose. g. The protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights should contribute to the promotion of technological innovation and to the transfer and dissemination of technology, to the mutual advantage of producers and users of technological knowledge and in a manner conducive to social and economic welfare, and to a balance of rights and obligations.

Support each Party's right to protect public health, including by facilitating timely access to affordable medicines.]

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY propose : 1. Each Party may, in formulating or amending its laws and regulations, adopt measures necessary to protect public health and nutrition, and to promote the public interest in sectors of vital importance to its socio-economic and technological development, provided that such measures are consistent with the provisions of this Chapter.

2. Each Party may adopt or maintain appropriate measures, provided that they are consistent with the provisions of this Chapter, to prevent the abuse of intellectual property rights by right holders or the resort to practices which unreasonably restrain trade or adversely affect the international transfer of technology.

3. Each Party may adopt or maintain, consistently with the other provisions of this Chapter, appropriate measures to prevent or control practices or conditions that may in particular cases constitute an abuse of intellectual property rights having an adverse effect on competition in the relevant market.]]

Each Party shall give effect to the provisions of this Chapter. A Party may, but shall not be obliged to, provide more extensive protection for, and enforcement of, intellectual property rights under its law than is required by this Chapter, provided that such protection and enforcement does not contravene the provisions of this Chapter. Each Party shall be free to determine the appropriate method of implementing the provisions of this Chapter within its own legal system and practice.

The Parties affirm their commitment to the Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health(WT/MIN(01)/DEC/2).

The Parties have reached the following understandings regarding this Chapter:

(a) The obligations of this Chapter do not and should not prevent a Party from taking measures to protect public health by promoting access to medicines for all, in particular concerning cases such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, [US oppose: chagas] and other epidemics as well as circumstances of extreme urgency or national emergency. Accordingly, while reiterating their commitment to this Chapter, the Parties affirm that this Chapter can and should be interpreted and implemented in a manner supportive of each Party's right to protect public health and, in particular, to promote access to medicines for all.

(b) In recognition of the commitment to access to medicines that are supplied in accordance with the Decision of the General Council of 30 August 2003 on the Implementation of Paragraph Six of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health (WT/L/540) and the WTO General Council Chairman's statement accompanying the Decision (JOB(03)/177, WT/GC/M/82) [SG/BN/VN/PE/CL/CA/MY/NZ/US/AU/MX/JP: , as well as the Decision on the Amendment of the TRIPS Agreement, adopted by the General Council, 6 December 2005 US/MY propose: and the WTO General Council Chairperson's statement accompanying the Decision (WT/GC/M/100)] (collectively, the "TRIPS/health solution"), this Chapter does not and should not prevent the effective utilization of the TRIPS/health solution.

(c) With respect to the aforementioned matters, if [US oppose: any waiver of any provision of the TRIPS Agreement, or any] [US propose: an] amendment of the TRIPS Agreement, enters into force with respect to the Parties, and a Party's application of a measure in conformity with that [US oppose: waiver or] amendment [US oppose: is contrary to the obligations of] [US propose: violates] this Chapter, the Parties shall immediately consult in order to adapt this Chapter as appropriate in the light of the [US oppose: waiver or] amendment.

1. [US: Further to Article -AA.2,] the Parties affirm their existing rights and obligations with respect to each other under the TRIPS Agreement [CL/PE: and any other multilateral agreements relating to intellectual property to which they are party] [MX propose: The TRIPS Agreement is incorporated into and made part of this Agreement,mutatis mutandis.][CA Propose: 1. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, nothing in this Chapter shall be construed as a limitation to the flexibilities, exceptions and limitations set out on the TRIPS Agreement and any other multilateral agreement relating to intellectual property to which they are party.]

[CL/NZ propose; US/AU/JP/MX oppose: 2. Nothing in this Chapter shall derogate from existing rights and obligations that Parties have to each other under the TRIPS Agreement or other multilateral agreements, such as those concluded or administered under the auspices of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the World Health Organization (WHO) and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).]

[CA propose; MX/US oppose: 2. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, the Parties shall interpret this Chapter in such a way as to be [complementary to / compatible with] their rights and obligations under multilateral treaties concluded or administered under the auspices of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) to which they are party, especially with regards to measures aimed at protecting public health and protecting equal access to knowledge and food.]

[CL/NZ/VN/BN/MY/PE:3. [Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter,] Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed as a limitation to the flexibilities, exceptions and limitations set out on the TRIPS Agreement and any other multilateral agreement relating to intellectual property to which they are party, especially with regards to measures aimed at protecting equal access to knowledge, food and public health.]]

[US/AU propose; CL/NZ/MY/PE/BN/VN/CA/JP/MXoppose:4. Each Party shall ratify or accede to the following agreements by the date of entry into force of this Agreement:

Patent Cooperation Treaty(1970), as amended in 1979;

Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property(1967);

Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works(1971);

Convention Relating to the Distribution of Programme-Carrying Signals Transmitted by Satellite(1974);

Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks(1989);

Budapest Treaty on the International Recognition of the Deposit of Microorganisms for the Purposes of Patent Procedure(1977), as amended in 1980;

International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants[MX propose: (1961) as revised in 1972, 1978 or] (1991) (UPOV Convention);

Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks(2006);

WIPO Copyright Treaty(1996); and

WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty(1996).]

[US/AU/NZ/PE/CA/JP/SG/MXpropose : 5. Each Party shall notify the WTO of its acceptance of the Protocol amending the TRIPS Agreement done at Geneva on December 6, 2005.]

[US/SG propose; CL/MY/NZ/PE//VN/BN/CA/JP/MXoppose: 6. Each Party shall make all reasonable efforts to ratify or accede to the following agreements by the date of entry into force of the Agreement:

[SG oppose: (a)Patent Law Treaty(2000); and]

(b)Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs(1999).]

1. In respect of all categories of intellectual property covered in this Chapter, each Party shall accord to nationals [] of the other Party treatment no less favorable than it accords to its own nationals with regard to the protection [] [NZ/BN/MY/CA/JP/SG/VN oppose: and enjoyment of such intellectual property rights, and any benefits derived from such rights.][NZ/VN/BN/MY/CL/PE/JP/SGpropose; US/AUoppose: of intellectual property, subject to the exceptions provided in the TRIPS Agreement and in those multilateral agreements concluded under the auspices of WIPO.] [CL/AU/NZ/BN/PEpropose: With respect to secondary uses of phonograms by means of analog communications and free over-the-air radio broadcasting, however, a Party may limit the rights of the performersand producers of the other Party to the rights its persons are accorded within the jurisdiction of the other Party.]

[VN: Articles 3 and 5 of the TRIPS shall apply with necessary modifications to the protection of intellectual property in this Chapter.]

A Party may derogate from paragraph 1 [national treatment]in relation to its judicial and administrative procedures, including requiring a national of the other Party to designate an address for service of process in its territory, or to appoint an agent in its territory, provided that such derogation is:

necessary to secure compliance with laws and regulations that are not inconsistent with this Chapter; and

not applied in a manner that would constitute a disguised restriction on trade.

[CL:3 Paragraphs 1 and 2 do] [US: Paragraph [Xnational treatment/judicial and administrative procedures] does] not apply to procedures in multilateral agreements concluded under the auspices of WIPO relating to the acquisition or maintenance of intellectual property rights.

[PE/CL: With regards to the protection and defence of intellectual property referred to in this chapter, any advantage, favour, privilege or immunity granted by a Party to the nationals of any other country will be accorded immediately and unconditionally to the nationals of the other Parties. The exceptions to this obligation shall be in conformity with the pertinent dispositions referred to in articles 4 and 5 of the TRIPS Agreement.]

[VN: Articles 4 and 5 of the TRIPS shall apply with necessary modifications to the protection of intellectual property in this Chapter.]

[CL/NZ/VN/AU/BN/SG/PE/MY/MX/CApropose; US/JP oppose: 1. Nothing in this Chapter shall prevent a Party from adopting appropriate measures to prevent: (a) the abuse of intellectual property rights by right holders or the resort to practices that unreasonably restrain trade or adversely affect the international transfer of technology; and (b) anticompetitive practices that may result from the abuse of intellectual property rights;, provided that such measures are consistent with this Agreement. [PE propose; CL/AU oppose: Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to reduce the protection that the Parties agree on or have agreed on in benefit of the conservation or sustainable use of biodiversity.]]

[NZ/AU/US/SG/MY/PE/VN/JP/MX propose: 1. [US: Further to Article ___ (Publication), and with the object of making the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights transparent,] Each Party shall ensure that its laws, regulations and procedures [VN: or administrative rulings of general application] concerning the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights [US: are in writing and are] [US oppose: shall be] published[], or where such publication is not [US/PE oppose: practical] [US/PE: practicable], are made publicly available [US/AU/NZ: in a national language in such a manner as to enable [AU oppose: governments and right holders] [AU: interested persons and Parties] to become acquainted with them.] [US/AU/NZ oppose: in at least the national language of that Party or in the English language.]]

[NZ/AU/SG/MY/CA/MX/CL propose; VN/PE oppose: 2. Each Party shall endeavour to make available on the Internet [AU/NZ:

its laws, regulations, procedures, and administrative rulings of general application concerning the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights; and]

[JP oppose: those details of patent, trademark, design, plant variety protection and geographical indication applications that are open to public inspection under national law.]]

[US/MX propose; BN oppose: 4. Nothing in this Chapter shall require a Party to disclose confidential information the disclosure of which would impede law enforcement or otherwise be contrary to the public interest [PE oppose: or would prejudice the legitimate commercial interests of particular enterprises, public or private].]

[US propose: 1. Except as it otherwise provides, including in Article QQ.G.8__ (Berne 18/TRIPS 14.6), this Chapter gives rise to obligations in respect of all subject matter existing at the date of entry into force of this Agreement that is protected on that date in the territory of the Party where protection is claimed, or that meets or comes subsequently to meet the criteria for protection under this Chapter.]

2. [CL/NZ/PE/MY/BN/VN/CA/MX oppose: Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, including Article QQ.G.8____ (Berne 18/TRIPS 14.6),]a Party shall not be required to restore protection to subject matter that on the date of entry into force of this Agreement has fallen into the public domain in its territory.

3. This Chapter does not give rise to obligations in respect of acts that occurred before the date of entry into force of this Agreement.

[CL/MY/NZ/VN/SG/BN/PE propose; US/AU/JP/MX oppose: The Parties are encouraged to establish international exhaustion of rights.]

[CL/VN/PE propose: Each Party shall endeavour to provide relevant information to disseminate public domain, including appropriate tools that help to identify the [CL: extension] [VN: expiration] of the terms of protection of intellectual property rights.]

[CL/VN propose: 1. The Parties recognize the importance of a rich and accessible public domain for their societies and the need that public domain material shall be free for its use by all persons.

2. For purposes of paragraph 1, each Party shall endeavor to:

identify subject matter that has fallen into the public domain within their respective jurisdictions;

promote access to the public domain; and

preserve the public domain.

3. Actions to achieve the purposes referred to in paragraph 2, may include the development of publicly accessible data bases of registered rights, guidelines and other tools to enhance access to material in the public domain.

4. Each Party shall make its best efforts to promote cooperation among the Parties to identify and facilitate access to subject matter that has fallen into the public domain and share updated information related to right holders and terms of protection.]

[CL/VN Alternative Proposal:

1. The Parties recognize the importance of a rich and accessible public domain for their societies and the need that public domain material shall be free for its use by all persons.

2. For this purpose, Parties may include the development of publicly accessible data bases of registered rights, guidelines and other tools to enhance access to material in the public domain.

3. Each Party shall make its best efforts to promote cooperation among the Parties to identify and faciliate access to subject matter that has fallen into the public domain and share updated information related to right holders and terms of protection.]

Note: We have not introduced braces into this section because party attributions are not clear based on the text.

Each Party shall designate at least one contact point for the purpose of cooperation under this section.

[NZ/CL/SG/BN/AU/MY/PE/VN/MX propose: 1. [AU/US oppose: Where a Party is a member of any of the following agreements, that Party shall, where appropriate and upon request by another Party, support that Party in implementing any of the following agreements] [AU/CA/JP/SG: A Party may seek to cooperate with other Parties to support its accession to, and implementation of, the agreements X-X ]:

(a)Patent Cooperation Treaty;

[PE/CA oppose: (b)Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks;

(c)Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks;] and

(d)Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks.]

[JP/SG/PE propose: (e)International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (1991) (UPOV Convention)]

[AU: 2. Each Party shall endeavor to provide such cooperation as appropriate and upon request.]

[AU/CL/NZ/PE/SG/BN/MX/VN/MY/US/CA propose: The Parties shall endeavour to cooperate on the subject matter covered by this Chapter through appropriate cooordination, training and exchange of information between the intellectual property offices, [or other relevant institutions], of the Parties. Cooperation may cover such areas as:

developments in domestic and international intellectual property policy

intellectual property administration and registration systems

education and awareness relating to intellectual property

intellectual property issues relevant to:

small and medium-sized enterprises

science, technology & innovation activities[PE propose: , which may include generation, transfer and dissemination of technology.]

policies involving the use of intellectual property for research, innovation and economic growth

such other areas as may be agreed among [AU/NZ oppose: the] Parties.]

[[AU/CL/MY/NZ/SG/PE/VN/CA/MX/BN/JP propose: In order to improve quality and efficiency in the Parties' patent systems,] The Parties shall endeavour to [US/SG propose: cooperate] [US oppose: establish a framework for cooperation] among their respective patent offices to facilitate the [AU/CL/MY/NZ/SG/PE/VN/CA/MX/BN/JP oppose: exploitation] [AU/CL/MY/NZ/SG/PE/VN/CA/MX/BN/JP propose: sharing and use] of search and examination work of other Parties. This may include:

making search and examination results available to the patent offices of other Parties, and

exchanges of information on quality assurance systems and quality standards relating to patent searching and examination;

[JP propose; CL/PE oppose: (c) implementing and promoting the Patent Prosecution Highway;]

[CL/AU/MY/NZ/SG/PE/VN/CA/MX/BN oppose: which may, among other things, facilitate work sharing.]]

[JP proposal: 2. In the course of the cooperation referred to Paragraph 1, the Parties are encouraged not to require the applicants to submit search and examination results, including cited documents, made available by the patent offices of other Parties, with a view to reducing the procedural costs of the applicants.]

Cooperation activities and initiatives undertaken under this Chapter shall be subject to the availability of resources, and on request and on terms and conditions mutually agreed upon between the Parties involved.[VN propose: , including the technical assistance for developing countries.]

[NZ/US/AU/CL/PE/SG/CA/JP/MYpropose: 1. [VN/BN/MX oppose: No] Party may require, as a condition of registration, that a sign be visually perceptible, [VN/BN/MX oppose: nor may a Party] [VN/BN/MX propose: and] deny registration of a trademark solely on the ground that the sign of which it is composed is a sound [CL/CA/JP/MY oppose: or a scent] [CL/CA/MX/MY propose: Each Party may provide trademark protection for scents].] A Party may require a concise and accurate description, or graphical representation, or both, as applicable, of the trademark.

1. Each Party shall provide that trademarks shall include collective marks and certification marks. A Party is not obligated to treat certification marks as a separate category in its domestic law, provided that such marks are protected.

Each Party [JP/MX propose: may][ JP oppose: shall] also provide that signs that may serve as geographical indications are eligible for protection under its trademark system [][PE/NZ/MX/CL/BN/AU/US/JP/SG oppose; VN propose: A Party may provide that Signs descriptive of geographical origin of goods or services, including geographical indication as defined in Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreement, may not be protected as trademarks other than collective and certification marks, unless they have acquired distinctiveness through use.]

[US/PE/MX/SG propose; AU/NZ/ VN/BN/MY/CL/CA oppose: 2. Pursuant to Article 20 of the TRIPS Agreement, each Party shall ensure that its measures mandating the use of the term customary in common language as the common name for a good or service ("common name") including, inter alia, requirements concerning the relative size, placement or style of use of the trademark in relation to the common name, do not impair the use or effectiveness of trademarks used in relation to such good or service. []][]

Each Party shall provide that the owner of a registered trademark shall have the exclusive right to prevent third parties not having the owner's consent from using in the course of trade identical or similar signs, [PE/MY/VN/CA/MX oppose: including subsequent geographical indications,] for goods or services that are related to those goods or services in respect of which the owner's trademark is registered, where such use would result in a likelihood of confusion.

In the case of the use of an identical sign, [PE/MY/SG/CL/CA/MX/VN oppose: including a geographical indication,] for identical goods or services, a likelihood of confusion shall be presumed.

Each Party may provide limited exceptions to the rights conferred by a trademark, such as fair use of descriptive terms, provided that such exceptions take account of the legitimate interest of the owner of the trademark and of third parties.

[VN propose; AU/US/NZ/SG/MY/CL/PE/CA/JP/BN oppose: The owner of a registered trademark shall not have the right to prevent third parties from using geographical indications or other signs descriptive of goods and services even though they are identical or similar to the trademark unless such use would result in confusion.]

1. No Party may require as a condition for determining that a trademark is well-known that the trademark has been registered in the Party or in another jurisdiction, included on a list of well-known trademarks, or given prior recognition as a well-known trademark.

2. Article 6bisof the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1967) shall apply,mutatis mutandis,to goods or services that are not identical or similar to those identified by a well-known trademark,[] [BN oppose: whether registered or not,] provided that use of that trademark in relation to those goods or services would indicate a connection between those goods or services and the owner of the trademark, and provided that the interests of the owner of the trademark are likely to be damaged by such use.

3. Each Party recognizes the importance of theJoint Recommendation Concerning Provisions on the Protection of Well-Known Marks(1999) as adopted by the Assembly of the Paris Union for the Protection of Industrial Property and the General Assembly of WIPO.

[US/BN/CL/PE/MX/CA/JP/NZ/SG/VN propose; AU/MY oppose: 4.EachParty shall [PE/BN/MX/CApropose: according to domestic laws] provide for appropriate measures to refuse or cancel the registration and prohibit the use of a trademark that is identical or similar to a well-known trademark, [SG/VN propose: as being already well-known before the registration or use of the first-mentioned trademark,] for related goods or services, if the use of that trademark is likely to cause confusion [CA/SG/VN oppose:or to deceive or risk associating the trademark with the owner of the well-known trademark, or constitutes unfair exploitation of the reputation of the well-known trademark.]]

Each Party shall provide a system for the examination and registration of trademarks which shall include,inter alia:

providing to the applicant a communication in writing, which may be electronic, of the reasons for any refusal to register a trademark;

providing the opportunity for the applicant to respond to communications from the competent authorities, to contest an initial refusal, and to appeal judicially any final refusal to register a trademark;

providing an opportunity to oppose the registration of a trademark or to seek cancellationof a trademark; and

requiring that administrative decisions in oppositions and cancellation proceedings be reasoned and in writing. Written decisions may be provided electronically.

Each Party shall provide:

a system for the electronic application for, and maintenance of, trademarks; and

a publicly available electronic information system, including an online database, of trademark applications and of registered trademarks.

Each Party shall adopt or maintain a trademark classification system that is consistent with theNice Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks(Nice Classification) of [June 15, 1957], as revised and amended. Each Party shall provide that:

[CA oppose: (a) registrations and the publications of applications indicate the goods and services by their names, grouped according to the classes established by the Nice Classification; and]

goods or services may not be considered as being similar to each other on the ground that, in any registration or publication, they are classfied in the same class of the Nice Classification. Conversely, each Party shall provide that goods or services may not be considered as being dissimilar from each other on the ground that, in any registration or publication, they are classified in different classes of the Nice Classification.

Each Party shall provide that initial registration and each renewal of registration of a trademark shall be for a term of no less than 10 years.

No Party may require recordal of trademark licenses:

a. to establish the validity of the license;

[US/CA/NZ/SG/JP/AU propose; VN/MX/BN/PE/CL/MY oppose: b. as a condition for the right of a licensee to join infringement proceedings initiated by the holder, or to obtain by way of such proceedings damages resulting from an infringement of the trademark which is subject to the license; or

c. as a condition for use of a trademark by a licensee, to be deemed to constitute use by the holder in proceedings relating to the acquisition, maintenance and enforcement of trademarks.]

[CL/NZ/SG/VN/PE/MY/BN/AU/CA/MX propose; US/JP oppose: The Parties are encouraged to establish international exhaustion of trademark rights. For this purpose, the registration of a trademark shall not entitle the proprietor to prohibit its use in relation to goods which have been put on the market in any country under that trademark by the proprietor or with his consent.]

1.In order to address the problem of trademark [VN/MX propose: geographical indication and trade name] cyber-piracy, each Party shall adopt or maintain a system for the management of its country-code top-level domain (ccTLD) that provides:

(a) an appropriate procedure for the settlement of disputes, based on, or modelled along the same lines as, the principles established in the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy, or that is: (i) designed to resolve disputes expeditiously and at low cost, (ii) fair and equitable, (iii) not overly burdensome, and (iv) does not preclude resort to court litigation;

(b) online public access to a reliable and accurate database of contact information concerning domain-name registrants;

in accordance with each Party's laws regarding protection of privacyand personal data.

2. [PE/SG/CL/AU/NZ/MY/BN/CA oppose; US/VN/JP/MX propose: Each party shall provide [VN: oppose adequate and effective] [VN propose: appropriate] remedies against the registration trafficking, or use in any ccTLD, with a bad faith intent to profit, of a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark [VN/MX propose: , geographical indication or trade name].]

The Parties recognize that [US propose; CL/PE/CA/MX/SG/MY/BN/VN/JP oppose: , subject to Article QQ.C.2(1), (Gls eligible for protection as trademarks)] geographical indications may be protected through a trademark or sui generis system or other legal means.

Where a Party provides administrative procedures for the protection or recognition of geographical indications, througha system of trademarks or a sui generis system, the Party shall with respect to applications for such protection or petitions for suchrecognition:

accept those applications or petitions without requiring intercession by a Party on behalf of its nationals;

process those applications or petitions without imposition of overly burdensome formalities;

ensure that its regulations governing the filing of those applications or petitions are readily available to the public and clearly set out the procedures for these actions;

make available information sufficient to allow the general public to obtain guidance concerning the procedures for filing applications or petitions and the processing of those applications or petitions in general; and allow applicants, petitioners, or their representatives to ascertain the status of specific applications and petitions;

ensure that those applications or petitions are published for opposition and provide procedures for opposing geographical indications that are the subject of applications or petitions; and

provide for cancellation, annulment, or revocation of the protection or recognition afforded to a geographical indication

Each Party shall, whether protection or recognition is provided to a geographical indication through [SG/CA/MY oppose: its domestic measures] [SG/CA/MY propose: the system referred to in article QQ.D.2] [CL/PE/MY/SG/VN/BN/CA/MX oppose: or pursuant to an agreement with another government or government entity], provide a process that allows interested persons to object to the protection or recognition of a geographical indication, [CA oppose: and for protection or recognition to berefused annulledor, [AU propose: where appropriate,] cancelled] [MY/VN/SG/MX oppose: , at least on the following grounds:

the geographical indication is likely to cause confusion with a trademark or geographical indication that is the subject of a pre-existing good faith pending application or registration in the territory of such Party[];

[BN oppose: the geographical indication is likely to cause confusion with a pre-existing trademark or geographical indication, the rights to which have been acquired in accordance with the Party's law[];] and

the geographical indication is a term customary in common language as the common name for such goods or services in that Party's territory.]]

[US propose;CL/PE/NZ/AU/SG/MY/MX/CA/BN/VN oppose: No Party shall, whether pursuant to an agreement with a government or a governmental entity or otherwise:

(a) in the case of geographical indications for goods other than wines or spirits, prohibit third parties from using or registering translated versions of the geographical indication;[] or

(b) prohibit third parties from using a term that is evoked by the geographical indication.]

[NZ/AU/BN/US propose;VN/PE/SG/CL/MY/CA/MX oppose: A Party may provide the means to protect a geographical indication against use in translation by third parties only if such use would, with respect to a geographical indication for goods other than wines and spirits:

(a) give rise to a likelihood of confusion with a prior trademark or geographical indication in the territory of that Party;

(b) mislead the public as to the geographical origin of the good; or

(c) constitute an act of unfair competition within the meaning of Article 10bis of the Paris Convention (1967).

[US/NZ/AU/CL/SG propose;MX/VN/PE/MY oppose: If a Party grants protection or recognition to a geographical indication through the systems described in Article QQ.D.2 or through an agreement with another government or government entity, such protection or recognition shall commence no earlier than [CL oppose: (i) the filing date in the Party[],] (ii) the date on which such agreement enters into force, or (iii) if a Party implements such protection or recognition on a date after entry into force of the agreement, on that later date.]

[NZ/AU/US propose;PE/CL/VN/SG/MY/BN/CA/MX oppose: No Party shall preclude the possibility that a term that it recognized as a trademark or geographical indication may become a term customary in the common language as the common name for the associated goods or services.]

[CL/PE/AU/US/NZ/MX/CA/VN/JP propose; BN oppose: In determining whether a term is the term customary in the common language as the common name for the relevant goods or services in a Party's territory, a Party's authorities shall have the authority to take into account how consumers understand the term in that Party's territory. Factors relevant to such consumer understanding may include [SG/CL/PE/MX/VN propose: if appropriate]:

whether the term is used to refer to the type of product in question, as indicated by competent sources such as dictionaries, newspapers, and relevant websites;

how the product referenced by the term is marketed and used in trade in the territory of that Party; and

[CL/PE/MX/CA oppose: whether the term is used in relevant international standards to refer to a class or type of product].]

[NZ/AU/US/VN/BN/CL propose; PE/MY/MX oppose: An individual component of a multi-component term that is protected as a geographical indication in a Party shall remain available for the public to use in that Party if the individual component is a term customary in the common language as the common name for the associated goods.]

[SG propose: For greater certainty, nothing in this section shall require a Party to apply its provisions in respect of any individual component contained in a GI for which that individual component is identical with the term customary in common language as the common name of such goods in the territory of that Party.]

[US propose;AU/CL/SG/PE/MY/NZ/BN/VN/MX/CA oppose: The existence of a geographical indication shall not be a ground upon which a Party may:

refuse a trademark owner's otherwise permissible request to renew the registration of its trademark; or

refuse a trademark owner's request to register an otherwise permissible modification of its registered trademark.]

The terms listed in Annex ['...] are recognized as geographical indications of the respective Party, within the meaning of paragraph 1 of Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreement. Subject to domestic laws [], in a manner that is consistent with the TRIPS Agreement, such terms will be protected as geographical indications in the territories of the other Parties.]

[NZ/CL/VN/MY/BN/SG/MX propose; PE/US/AU oppose: 1. Each Party may provide protection to homonymous geographical indications. Where a Party provides protection to homonymous geographical indications, that Party may, where necessary, lay down the practical conditions of use to make a distinction between the homonymous geographical indications, taking into account the need to ensure equitable treatment of the producers concerned and that consumers are not misled.]

[CL propose; AU/US/PE/NZ/VN/SG/MY/BN/MX/CA/JP oppose: 2. The Parties recognize the geographical indicationPiscofor the exclusive use for products from Chile and Peru.]

[CL/SG/BN/MX propose; AU/PE/US/NZ/CA/JP oppose:Annex ['...] Lists of Geographical Indications]

[CL/AU/NZ/SG/BN/VN/MY/PE/CA/MX/JP propose: The Parties shall provide the legal means for interested parties to prevent commercial use of country names of the Parties in relation to goods in a manner which misleads consumers as to the origin of such goods.]

[US propose; CL/PE/VN/MY/CA oppose: Each Party shall permit the use, and as appropriate, allow the registration, of signs orindications that identify goods other than wines or spirits, and that reference a geographical area that is not the place of origin of the goods, unless such use is misleading, would constitute an act of unfair competition, or would cause a likelihood of confusion with a prior trademark or geographical indication that identifies the same or similar goods. The foregoing shall not be understood to prevent a Party from denying registration of such a sign or indication on other grounds, provided such denial does not derogate from the provisions of the Paris Convention and the TRIPS Agreement.]

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.[US/AU propose;CL/MY/PE/SG/VN/BN/NZ/CA/MX oppose: The Parties confirm that:

patents shall be available for any new uses or methods of using a known product],

[US/JP propose; CL/MY/PE/SG/VN/BN/AU/NZ/CA/MX oppose: (b) a Party may not deny a patent solely on the basis that the product did not result in enhanced efficacy of the known product when the applicant has set forth distinguishing features establishing that the invention is new, involves an inventive step, and is capable of industrial application.]

2. Each Party may exclude from patentability inventions, the prevention within their territory of the commercial exploitation of which is necessary to protect ordre public or morality, including to protect human, animal or plant life or health or to avoid serious prejudice to nature or the environment, provided that such exclusion is not made merely because the exploitation is prohibited by their law.

3. [US: Consistent with paragraph 1] each Party [US propose; AU/NZ/VN/BN/CL/PE/MY/SG/CA/MX oppose: shall make patents available for inventions for the following] [NZ/CL/PE/MY/AU/VN/BN/SG/CA/MX propose: may also exclude from patentability]:

(a) plants and animals, [NZ/CL/PE/MY/AU/VN/BN/SG/CA/MX propose: other than microorganisms];

[JP oppose: (b)diagnostic, therapeutic, and surgical methods for the treatment of humans or animals [US propose; AU/SG/MY/NZ/CL/PE/VN/BN/CA/MX oppose: if they cover a method of using a machine, manufacture, or composition of matter]; [NZ/CL/PE/MY/AU/VN/BN/SG/CA/MX propose:] and

(c) essentially biological processes for the production of plants or animals, other than non-biological and microbiological processes for such production.]

[MX propose: (d) and the diagrams, plans, rules and methods for carrying out mental processes, playing games or doing business, and mathematical methods as such; software as such; methods to present information as such; and aesthetic creations and artistic or literary works.]

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY propose: ALT 3. Each Party may also exclude from patentability:

diagnostic, therapeutic and surgical methods for the treatment of humans or animals; and

plants and animals other than microorganisms, and essentially biological processes for the production of plants or animals other than non-biological and microbiological processes. However, Parties shall provide for the protection of plant varieties either by patents or by an effective sui generis system or by any combination thereof.]

Each Party shall disregard at least information contained in public disclosures used to determine if an invention is novel or has an inventive step if the public disclosure[ []:

was made by the patent applicant or by a person who obtained the information directly or indirectly from the patent applicant,

and

occurred within 12 months prior to the date of filing of the application in the territory of the Party.

[US: Without prejudice to Article 5A(3) of the Paris Convention,] Each Party shall provide that a patent may be cancelled, revoked or nullified only on grounds that would have justified a refusal to grant the patent. A Party may also provide that fraud, misrepresentation, or inequitable conduct may be the basis for cancelling, revoking, or nullifying a patent or holding a patent unenforceable. [AU/CL/MY/NZ/BN/CA/MX/VN propose; US/JP oppose: A Party may also provide that a patent may be cancelled, revoked or nullified on the basis that the patent is used in a manner determined to be anti-competitive in a judicial [VZ/CA/MX propose: or administrative] proceeding] [AU/CL/CA/MX propose: US oppose; consistent with Article 5A(3) of the Paris Convention.]

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY propose: Each Party shall provide a procedure for third persons to oppose the grant of a patent, either before or after the grant of a patent, or both.]

Each Party may provide limited exceptions to the exclusive rights conferred by a patent, provided that such exceptions do not unreasonably conflict with a normal exploitation of the patent and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the patent owner, taking into account the legitimate interests of third parties.

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY propose: Consistent with [Article QQ.E.5 (Exceptions)], each Party may provide that a third person may do an act that would otherwise infringe a patent if the act is done for purposes connected with the collection and submission of data in order to comply with the regulatory requirements of that Party or another country, including for purposes connected with marketing or sanitary approval.]

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY propose: 1. Consistent with [Article QQ.E.5 (Exceptions)], each Party may provide that a third person may do an act that would otherwise infringe a patent if the act is done for experimental purposes relating to the subject matter of a patented invention.

2. For the purposes of this Article, experimental purposes may include, but need not be limited to, determining how the invention works, determining the scope of the invention, determining the validity of the claims, or seeking an improvement of the invention (for example, determining new properties, or new uses, of the invention).]

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY propose: Nothing in this Chapter shall limit a Party's rights and obligations under Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement or any amendment thereto.]

1 Each Party shall provide that where an invention is made independently by more than one inventor, and separate applications claiming that invention are filed with or for the relevant authority of the Party, any patent granted for the claimed invention shall be granted on the application [US/VN/MX propose; AU/NZ/CL/MY/CA/PE oppose: which has been found to be patentable and] which has the earliest filing or, if applicable, priority date [AU/NZ/PE/BN/CL/CA propose; US/VN/MY/MX/SG oppose: and which is published].[US: ]

Each Party shall provide patent applicants with at least one opportunity to make amendments, corrections, and observations in connection with their applications.

[US/AU/PE/VN propose; CL/MY/BN/NZ/CA/SG/MX oppose: Each Party shall provide that a disclosure of a claimed invention shall be considered to be sufficiently clear and complete if it provides information that allows the invention to be made and used by a person skilled in the art, without undue experimentation, as of the filing date.]

[US/PE/AU propose; CL/VN/MY/BN/NZ/CA/SG/MX oppose: Each Party shall provide that a claimed invention [AU oppose: is] [AU propose: shall be] sufficiently supported by its disclosure [AU oppose: if the disclosure reasonably conveys to a person skilled in the art that the applicant was in possession of the claimed invention] as of the filing date.]

[US/AU/MX propose; SG/CL/MY/VN/PE/BN/NZ/CA oppose: Each Party shall provide that a claimed invention is [US/AU propose: useful] [MX propose: industrially applicable] if it has a specific [MX propose: and], substantial, [MX oppose: and credible] utility.]

[AU/PE/NZ/MY/CL/VN/US/CA/MX/JP: 1. Each Party shall publish [US/MX oppose: or make available for public inspection] any patent application promptly after the expiry of 18 months from its filing date or, if priority is claimed, from its priority date, unless the application has been published earlier or has been withdrawn, abandoned or refused [CA propose: , without leaving any rights outstanding].]

[AU/PE/NZ/CL/VN/CA/MX propose; MY oppose: 2. Each Party shall provide that an applicant may request the early publication of an application prior to the expiry of the period mentioned above.]

[US/AU/CA/SG/PE/CL/NZ/JP propose; MY/BN/VN/MX oppose: For published patent applications and issued patents, each Party shall make available to the public [US/PE/CA propose: at least] the following information : submitted [US/SG/PE propose: to that Party's competent authorities] in accordance with [US/SG/PE propose: their] requirements [US/SG/PE oppose: of the Party's competent authorities] [AU/CA/CL propose: in their possession] [US/SG/PE propose: and] in connection with the prosecution of such patent applications and patents:

(a) search and examination results, [JP oppose: including any relevant prior art search histories];

(b) [SG/PE/CL/US/NZ/AU/JP propose: non confidential] communications from applicants; and

(c) patent and non-patent related literature citations submitted by applicants, and relevant third parties.]

[CL propose: The Parties are encouraged to establish international exhaustion of patent rights. For this purpose, the registration of a patent shall not entitle its holder to prevent third parties from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing a product protected by that patent, which has been put in the market in any country by the patent holder or with his consent.]

[US propose; CA/NZ/JP oppose: Each Party, at the request of the patent owner, shall adjust the term of a patent to compensate for unreasonable delays that occur in the granting of the patent. For purposes of this subparagraph, an unreasonable delay at least shall include a delay in the issuance of the patent of more than four years from the date of filing of the application in the territory of the Party, or two years after a request for examination of the application has been made, whichever is later. Periods attributable to actions of the patent applicant need not be included in the determination of such delays. Any patent term adjustment under this article shall confer all of the exclusive rights of a patent subject to the same limitations and exceptions that would otherwise apply to the patent absent any adjustment of the patent term.]

Article QQ.E.13 : {Exceptions / Regulatory Review Exception}[US/NZ/PE/CA/MX/JP propose: Consistent with paragraph [QQ.E.5] (patent exceptions and limitations), each Party shall permit] [CL/SG/MY/AU/VN/BN propose: Where a Party permits] a third person to use the subject matter of a subsisting patent to [US/NZ/PE/AU/MX/VN/BN/JP] propose: generate information necessary to] support an application for [AU/CA/MX/VN/BN propose: regulatory or] marketing approval [CL/NZ/PE/SG/MY/AU/CA/MX/VN/BN propose: or sanitary permit] of a [AU/CA/VN/BN oppose: pharmaceutical] product [PE propose: or agricultural chemical product], [US/NZ/PE/SG/MY/MX/JP propose: and shall further] [CL/AU/CA/VN/BN propose: that Party may also] provide that any product produced under such authority [CL/AU/CA/VN/BN propose: may be] [US/NZ/PE/SG/MY/MX/JP propose: shall not be] made, [CA propose: constructed,] [CL/PE/VN/BN propose: offered for sale], [PE/VN/BN propose: imported,] used, or sold in its territory [US/NZ/PE/SG/MY/MX/JP propose: other than] for purposes related to [US/NZ/PE/AU/MX/VN/BN/JP propose: generating such information to support an application for] meeting [AU/CA/MX/VN/BN propose: regulatory or] marketing approval [CL/NZ/PE/SG/MY/AU/CA/MX/VN/BN propose: or sanitary permit] requirements of that Party [NZ/SG/MY/AU/CA/MX/CL/VN/BN propose: or another country].

[US/SG/MY/PE/MX/CL propose; NZ/AU/CA/VN/BN oppose: If the Party permits exportation of such a product, the Party shall provide that the product shall only]] [NZ/CA/BN propose: Each Party shall permit a product to] [AU/VN propose: Each Party may permit such a product to] be exported outside its territory [US/NZ/PE/AU/MX/VN/BN propose: for purposes of generating information] to support an application for meeting [AU/CA/MX/VN/BN propose: regulatory or] marketing approval [CL/NZ/SG/MY/PE/AU/CA/MX/VN/BN propose: or sanitary approval] requirements of that Party [CL/NZ/SG/MY/AU/CA/MX/VN/BN propose: or another country].

[US propose; AU/NZ/CL/PE/MY/SG/BN/VN/CA/MX oppose: 6.

(a) Each Party shall make best efforts to process patent applications and marketing approval applications expeditiously with a view to avoiding unreasonable or unnecessary delays.

(c) Each Party, at the request of the patent owner, shall make available an adjustment of the patent term of a patent which covers a new pharmaceutical productor a patent that covers a method of making or using a pharmaceutical product, to compensate the patent owner of unreasonable curtailment of the effective patent term as a result of the marketing approval process.

(d) In implementing subparagraph 6(c), a Party may:

limit the applicability of subparagraph 6(c) to a single patent term adjustment for each new pharmaceutical product that is being reviewed for marketing approval;

require the basis for the adjustment to be the first marketing approval granted to the pharmaceutical product in that Party;

and

limit the period of the adjustment to no more than 5 years.

(e) In implementing subparagraph 6(c), and as a condition for providing the adjustment set forth in subparagraph 6(c) for a new pharmaceutical product approved consistent with Article 9.2(b) or Article 9.2(d), a Party may require an applicant that has submitted an application for marketing approval consistent with Article 9.2(b) or Article 9.2(d) to commence the process of obtaining marketing approval for that new pharmaceutical product in the Party within [X] years of the date of the first marketing approval of the same pharmaceutical product in another Party.

(f) Any adjustment under subparagraph 6(c) shall confer all of the exclusive rights, subject to the same limitations and exceptions, of the patent claims of the product, its method of use, or its method of manufacture in the originally issued patent as applicable to the product and the approved method of use of the product. ]] ]

Submission of Information or Evidence Concerning the Safety or Efficacy of a New Pharmaceutical Product

[US propose; AU/PE/VN/NZ/CL/MY/SG/BN oppose: 1. (a) If a Party requires or permits, as a condition for granting marketing approval for a new pharmaceutical product, the submission of information concerning the safety or efficacy of the product, the origination of which involves a considerable effort, the Party shall not, without the consent of a person previously submitting such safety or efficacy information to obtain marketing approval in the territory of the Party, authorize a third person to market a same or a similar product based on:

the safety or efficacy information previously submitted in support of the marketing approval; or

evidence of the existence of the marketing approval,

for at least five years from the date of marketing approval of the new pharmaceutical product in the territory of the Party.

If a Party requires or permits, in connection with granting marketing approval for a new pharmaceutical product, the submission of evidence concerning the safety or efficacy of a product that was previously approved in another territory, such as evidence of prior marketing approval in the other territory, the Party shall not, without the consent of a person previously submitting the safety or efficacy information to obtain marketing approval in the other territory, authorize a third person to market a same or a similar product based on:

the safety or efficacy information submitted in support of a prior marketing approval in the other territory; or

evidence of the existence of a prior marketing approval in the other territory,

for at least five years from the date of marketing approval of the new pharmaceutical product in the territory of the Party.

Submission of New Clinical Information or Evidence relating to a Pharmaceutical Product that Includes a Chemical Entity that has been Previously Approved for Marketing in Another Pharmaceutical Product

If a Party requires or permits, as a condition of granting marketing approval for a pharmaceutical product that includes a chemical entity that has been previously approved for marketing in another pharmaceutical product, the submission of new clinical information that is essential to the approval of the pharmaceutical product containing the previously approved chemical entity, other than information related to bioequivalency, the Party shall not, without the consent of a person previously submitting such new clinical information to obtain marketing approval in the territory of the Party, authorize a third person to market a same or a similar product based on:

the new clinical information previously submitted in support of the marketing approval; or

evidence of the existence of the marketing approval that was based on the new clinical information,

for at least three years from the date of marketing approval based on the new clinical information in the territory of the Party.

If a Party requires or permits, in connection with granting marketing approval for a pharmaceutical product of the type specified in subparagraph (c), the submission of evidence concerning new clinical information for a product that was previously approved based on that new clinical information in another territory, other than evidence of information related to bioequivalency, such as evidence of prior marketing approval based on new clinical information, the Party shall not, without the consent of a person previously submitting such new clinical information to obtain marketing approval in the other territory, authorize a third person to market a same or a similar product based on:

the new clinical information submitted in support of a prior marketing approval in the other territory; or

evidence of the existence of a prior marketing approval that was based on the new clinical information in the other territory,

for at least three years from the date of marketing approval based on the new clinical information in the territory of the Party.]

[US:Additional Provisions relating to Pharmaceutical Products

Notwithstanding paragraph 2 above, a Party may take measures to protect public health in accordance with:

the Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health (WT/MIN(01)/DEC/2) (the "Declaration");

any waiver of any provision of the TRIPS Agreement granted by WTO Members in accordance with the WTO Agreement to implement the Declaration and in force between the Parties; and

any amendment of the TRIPS Agreement to implement the Declaration that enters into force with respect to the Parties.

A Party that requires or permits an applicant to obtain approval for marketing a new pharmaceutical product in its territory by relying, in whole or in part, on the prior approval of the pharmaceutical product by the regulatory authority in another territory may, as a condition for providing the period of data protection specified in subparagraph 2(b) or 2(d), require an applicant that has submitted an application for marketing approval consistent with said subparagraphs to commence the process of obtaining marketing approval for that pharmaceutical product within [X] years of the date of first marketing approval of the same pharmaceutical product in another Party.

1. Where a Party requires or permits, as a condition of approving the marketing of a pharmaceutical product, persons, other than the person originally submitting safety or efficacy information, to rely on that information or on evidence concerning safety or efficacy information for a product that was previously approved, such as evidence of prior marketing approval in another territory, each Party shall:

(a) provide a transparent and effective system to:

identify a patent or patents covering an approved pharmaceutical product or its approved method of use; and

provide notice to a patent holder of the identity of another person who intends to market, during the term of the identified patent or patents, a product that is the same as, or similar to, the approved pharmaceutical product referenced in subparagraph 5(a)(i).

(b) unless such other person agrees to defer the marketing of the product until after the expiration of an identified patent, ensure that a patent holder may seek, prior to granting of marketing approval to an allegedly infringing product, available remedies by providing:

an automatic delay of the grant of marketing approval that remains in place for a period of time designed to ensure sufficient opportunity to adjudicatedisputes concerning the validity or infringement of allegedly infringed patents; and

judicial or administrative procedures, including effective

provisional measures, to allow for the timely adjudication of disputes concerning the validity or infringement of an allegedly infringed patent.

(c) If such other person's product has been found to infringe a valid patent identified pursuant to subparagraph (a), provide measures that operate to prohibit the unauthorized marketing of that product prior to the expiration of the patent.

(d) when a Party delays the grant of marketing approval consistent with subparagraph 5(b)(i), provide an effective reward, consistent with the provisions of this Agreement, for the successful challenge of the validity or applicability of the patent.

In implementing subparagraph 5(b)(i), and as a condition for providing the automatic delay of the grant of marketing approval specified in subparagraph 5(b)(i) for a new pharmaceutical product approved consistent with subparagraph 2(b) or 2(d), a Party may require that an applicant that has submitted an application for marketing approval consistent with subparagraph 2(b) or 2(d) to commence the process of obtaining marketing approval for that new pharmaceutical in the Party within [X] years of the date of first marketing approval of the pharmaceutical product in another Party.

Where a Party provides for a period of data protection for a pharmaceutical product of more than [5+Y] years pursuant to subparagraph 2(a) or 2(b) of this Article, that Party is not required to implement for that pharmaceutical product subparagraphs 2(c), 2(d) (3-year data protection in connection with submission of new clinical information), 5(b)(i) (automatic delay of marketing approval) or 5(d) of this Article (reward for the successful challenge of the validity or applicability of a patent).

Where a Party chooses to apply subparagraph 6(e) of Article 8 and paragraphs 4 and 6 of this Article, the following provisions shall apply:

a Party shall permit an applicant to commence the process of obtaining marketing approval by providing the regulatory authority of the Party information supporting approval of the new pharmaceutical product in the Party that is available to the person at the time the request is made, such as evidence of the prior approval of the product in another Party. It is understood that, while a Party may impose reasonable additional requirements or deadlines as a condition of authorizing the person to market the pharmaceutical product in its territory, satisfaction of those additional requirements or deadlines or the granting of approval shall be recognized by the Party as necessarily occurring after the commencement of the marketing approval process within the meaning of subparagraph 6(e) of Article 8 and paragraphs 4 and 6 of this Article; and

a Party may not refuse to grant approval of a new pharmaceutical product on the basis of a failure of an applicant for marketing approval to satisfy the requirements of subparagraph 6(e) of Article 8 or paragraphs 4 and 6 of this Article.

[US:General Provisions relating to Pharmaceutical Products and Agricultural Chemical Products

For purposes of this Article, a new pharmaceutical product means a product that does not contain a chemical entity that has been previously approved in the territory of the Party for use in a pharmaceutical product [JP propose: for human use].

Subject to paragraph 3 (protection of public health), when a product is subject to a system of marketing approval in the territory of a Party pursuant to paragaph 1 or 2 and is also covered by a patent in the territory of that Party, the Party shall not alter the term of protection that it provides pursuant to paragraph 1 or 2 in the event that the patent protection terminates on a date earlier than the end of the term of protection specified in paragraph 1 or 2.]]

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY/VN propose: Each Party may adopt or maintain measures to encourage the timely entry of pharmaceutical products to its market.]

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY/VN propose: 1. Each Party shall endeavour to improve quality and efficiency in its patent system.

2. Each Party shall endeavour to enhance its patent registration system by maintaining examination procedures, cancellation procedures and, where provided, opposition procedures that consistently provide high quality rights for granted patents, and endeavour to simplify and streamline its administration system for the benefit of all users of the system and the public as a whole.]

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY/VN propose: 1. Each Party shall endeavour to process applications for patents, and applications for marketing, regulatory or sanitary approval of pharmaceutical products, in an efficient and timely manner.

2. Each Party may provide a procedure for patent applicants to apply to expedite the examination of their patent application.

3. If there are unreasonable delays in a Party's processing of applications for patents, or processing of applications for marketing, regulatory or sanitary approval of pharmaceutical products, the Party shall endeavour to address those delays.]

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY/VN propose: 1. Where a Party requires, as a condition of marketing, regulatory or sanitary approval for pharmaceutical products which utilize new chemical entities, the submission of undisclosed test or other data, the origination of which involves a considerable effort, that Party shall protect such data against unfair commercial use. In addition, each Party shall protect such data against disclosure, except where necessary to protect the public or unless steps are taken to ensure that the data is protected against unfair commercial use.

Each Party may provide that the protection of data under paragraph 1,inter alia:

is limited to undisclosed test or other data, the origination of which involves a considerable effort;

is limited to pharmaceutical products that do not contain a new chemical entity that has been previously approved for marketing in the Party;

is limited to pharmaceutical products which utilize a new chemical entity;

is available only once per pharmaceutical product;

is not available for new uses or indications, new dosage forms or methods of making a pharmaceutical product;

is limited to a period of time as determined by the Party; or

may be waived to facilitate the marketing, regulatory or sanitary approval of a pharmaceutical product that is the subject of a voluntary or compulsory license, or a licence otherwise issued pursuant to the TRIPS Agreement.

Each Party may take measures to protect public health in accordance with:

the Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health (WT/MIN(01)/DEC/2) (the "Declaration");

any waiver of any provision of the TRIPS Agreement granted by WTO Members in accordance with the WTO Agreement to implement the Declaration and in force between the Parties; and

any amendment of the TRIPS Agreement to implement the Declaration that enters into force with respect to the Parties.]

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY/VN propose: Each Party shall endeavour to promptly make public the granting of marketing, regulatory or sanitary approval of pharmaceutical products.]

[US/SG/PE/MX/JP propose; NZ/VN oppose: 1.

(a) If a Party requires [AU/CL/MX oppose: or permits], as a condition of granting marketing approval [CL/MX propose: or sanitary permit] for a new agricultural chemical product [CL/MX propose; JP oppose: which utilize new chemical entity], the submission of [CL/MX propose: undisclosed][AU oppose: information] [AU propose; JP oppose: undisclosed test or other data] concerning safety or efficacy of the [CL/MXoppose: product][CL/MX propose; JP oppose: new chemical entity], the Party shall not, without the consent of [AU oppose: a person that previously submitted such] [AU propose: the person who provided the] [CL/MX oppose: safety or efficacy] information [AU oppose: to obtain marketing approval in the Party, authorize another] [AU propose: , permit third persons] to [CL/MX oppose: market] a [CL/MX oppose: same or a similar] product based on:

[SG oppose: (i) [CL/MX propose; JP oppose: undisclosed information concerning][AU oppose: the safety or efficacy information submitted in support of the marketing approval] [CL/MX propose: or sanitary permit][AU propose; JP oppose: that undisclosed test or other data]; or]

[CL/MX oppose: (ii) [AU oppose: evidence of the existence of] the marketing approval,]

[MX oppose: for [AU oppose: at least] ten years from the date of marketing approval [AU oppose: in the territory of] [AU propose: by] the Party .] [MX propose: Where origination of such data involve considerable efforts,] [CL/MX propose; JP oppose: Each Party shall protect such information against disclosure except where necessary to protect the public, or unless steps are taken to ensure that the data are protected against unfair commercial use]

[CL/MX oppose: (b) If a Party [AU oppose: requires or permits, in connection with] [AU propose: permits, as a condition of ] granting marketing approval for a new agricultural chemical product, the submission of evidence concerning the safety or efficacy of a product that was previously approved in another territory, such as evidence of prior marketing approval [AU oppose: in the other terrritory]; the Party shall not, without the consent of [AU oppose: a person that] [AU propose: the person who] previously submitted [AU oppose: the safety or efficacy] information [AU propose: concerning safety or efficacy] to obtain marketing approval in another territory, [AU oppose: authorize another] [AU propose: permit third persons] to market a same or a similar product based on:

[SG oppose: (i) [AU oppose: the safety or efficacy] information [AU propose: concerning safety or efficacy] submitted [AU oppose: in support of] [AU propose: to obtain] the prior marketing approval in the other territory; or]

(ii) evidence of [AU oppose: the existence of a] prior marketing approval in the other territory,

for [AU oppose: at least] ten years from the date of marketing approval [AU oppose: of the new product in the territory of the Party].]

[PE propose: In order to receive protection under subparagraph (b), a Party may require that the person providing the information in the other territory seek approval in the territory of the Party within five years after obtaining marketing approval in the other territory.]

[MX propose: Where a Party relies on a marketing approval granted by another Party, the reasonable period of exclusive use of the data submitted in connection with obtaining the approval relied on shall begin with the date of the first marketing approval relied on.]

[CL/MX oppose: 2. For purposes of this Article, a new agricultural chemical product is one that [AU oppose: contains] [AU propose: does not contain] a chemical entity that has [AU oppose: not] been previously approved [AU propose: for marketing] in the [AU oppose: territory of the] Party [AU oppose: for use in an agricultural chemical product].]]

[NOTE: ARTICLES ORIGINALLY LABELED AS QQ.E.23-24 HAVE BEEN MOVED TO QQ.A.4-5]

Article QQ.E.23: [PE/NZ/MX/SG: Proposed joint text for the Intellectual Property Chapter on Traditional Knowledge, Traditional Cultural Expressions and Genetic Resources[PE/NZ/VN/BN/MX/SG/CL/MY propose: 1. The Parties recognise the importance and contribution of traditional knowledge, traditional cultural expressions, and biological diversity to cultural, economic and social development. ]

[PE/MY/MX/BN propose; NZ/AU/SG/CL oppose: 2. Each Party exercises sovereignty over their biological [MY/BN oppose: diversity] [MY/BN propose: resources] and shall determine the access conditions to their genetic resources and their derivatives in accordance to their domestic legislation.]

[PE/NZ/BN/MY/MX/VN propose; AU/SG/CL oppose: 3. Where national legislation [MY/BN propose: or policies] establishes such requirements, the Parties recognise that users of genetic resources [NZ/CA oppose: and their derivatives] [] or traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources [NZ/CA oppose: and their derivatives] [NZ propose: may] [PE/MY propose: shall]:

(a) obtain prior informed consent to access genetic resources [NZ/CA oppose: and their derivatives];

(b) access traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources [NZ/CA oppose: and their derivatives] with the prior informed consent or approval and involvement of the indigenous or local community holding such knowledge; and

[BN/MY propose: fairly and] equitably share the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources [NZ/CA oppose: and its derivatives] and traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources [NZ/CA oppose: and their derivatives] on mutually agreed terms.]

[PE/NZ/MX/CL/VN propose; SG oppose: 4. The parties recognize that:

(a) information about genetic resources [NZ/CL/AU/CA oppose: and their derivatives] and traditional knowledge [CL oppose: associated with genetic resources [NZ/AU/CA oppose: and their derivatives]] can be useful in assessing patent applications against existing eligibility criteria; and

(b) the intellectual property system is one possible means to protect the traditional knowledge [CL oppose: associated with genetic resources [NZ/AU/CA oppose: and their derivatives]] and traditional cultural expressions of indigenous and local communities.]

[PE/NZ/MX/CL propose; SG oppose: 5. The Parties affirm that they will promote quality patent examination of applications concerning genetic resources and traditional knowledge [CL oppose: associated with genetic resources [NZ/AU/CA oppose: and their derivatives]] to ensure that the eligibility criteria for patentability are satisfied. This may include:

(a) in determining prior art, ensuring that readily available documented information related to genetic resources [NZ/CL/AU/CA oppose: and their derivatives] or traditional knowledge [CL oppose: associated with genetic resources [NZ/AU/CA oppose: and their derivatives]] is taken into account;

(b) an opportunity to cite, in writing, to the appropriate examining authority prior art that may have a bearing on patentability;

(c) where applicable and appropriate, the use of databases or digital libraries containing traditional knowledge [CL oppose: associated genetic resources [NZ/AU/CA oppose: and their derivatives]]; and

(d) cooperation in the training of patent examiners in the examination of patent applications related to genetic resources [NZ/CL/AU/CA oppose: and their derivatives] and traditional knowledge [CL oppose: associated with genetic resources [NZ/AU/CA oppose: and their derivatives]].]

[PE/NZ/AU/MX/MY/BN/VN/CL propose; SG oppose: 6. Subject to each Party's international obligations [AU/MY/BN/VN/CL oppose: the Parties affirm that they will endeavour to][AU/MY/BN/VN/CL propose: each Party may] establish appropriate measures to protect traditional knowledge and [MY oppose: traditional cultural expressions].]

[PE/MX propose; NZ/AU/SG/CL oppose: 7. Each Party will take appropriate, effective and proportionate measures to address situations of non-compliance with provisions established in paragraph 3.]

[PE/NZ/MX/SG/MY/BN/VN propose: 8. The Parties shall, through their respective agencies responsible for intellectual property, cooperate to enhance understanding of how the intellectual property system can deal with issues associated with traditional knowledge, traditional cultural expressions and genetic resources.[This text is a place holder, to be reconsidered depending on the outcome of the cooperation section of the IP chapter]]]

Each Party shall ensure that adequate and effective protection is provided to industrial designs, including to designs of a part of an article, regardless of whether or not the part can be separated from the article.]

Each Party shall provide that authors, [NZ oppose: performers], and producers of phonograms have the right to authorize or prohibit all reproductions of their works, [NZ oppose: performances], and phonograms, [] in any manner or form,[] [VN/CA/NZ oppose: permanent or temporary (including temporary storage in electronic form)] [] [] [VN propose: it shall be a matter for national legislation to determine exceptions and limitations under which the right may be exercised].

Without prejudice to Articles 11(1)(ii), 11bis(1)(i) and (ii), 11ter(1)(ii), 14(1)(ii), and 14bis(1) of the Berne Convention, each Party shall provide to authors the exclusive right to authorize or prohibit the communication to the public of their works, by wire or wireless means, including the making available to the public of their works in such a way that members of the public may access these works from a place and at a time individually chosen by them.

[US/AU/PE/NZ/SG/CL/MX propose; VN/MY/BN/JP oppose: Each Party shall provide to authors, [NZ/MX oppose: performers,] and producers of phonograms the right to authorize or prohibit the importation[] into that Party's territory of copies of the work [PE oppose: [NZ/MX: oppose: performance,] or phonogram] made without authorization, [PE/AU/NZ/CA/SG/CL/MX/JP oppose: or made outside that Party's territory with the authorization of the author, performer, or producer of the phonogram.[] ]] []

Each Party shall provide to authors, [NZ/MX oppose: performers,] and producers of phonograms the right to authorize or prohibit the making available to the public of the original and copies of their works, [NZ/MX oppose: performances,] and phonograms through sale or other transfer of ownership.[]

Each Party shall provide that in cases where authorization is needed from both the author of a work embodied in a phonogram and a performer or producer owning rights in the phonogram, the need for the authorization of the author does not cease to exist because the authorization of the performer or producer is also required. Likewise, each Party shall provide that in cases where authorization is needed from both the author of a work embodied in a phonogram and a performer or producer owning rights in the phonogram, the need for the authorization of the performer or producer does not cease to exist because the authorization of the author is also required.

[US/AU/PE/SG/CL/MX propose; VN/BN/NZ/MY/CA/JP oppose: Each Party shall provide that, where the term of protection of a work (including a photographic work), performance, or phonogram is to be calculated:

on the basis of the life of a natural person, the term shall be not less than the life of the author and [MX propose: 100] [MX oppose: 70] years after the author's death; and

on a basis other than the life of a natural person, the term shall be:

not less than [US propose; CL oppose: 95] [AU/PE/SG/CL propose: 70] [MX propose: 75] years from the end of the calendar year of the first authorized publication of the work, performance, or phonogram, or

failing such authorized publication within [US propose; CL oppose: 25] [SG/PE/AU/CL propose: 50] years from the creation of the work, performance, or phonogram, not less than [US propose; CL oppose: 120] [AU/PE/SG/CL propose: 70] years from the end of the calendar year of the creation of the work, performance, or phonogram.]

[NZ/BN/MY/VN/CA/JP propose; US/AU/SG/MX oppose: The term of protection of a work, performance or phonogram shall be determined according to each Party's domestic law and the international agreements to which each Party is a party.]

Each Party shall apply Article 18 of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (1971) (Berne Convention) and [PE/SG/NZ/BN/US/VN/CL/MY/MX: the corresponding provision in] Article 14.6 of the TRIPS Agreement, mutatis mutandis, to [CA oppose: the subject matter, rights, and obligations] [CA propose; US oppose: rights of authors, performers and producers of phonograms] in [Section G].

[CA/JP/SG/BN/NZ/PE/CL/VN/AUpropose:Each Party shall apply, mutatis mutandis, Article 18 of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (1971) to the rights of authors, performers and producers of phonograms in [Section G]. A Party may provide for conditions, limitations, exceptions and reservations to the extent permitted in Article 14.6 of the TRIPS Agreement. ]

Each Party shall provide that for copyright and related rights, any person acquiring or holding any economic rightin a work, [SG/BN/NZ/MY/VN/CL oppose: performance,] or phonogram:

may freely and separately transfer that right by contract; and

by virtue of a contract, including contracts of employment underlying the creation of works, [BN/SG/MY/VN/NZ/CL oppose: performances,] and phonograms, shall be able to exercise that right in that person's own name and enjoy fully the benefits derived from that right.

[CL: (c) Each Party may establish:

(i) which specific contracts underlying the creation of works or phonograms shall, in the absence of a written agreement, result in a transfer of economic rights by operation of law; and

(ii) reasonable limits to the provisions in [paragraph 2(a)] [cross reference to QQ.G.9(a)-(b)] to protect the interests of the original right holders, taking into account the legitimate interests of the transferees.]

No Party may subject the enjoyment and exercise of the rights of authors, performers and producers of phonograms provided for in this Chapter to any formality.

[US/AU/SG/PE/MX propose; MY/VN/BN/JP oppose: (a) In order to provide adequate legal protection and effective legal remedies against the circumvention of effective technological measures that authors, performers, and producers of phonograms use in connection with the exercise of their rights and that restrict unauthorized acts in respect of their works, performances, and phonograms, each Party shall provide that any person who:

knowingly, [CL oppose: or having reasonable grounds to know], circumvents without [CL oppose: authority] [CL propose: authorization] any effective technological measure that controls access to a protected work, performance, phonogram, [PE/CA/CL oppose: or other subject matter]; or

manufactures, imports, distributes, [CL oppose: offers [CA/CL propose: for sale or rental] to the public, provides, or otherwise trafficsin] devices, products, or components, [CL oppose: or offers to the public] or provides services, that:

are promoted, advertised, or marketed by that person, [PE/SG/CL oppose: or by another person acting in concert with that person and with that person's knowledge,] for the purpose of circumvention of any effective technological measure,

have only a limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent any effective technological measure, or

are primarily designed, produced, or performed for the purpose of [CA oppose: enabling or facilitating] the circumvention of anyeffective technological measure,

shall be liable and subject to the remedies set out in Article [12.12]. [CL propose: If the conduct is carried out in good faith without knowledge that the conduct in prohibited, a Party may exempt acts prohibited under this subparagraph that are carried out in connection with a nonprofit library, archive or educationalinstitution]. Each Party shall provide for criminal procedures and penalties to be applied when any person, other than a nonprofitlibrary, [CA/CLpropose: museum,] archive, educationalinstitution, or [CA/CL oppose: public noncommercial broadcasting entity,] [CA propose: any other nonprofit entity as determined by a Party's law] is found to have engaged [CA oppose: willfully and for purposes of commercial advantage [CL oppose: or private financial gain]] [CA propose: knowingly and for commercial purposes] in any of the foregoing activities. [SG/AU/PE/CLoppose: Such criminal procedures and penalties shall include the application to such activities of the remedies and authorities listed in subparagraphs (a), (b), and (f) of Article [15.5]as applicable to infringements,mutatis mutandis.[]][CL propose: No Party is required to impose civil or criminal liability for a person who circumvents any effectivetechnological measure that protects any of the exclusive rights of copyright or related rights in a protected work, but does not control access to such work].

In implementing subparagraph (a), no Party shall be obligated to require that the design of, or the design and selection of parts and components for, a consumer electronics, telecommunications, or computing product provide for a response to any particular technological measure, so long as the product does not otherwise violate any measures implementing subparagraph (a).

[CL oppose: (c) Each Party shall provide that a violation of a measure implementing this paragraph is independent of any infringement that might occur under the Party's law on copyright and related rights.]

Each Party shall confine exceptions and limitations to measures implementing subparagraph (a) [CL oppose: to the following activities,][CL propose: certain special cases that do not impair the adequacy of legal protection of the effectiveness of legal remedies againstthe circumvention of effective technological measures] [CL oppose: which shall be applied to relevant measures in accordance with subparagraph (e)]:

[CA oppose: noninfringing reverse engineering activities with regard to a lawfully obtained copy of a computer program, carried out in good faith with respect to particular elements of that computer program that have not been readily available to the person engaged in those activities, for the sole purpose of achieving interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs] [CA propose: reverse engineering activities with regard to a lawfully obtained copy of a computer program, for the sole purpose of achieving interoperability of the program or any other program];

[CA oppose: noninfringing good faith activities, carried out by an appropriately qualified researcher who has lawfully obtained a copy, [CL oppose: unfixed] performance, or display of a work, performance, or phonogram and who has made a good faith effort to obtain authorization for such activities, to the extent necessary for the sole purpose of research consisting of identifying and analyzing flaws and vulnerabilities of [CL propose: encryption] technologies [CL oppose: for scrambling and descrambling of information]] [CA propose: activities with regard to a lawfully obtained copy of a work, performance, or phonogram for the sole purpose of encryption research] ;

the inclusion of a component or part for the sole purpose of preventing the access of minors to inappropriate online content in a technology, product, service, or device that itself is not prohibited under the measures implementing subparagraph (a)(ii);

[CA oppose: noninfringing good faith activities that are authorized by the owner of a computer, computer system, or computer network for the sole purpose of testing, investigating, or correcting the security of that computer, computer system, or computer network] [CA propose: security testing activities that are authorized by the owner or administrator of a computer, computer system or computer network for the sole purpose of testing, investigating, or correcting the security of that computer, computer system or computer network];

[CA oppose: noninfringing activities for the sole purpose of identifying and disabling a capability to carry out undisclosed collection or dissemination of personally identifying information reflecting the online activities of a natural person in a way that has no other effect on the ability of any person to gain access to any work] [CA propose: activities for the sole purpose of identifying or disabling a capacity to carry out collection or dissemination of personally identifying information];

lawfully authorized activities carried out by government employees, agents, or contractors for the purpose of law enforcement, intelligence, essential security, or similar governmental purposes;

access by a nonprofit library, [CA propose: museum,] archive, or educational institution to a work, performance, or phonogram not otherwise available to it, for the sole purpose of making acquisition decisions; and

[CA propose: (viii) activities for the sole purpose of making a work, performance or phonogram perceptible to a person with a perceptual disability.

activities for the sole purpose of making an ephemeral reproduction of a work, performance or phonogram,

circumvention of a technological measure on a radio apparatus for the sole purpose of gaining or facilitating access to a telecommunication service by means of the radio apparatus]

[CA oppose: noninfringing uses [SG oppose: of a work, performance, or phonogram] in a particular class of works, [SG oppose: performances, or phonograms] when an actual or likely adverse impact on those noninfringing uses [CL propose: or exceptionsor limitations to copyright or related rights with respect to users] is [PE oppose: credibly demonstrated] [PE propose: found] [CL propose: demonstrated or recognized] in a legislative or administrative review or proceeding [SG oppose: by substantial evidence]; provided that [AU/PE oppose: any limitation or exception adopted in reliance upon this clause shall have effect for a renewable period of not more than three [SG propose: four] years][AU/PE propose: any such review or proceeding is conducted at least once every four years] from the date of conclusion of such review or proceeding.]

[CA propose: (xi) Each Party may provide further exceptions and limitations to measures implementing subparagraph (a) in relation to non infringing uses as determined through a legislative, regulatory, judicial, or administrative process in accordance with the Party's law, following due consideration of the actual or potential adverse impact on those non infringing uses.]

The exceptions and limitations to measures implementing subparagraph (a) for the activities set forth in subparagraph [4.9(d)] may [CL oppose: only] be applied as follows[CL oppose: , and only to the extent that they do not impair the adequacy of legal protection or the effectiveness of legal remedies against the circumvention of effective technological measures]:

Measures implementing subparagraph (a)(i) may be subject to exceptions and limitations with respect to each [CL propose: situations and] activity set forth in subparagraph (d).

Measures implementing subparagraph (a)(ii), as they apply to effective technological measures that control access to a work, performance, or phonogram, may be subject to exceptions and limitations with respect to activities set forth in subparagraph (d)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), and (vi).

Measures implementing subparagraph (a)(ii), as they apply to effective technological measures that protect any copyright or any rights related to copyright, may be subject to exceptions and limitations with respect to activities set forth in subparagraph (d)(i) and (vi).

Effective technological measuremeans any [CA propose: effective] technology, device, or component that, in the normal course of its operation, controls access to a protected work, performance, phonogram, [PE/CL/CA oppose: or other protected subject matter,] or protects [CA oppose: any copyright or any rights related to copyright] [CA propose: rights related to a work, performance or phonogram].][CL propose: and cannot, in a usual case be circumvented accidentally.]

[SG/CL propose: Nothing in this agreement shall require any Party to restrict the importation or domestic sale of a device that does not render effective a technological measure the sole purpose of which is to control market segmentation for legitimate copies of cinematographic filmor computer program, and is not otherwise a violation of law.]

Article QQ.G.12: {Technological Protection Measures}[CL/NZ/PE/VN/MY/BN/JP propose; AU/US oppose:

1. [PE/SG oppose: Each Party [VN propose: may] [VN oppose: shall] provide legal protections and remedies against the circumvention of effective technological protection measures in their domestic copyright laws where circumvention is for purposes of infringing the exclusive rights of copyright [NZ oppose: or related rights] owners.]

2. Each Party may provide that such protections and remedies shall not hinder or prevent uses of copyright or related rights protected material that are permitted under exceptions or limitations to the exclusive rights of copyright [NZ oppose: and related rights] owners, or the use of materials that are in the public domain.

[PE/SG: It is understood that nothing in this Article prevents a Party from adopting effective and necessary measures to ensure that a beneficiary may enjoy limitations and exceptions provided in that Party's national law, in accordance with Article QQG16, where technological measures have been applied toa work, performance or phonogram, and the beneficiary has legal access to that work, performance or phonogram particularly in circumstances such as where appropriate and effective measures have not been taken by rights holders in relation to that work, performance or phonogram to enable the beneficiary to enjoy the limitations and exceptions under that Party's national law.]

3. Subject to each Party's international obligations, the Parties affirm that they may establish provisions to facilitate the exercise of permitted acts where technological measures have been applied.]

In order to provide adequate and effective legal remedies to protect rights management information:

each Party [VN oppose: shall] [VN: may] provide [VN oppose: that] [VN: legal remedies against] any person who without authority, and knowing, or, with respect to civil remedies, having reasonable grounds to know, that it would induce, enable, facilitate, or conceal an infringement of [CA oppose: any] [CA propose: the] copyright or related right [VN oppose: ,] [VN: :]

knowingly removes or alters any [CA/JP propose: electronic] rights management information;

[MY/BN/VN/CA/JP oppose: distributes or imports for distribution rights management information knowing that the rights management information has been altered without authority; or]

[CA propose: knowingly] distributes, imports for distribution, broadcasts, communicates or makes available to the public copies of works, [CL/NZ/MY/SG/VN oppose: performances,] or phonograms, knowing that [CA/JP propose: electronic] rights management information has been removed or altered without authority [VN oppose: ,] [VN: .]

[VN oppose: shall be liable and subject to the remedies set out in Article [QQ.H.4(15) ]. Each Party [CA/MX/JP propose: may] [CA/MX oppose: shall] provide for criminal procedures and penalties to be applied when any person, other than a nonprofit library, archive, [CA propose: museum,] [MY: or] educational institution [MY/CA oppose: , or [CL oppose: public noncommercial] broadcasting entity] [CA propose: any other nonprofit entity as determined by a Party's law.] [CL: established without a profit-making purpose], is found to have engaged [CA oppose: willfully and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain] [CA propose: knowingly and for commercial purposes] in any of the foregoing activities. [MY/CA propose: Each Party may provide that these criminal procedures and penalties do not apply to any other nonprofit entity as determined by a Party's law.] [AU/SG/PE/CL/MY/NZ/BN/CA/MX/JP oppose: Such criminal procedures and penalties shall include the application to such activities of the remedies and authorities listed in subparagraphs (a), (b) and (f) of Article [15.5] as applicable to infringements, mutatis mutandis.]]

[SG/NZ/CL/MY/BN/VN/CA/JP oppose: (b) each Party shall confine exceptions and limitations to measures implementing subparagraph (a) to lawfully authorized activities carried out by [MX propose: the] government [MX oppose: employees, agents, or contractors] for the purpose of law enforcement, intelligence, essential security, or similar governmental purposes.]

(c) Rights management information means:

[AU/MY/CA/JP propose: electronic] information that identifies a work, [NZ/MY oppose: performance,] or phonogram, the author of the work, [NZ/MY oppose: the performer of the performance,] or the producer of the phonogram; or the owner of any right in the work, [NZ/MY oppose: performance,] or phonogram;

[AU/MY/CA/JP: electronic] information about the terms and conditions of the use of the work, [NZ/MY oppose:performance,] or phonogram ; or

any [AU/MY/CA/JP: electronic] numbers or codes that represent such information,

when any of these items [CA propose: of information] is attached to a copy of the work, [NZ/MY oppose: performance,] or phonogram or appears in connection with the communication or making available of a work, [NZ/MY oppose: performance] or phonogram, to the public.

(d) For greater certainty, nothing in this paragraph shall obligate a Party to require the owner of any right in the work, performance, or phonogram to attach rights management information to copies of the work, performance, or phonogram, or to cause rights management information to appear in connection with a communication of the work, performance, or phonogram to the public.

1. Each Party shall accord the rights provided for in this Chapter with respect to [NZ/BN/MY oppose: performers and] producers of phonograms to the [NZ/BN/MY oppose: performers and] producers of phonograms who are nationals of another Party and to [NZ/BN/MY oppose: performances or] phonograms first published or first fixed in the territory of another Party. A [NZ/BN/MY oppose: performance or] phonogram shall be considered first published in the territory of a Party in which it is published within 30 days of its original publication.[][]

2. Each Party shall provide to performers the right to authorize or prohibit:

broadcasting and communication to the public of their unfixed performances, except where the performance is already a broadcast performance; and

fixation of their unfixed performances.

3. [US/AU/PE/NZ/MY/BN/VN/CL/MX/SG propose ; CA oppose:

(a) Each Party shall provide to [NZ oppose: performers and] producers of phonograms the right to authorize or prohibit [BN oppose: the broadcasting or] any communication to the public of their [NZ oppose: performances or] phonograms, by wire or wireless means, including the making available to the public of those [NZ oppose: performances and] phonograms in such a way that members of the public may access them from a place and at a time individually chosen by them.]

[US/CL/PE/MX/SG/MY/NZ/AU/VN/BN propose: (b) Notwithstanding subparagraph (a) and Article [QQ.G.16.1] [exceptions and limitations - 3 step test], the application of this right to analog transmissions and [SG/VN/BN oppose: non-interactive], free over-the-air [CL/PE/MX oppose: analog and digital] broadcasts, and exceptions or limitations to this right for such activity, shall be a matter of each Party's law.]

[US/AU/SG/CL/PE/VN/MY propose: (c) Each Party may adopt limitations to this right in respect of other noninteractive transmissions in accordance with Article [QQ.G.16.1] [exceptions and limitations - 3 step test], provided that the limitations do not [CL/PE oppose: unreasonably] prejudice the right of the performer or producer of phonograms to obtain equitable remuneration].

[CA propose: Each Party shall provide to performers and producers of phonograms the rights to authorize or prohibit:

(c) the broadcasting or any communication to the public of their performances or phonograms; and

(d) the making available to the public, by wire or wireless means, of their performances and phonograms in such a way that members of the public may access them from a place and at a time individually chosen by them.

Where, upon the data of signature of this Agreement, the right in subparagraph (a) has not been implemented by a Party, the requirement may be satisfied by providing a right to a single equitable remuneration for the direct or indirect use of phonograms published for commercial purposes for broadcasting or for any communication to the public.]

For purposes of this [Article QQ.G.1 and Article QQ.G.3 - 18 ], the following definitions apply with respect to performers and producers of phonograms:

broadcasting means the transmission by wireless means for public reception of sounds or of images and sounds or of the representations thereof; such transmission by satellite is also "broadcasting"; transmission of encrypted signals is "broadcasting" where the means for decrypting are provided to the public by the broadcasting organization or with its consent;

communication to the public of a performance or a phonogram means the transmission to the public by any medium, other than by broadcasting, of sounds of a performance or the sounds or the representations of sounds fixed in a phonogram. For the purposes of paragraph [3], "communication to the public" includes making the sounds or representations of sounds fixed in a phonogram audible to the public;

fixation means the embodiment of sounds, or of the representations thereof, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or communicated through a device;

performers means actors, singers, musicians, dancers and other persons who act, sing, deliver, declaim, play in, interpret, or otherwise perform literary or artistic works or expressions of folklore;

phonogram means the fixation of the sounds of a performance or of other sounds, or of a representation of sounds, other than in the form of a fixation incorporated in a cinematographic or other audiovisual work;

producer of a phonogram means the person who, or the legal entity which, takes the initiative and has the responsibility for the first fixation of the sounds of a performance or other sounds, or the representations of sounds; and

[CA propose:]publication of a performance or a phonogram means the offering of copies of the performance or the phonogram to the public, with the consent of the rightholder, and provided that copies are offered to the public in reasonable quantity.

With respect to Section G, each Party shall confine limitations or exceptions to exclusive rights to certain special cases that do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work, performance, or phonogram, and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holder.

Article QQ.G.X.1 neither reduces nor extends the scope of applicability of the limitations and exceptions permitted by the TRIPS Agreement, Berne Convention [VN propose: Rome Convention,] the WIPO Copyright Treaty, and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty.

Each Party shall endeavor to achieve an appropriate balance in its copyright and related rights system,inter aliaby means of limitations or exceptions that are consistent with Article QQ.G.X, 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 [CL/MY propose: ,education, ] [CL propose: and persons with disabilities] [US/MY/SG/CA/PE/BN/MX/VN propose: , as well as facilitating access to published works for persons who are blind, visually impaired, or otherwise print disabled].

[CL/NZ/MY propose: It is consistent with this Agreement to provide exceptions and limitations for temporary acts of reproduction which are transient or incidental and an integral and essential part of a technological process and whose sole purpose is to enable (a) a lawful transmission in a network between third parties by an intermediary; or (b) a lawful use of a work; and which have no independent economic significance.]

[CL/NZ/SG/MY/BN/VN/PE/MXpropose; AU/US oppose: The Parties are encouraged to establish international exhaustion of rights.]

[CA propose: Nothing in this Chapter shall affect the freedom of the Parties to determine whether and under what conditions the exhaustion of copyright and related rights applies.]

The Parties recognize the important role of collective management societies for copyright and related rights in collecting and distributing royaltiesbased on practices that are fair, efficient, transparent and accountable, and which may include appropriate record keeping and reporting mechanisms.

1. Each Party shall ensure that enforcement procedures as specified in this section, are available under its law [CL/SG/CA/BN/PE/MX/VN propose: and its legal system] so as to permit effective action against any act of infringement of intellectual property rights covered by this Chapter, including expeditious remedies to prevent infringements and remedies which constitute a deterrent to future infringements. These procedures shall be applied in such a manner as to avoid the creation of barriers to legitimate trade and to provide for safeguards against their abuse.

2. Each Party shall ensure that its procedures concerning the enforcement of intellectual property rights shall be fair and equitable. These procedures shall not be unnecessarily complicated or costly, or entail unreasonable time-limits or unwarranted delays.

[CL/VN/PE/AU/MY/BN/NZ/SG/MX/CA propose: 3. This Section does not create any obligation:

(a) to put in place a judicial system for the enforcement of intellectual property rights distinct from that for the enforcement of law in general, nor does it affect the capacity of each Party to enforce their law in general, or

(b) with respect to the distribution of resources as between the enforcement of intellectual property rights and the enforcement of law in general.]

[US/SG propose; BN/VN/PE/MY/NZ/MX/CA oppose: 4. The Parties understand that the distribution of enforcement resources shall not excuse that Party from complying with this Section.]

1. In civil, criminal, and if applicable, administrative proceedings involving copyright or related rights, each Party shall provide:

for a presumption [US/CA propose: ] that, in the absence of proof to the contrary, the person whose name is indicated in the usual manner [CL/VN/BN/AU/MX/CA/SG/PE/NZ propose: ] as the author, performer, producer [CA oppose: , or publisher] of the work, performance, or phonogram [CA propose: , or as applicable, the publisher] is the designated right holder in such work, performance, or phonogram; and

for a presumption that, in the absence of proof to the contrary, the copyright or related right subsists in such subject matter.

[US/BN/MY/NZ/SG/CA propose; 2 AU/PE/CL/VN/MX oppose: In civil, [BN/MY oppose: administrative,] and criminal proceedings involving trademarks, each Party shall provide for a rebuttable presumption that a registered trademark is valid.

[BN/SG/MY oppose: In civil or administrative patent enforcement proceedings, each Party shall provide for a rebuttable presumption that each claim in a patent substantively examined and granted by the competent authority satisfies the applicable criteria of patentability in the territory of the Party ].]

1. Each Party shall provide that final judicial decisions and administrative rulings of general application pertaining to the enforcement of intellectual property rights shall [SG/BN/MY/CA propose: preferably] be in writing and [MY oppose: shall] [MY/CA propose: may] state [VN/SG/BN/MY/CA oppose: any relevant findings of fact and] the reasoning or the legal basis on which the decisions and rulings are based. Each Party shall also provide that such decisions and rulings shall be published [] or, where publication is not practicable, otherwise made available to the public, in a national language in such a manner as to enable interested persons and Parties to become acquainted with them.

2. Each Party recognizes the importance of collecting and analyzing statistical data and other relevant information concerning intellectual property rights infringements as well as collecting information on best practices to prevent and combat infringements.

3. Each Party [US/AU/PE/NZ/CL/MX/CA/JP/SG/BN/VN propose: shall] [MY propose: may] publish or otherwise make available to the public information on its efforts to provide effective enforcement of intellectual property rights in its civil, administrative and criminal systems, such as statistical information that the Party may collect for such purposes.

1. Each Party shall make available to right holderscivil judicial procedures concerning the enforcement of any intellectual property rightcovered in this Chapter.

2 Each Party shall provide [] that in civil judicial proceedings its judicial authorities have the authority at least to order the infringer to pay the right holder damages adequate to compensate for the injury the right holder has suffered [PE oppose: because of an infringement of that person's intellectual property right by an infringer who knowingly, or with reasonable grounds to know, engaged in infringing activity.] [SG/PE/AU/NZ/MY/CL/CA/MX/BN/VN oppose:]

2bis.At least in cases of copyright or related rights infringement and trademark counterfeiting, each Party shall provide that, in civil judicial proceedings, its judicial authorities have the authority to order the infringer to pay the right holder the infringer's profits that are attributable to the infringement.[]

2ter.In determining the amount of damages under paragraph 2, its judicial authorities shall have the authority to consider,inter alia,any legitimate measure of value the right holder submits, which may include lost profits, the value of the infringed goods or services measured by the market price, or the suggested retail price.

[US/CA/BN/AU/JP/MX/NZ/PE/VN propose: 3.Each Party shall provide that its judicial authorities have the authority to order injunctive relief that conforms to the provisions of Article 44 of the TRIPS Agreement,inter alia,to prevent goods that involve the infringement of an intellectual property right from entering into the channels of commerce [VN propose: in that Party's Jurisdiction].]

[CL/PE/BN//VN propose;US/NZ oppose: 4. Each Party shall ensure that its judicial authorities shall have the authority to order a party at whose request measures were taken and who has abused enforcement procedures to provide the party wrongfully enjoined or restrained adequate compensation for the injury suffered because of such abuse.]

(1) In civil judicial proceedings, with respect to infringement of copyright or related rights protecting works, phonograms, and performances, each Party shall establish or maintain a system that provides for one or more of the following:

pre-established damages, which shall be available upon the election of the right holder; or

additional damages.

(2)In civil judicial proceedings, with respect to trademark counterfeiting, each Party [US propose: shall] [NZ/MY/BN/JP propose: may] also establish or maintain a system that provides for one or more of the following:

pre-established damages, which shall be available upon the election of the right holder; or

additional damages.

(3) Pre-established damages shall be set out in an amount that would be sufficient to compensate the right holder for the harm caused by the infingement [VN oppose: , and with a view to deterring future infringements].

(4) In awarding additional damages, judicial authorities shall have the authority to award such additional damages as they consider appropriate, having regard to all relevant matters, including the [seriousness / extent / blatancy of the infringing conduct]and the need to deter similar infringements in the future.

[US propose; SG/PE/VN/CA/CL/NZ/MY/BN/AU/MX/JP oppose: 6. In civil judicial proceedings concerning patent infringement, each Party shall provide that its judicial authorities shall have the authority to increase damages to an amount that is up to three times the amount of the injury found or assessed.]

7. Each Party shall provide that its judicial authorities, [PE oppose: where appropriate,] [CA propose:] [PE propose: except in exceptional circumstances] have the authority to order, at the conclusion of civil judicial proceedings concerning infringement of at least copyright or related rights, [CA/MX/US propose: patents and] [CA/MX/US oppose: or] trademarks, that the prevailing party be awarded payment by the losing party of court costs or fees and appropriate attorney's fees, or any other expenses as provided for under that Party's law.

9. In civil judicial proceedings concerning copyright or related rights infringement and trademark counterfeiting, each Party shall provide that its judicial authorities shall have the authority [VN propose: , at the right holder's request,] to order [VN propose: as provisional measures] the seizure or other taking into custody of suspected infringing goods, materials and implements relevant to the infringement, and, at least for trademark counterfeiting, documentary evidence relevant to the infringement.

10. Each Party shall provide that in civil judicial proceedings :

At least with respect to pirated copyright goods and counterfeit trademark goods, each Party shall provide that, in civil judicial proceedings, at the right holder's request, its judicial authorities have the authority to order that such infringing goods be [VN propose: disposed of outside the channel of commerce or] destroyed, except in exceptional circumstances, without compensation of any sort.

Each Party shall further provide that its judicial authorities have the authority to order that materials and implements that have been used in the manufacture or creation of such infringing goods, be, without undue delay and without compensation of any sort, destroyed or disposed of outside the channels of commerce in such a manner as to minimize the risks of further infringements.

in regard to counterfeit trademark goods, the simple removal of the trademark unlawfully affixed shall not be sufficient, other than in exceptional circumstances, to permit the release of goods into the channels of commerce.

11. Without prejudice to its law governing privilege, the protection of confidentiality of information sources, or the processing of personal data, each Party shall provide that, in civil judicial proceedings concerning the enforcement of intellectual property rights, its judicial authorities have the authority, upon a justified request [VN: propose] of the right holder, to order the infringer or, in the alternative, the alleged infringer, to provide to the right holder or to the judicial authorities, at least for the purpose of collecting evidence, relevant information as provided for in its applicable laws and regulations that the infringer or alleged infringer possesses or controls. Such information may include information regarding any person involved in any aspect of the infringement or alleged infringement and regarding the means of production or the channels of distribution of the infringing or allegedly infringing goods or services, including the identification of third persons alleged to be involved in the production and distribution of such goods or services and of their channels of distribution.

12. Each Party shall provide that in relation to a civil judicial proceeding concerning the enforcement of intellectual property rights, its judicial or other authorities have the authority to impose sanctions on a party, counsel, experts, or other persons subject to the court's jurisdiction, for violation of judicial orders concerning the protection of confidential information produced or exchanged in connection with such a proceeding.

13. To the extent that any civil remedy [VN propose; MX oppose:]can be ordered as a result of administrative procedures on the merits of a case, each Party shall provide that such procedures conform to principles equivalent in substance to those set out in this Article (civil and administrative proceedings)

14. In the event that a Party's judicial or other authorities appoint technical or other experts in civil proceedings concerning the enforcement of intellectual property rights and require that the parties to the litigation bear the costs of such experts, that Party should seek to ensure that such costs are reasonable and related appropriately,inter alia, to the quantity and nature of work to be performedand do not unreasonably deter recourse to such proceedings.

[US/AU/SG propose; BN/VN/MX/JP oppose: 15. In civil judicial proceedings concerning the acts described in Article 4.[9] (TPMs) and Article 4.[10] (RMI), each Party shall provide that its judicial authorities shall, at the least, have the authoriy to:

impose provisional measures, including seizure or other taking into custody of devices and products suspected of being involved in the prohibited activity;

[US/SG propose; NZ/AU/MY oppose: provide an opportunity for the right holder to elect between actual damages it suffered (plus any profits attributable to the prohibited activity not taken into account in computing those damages) or pre-established damages;] [AU/NZ/PE propose: order damages of the type available for the infringement of copyright]

order [NZ propose: , where appropriate,] payment to the prevailing party at the conclusion of civil judicial proceedings of court costs and fees, and appropriate attorney's fees, by the party engaged in the prohibited conduct; and

order the destruction of devices and products found to be involved in the prohibited activity.

[US/AU/SG/NZ/MY/CL/CA propose [US propose: No Party shall make damages available under this paragraph] [AU/SG/NZ/MY/CL/CA propose: A Party may provide that damages shall not be available] against a [MY oppose: nonprofit] library, archives, educational institution, [CA propose: museum, or any other nonprofit entity as determined by a Party's law] [CA oppose: or public noncommercial broadcasting entity] [MY oppose: that sustains the burden of proving that such entity was not aware and had no reason to believe that its acts constituted a prohibited activity]. ]]

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY propose: 16. Each Party may adopt or maintain measures to discourage vexatious or unreasonable proceedings, including those involving pharmaceutical products that are subject to marketing, regulatory or sanitary approval.]

1. Each Party's authorities shall act on requests for reliefinaudita altera parteexpeditiously in accordance with the Party's judicial rules.

2. Each Party shall provide that its judicial authorities have the authority to require the applicant, with respect to provisional measures, to provide any reasonably available evidence in order to satisfy themselves with a sufficient degree of certainty that the applicant's right is being infringed or that such infringement is imminent, [VN//PE: and that any delay in the issuance of such measures is likely to cause irreparable harm to the right holders, or there is a demonstrable risk of evidence being destroyed,] and to order the applicant to provide a security or equivalent assurance set at a level sufficient to protect the defendant and to prevent abuse. Such security or equivalent assurance shall not unreasonably deter recourse to such procedures.

1. Each Party shall provide that any right holder initiating procedures for its competent authorities to suspend release of suspected counterfeit [SG/BN/MY/VN/CA oppose: or confusingly similar] trademark goods, or pirated copyright goodsinto free circulation is required to provide adequate evidence to satisfy the competent authorities that, under the law{s} of the [CA/NZ/MX/US/PE/AU oppose: country of importation] [CA/NZ/MX/US/PE/AUpropose: Party providing the procedures], there isprima faciean infringement of the right holder's intellectual property right and to supply sufficient information that may reasonably be expected to be within the right holder's knowledge to make the suspected goodsreasonably recognizable by its competent authorities. The requirement to provide such information shall not unreasonably deter recourse to these procedures.

1bis.Each Party shall provide for applications to suspend the release of, or to detain, any suspect goods[SG/VN oppose: under customs controlin its territory.][SG/VN propose: that are imported into the territory of the Party] A Party may provide that, at the request of the right holder, an application to suspend the release of, or to detain, suspect goods may apply to selected points of entry [US/CA/JP/MXpropose; CL/SG/VN oppose: and exit] under customs control.][US/AU/CA/JP/NZ propose; MX /PE/CL/MY/SG/VN/BN oppose: Each Party shall provide that applications [NZ oppose: shall] remain in force [NZ propose: for the period requested by the right holder but not exceeding five years, or] for a period of not less than one year from the date of application, or the period that the good is protected by copyright or the relevant trademark registration is valid, whichever is shorter.[NZ propose: A Party may provide that its competent authorities have the authority to suspend or invalidate an application when there is due cause.]

2. Each Party shall provide that its competent authorities have the authority to require a right holder initiating procedures to suspend the release of suspected counterfeit [BN/SG/MY/VN/CA oppose: or confusingly similar] trademark goods, or pirated copyright goods, to provide a reasonable security or equivalent assurance sufficient to protect the defendant and the competent authorities and to prevent abuse. Each Party shall provide that such security or equivalent assurance shall not unreasonably deter recourse to these procedures. A Party may provide that such security may be in the form of a bond conditioned to hold the defendant harmless from any loss or damage resulting from any suspension of the release of goods in the event the competent authorities determine that the article is not an infringing good.

3. Without prejudice to a Party's laws pertaining to privacy or the confidentiality of information, where its competent authorities have detained or suspended the release of goods that are suspected of being counterfeit or pirated, a Party may provide that its competent authorities have the authority to inform the right holder [CA/VN propose: who has filed a request for assistance] [MY/CA/BN/PE/VN oppose: promptly] [MY/CA/PE/BN/SG/VN propose: within a reasonable period] of the names and addresses of the consignor, exporter, consignee or importer, a description of the merchandise, quantity of the merchandise, and, if known, the country of origin of the merchandise.: Where a Party does not provide such authority to its competent authorities when suspect goods are detained or suspended from release, it shall provide [US/VN propose: , at least in cases of imported goods,] its competent authorities with the authority to provide the foregoing information to the right holder [SG/VN oppose: within 30 days] [SG/VN propose: within a reasonable period] of the seizure or determination that the goods are counterfeit or pirated, whichever is earlier.

[US/PE/AU/SG/MY/CL/CA/BN/JP propose; NZ/VN/MX oppose: 4. Each Party shall provide that its competent authorities may initiate border measuresex officiowith respect to [AU propose: merchandise that is] imported, [MY/CL/AU/PE/BN oppose: exported,] [CL/AU/PE propose; SG oppose: destined for export,] [AU/MY/SG/CA/BN/CL oppose: or in-transit merchandise,[PE oppose:]] [PE/SG/MY/CL/CA/BN oppose: or [AU oppose: merchandise] [US propose: entering into or exiting from] [US oppose: in] free trade zones], that is suspected of being counterfeit [SG/PE/MY/CA/BN oppose: or confusingly similar] trademark goods, or pirated copyright goods.]

5. Each Party shall adopt or maintain a procedure by which its competent authorities may determine, within a reasonable period oftime after the initiation of the procedures described under Article QQ.H.6(1)whether the suspect goods infringe an intellectual property right. Where a Party provides administrative procedures for the determination of an infringement, it [VNpropose: may] [VN oppose: shall] also provide its authorities with the authority to impose administrative penalties, which may include monetary penalties or the seizure of the infringing goods, following a determination that the goods are infringing.

6. Each Party shall provide that its competent authorities have the authority to order the destruction [VN propose: , or disposal outside the channel of commerce,] of goods following a determination that the goods are infringing. In cases where such goods are not destroyed, each Party shall ensure that, except in exceptional circumstances, such goods are disposed of outside the channels of commerce in such a manner as to avoid any harm to the right holder. In regard to counterfeit trademark goods, the simple removal of the trademark unlawfully affixed shall not be sufficient, other than in exceptional cases, to permit the release of the goods into the channels of commerce.

7. Where a Party establishes or assesses, in connection with the procedures described in this section [article], an application fee, storage fee, or destruction fee, such fee shall not be set at an amount that unreasonably deters recourse to these procedures

8. Each Party shall include in the application of this Article goods of a commercial nature sent in small consignments. A Party may exclude from the application of thisArticle small quantities of goods of a non-commercial nature contained in travellers' personal luggage.

1. Each Party shall provide for criminal procedures and penalties to be applied at least in cases of willful trademark counterfeiting or copyright or related rights piracy on a commercial scale.

2. [US/AU/SG/PE propose; CL/VN/MY/NZ/CA/BN/MX oppose: Willful copyright or related rights piracy on a commercial scale includes:

significant willful copyright or related rights infringements that have no direct or indirect motivation of financial gain; and

willful infringements for purposes of commercial advantage or [AU/SG/PE/JP oppose: private] financial gain.[AU/SG/PE/CA/JP oppose:]]

Each Party shall treat willful importation [SG/MX/BN/MY/VN oppose: or exportation] of counterfeit trademark goods [VN oppose: or pirated copyright goods] on a commercial scale as unlawful activities subject to criminal penalties.

[US propose; AU/BN/MY/NZ/SG/CL/VN/PE/CA/MX/JP oppose: 3. Each Party shall also provide for criminal procedures and penalties to be applied, even absent willful trademark counterfeiting or copyright or related rights piracy, at least in cases of knowing trafficking in:

labels or packaging, of any type or nature, to which a counterfeit trademarkhas been applied, the use of which is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive; and

counterfeit or illicit labelsaffixed to, enclosing, or accompanying, or designed to be affixed to, enclose, or accompany the following:

a phonogram,

a copy of a computer program or a literary work,

a copy of a motion picture or other audiovisual work,

documentation or packaging for such items; and

counterfeit documentation or packaging for items of the type described in subparagraph (b).]

[NZ/AU/BN/MY/US/CA/SG/MX/JP propose; PE/CL/VN oppose: 4. Each Party shall provide for criminal procedures and penalties to be applied in cases of willful importationand domestic use, in the course of trade and on a commercial scale, of labels or packaging:

to which a mark has been applied without authorization which is identical to, or cannot be distinguished from, a trademark registered in its territory; and

which are intended to be used in the course of trade on goods or in relation to services which are identical to goods or services for which such trademark is registered.]

[US propose; CA/JP oppose: Each Party shall further ensure that criminal penalties and procedures are applied in cases of knowing trafficking in illicit labelsaffixed, enclosing, or accompanying, or designed to be affixed to, enclose, or accompany phonograms, copies of computer programs, literary works, motion pictures, or other audiovisual works.]

5. [AU/NZ/SG/MY/ CA/US propose; PE/VN/BN/MX/CL oppose: [US/CA propose: Each] [US/CA oppose: A] Party [SG/NZ/CL oppose: shall] [SG/NZ/CL/JP: may] provide criminal procedures and penalties [US/CA oppose: , in appropriate cases,] for the [US/CA propose: knowing and] unauthorized copying [MY: or recording] [US propose; CA/JP oppose: or transmittal] of [US/CA propose: a [JP propose: first-run] cinematographic work, or any part thereof,] [US/CA oppose: cinematographic works] from a performance in a [CA oppose: motion picture exhibition facility generally open to the public] [CA/JP propose: movie theater].]

6. With respect to the offenses for which this Article requires the Parties to provide for criminal procedures and penalties, Parties shall ensure that criminal liability for aiding and abetting is available under its law.

7. With respect to the offences described in Article QQ.H.7[1]-[4] above, each Party shall provide:

penalties that include sentences of imprisonment as well as monetary fines sufficiently high to provide a deterrent to future acts of infringement, consistently with the level of penalties applied for crimes of a corresponding gravity;

that its judicial authorities shall have the authority, when determining penalties, to account for the seriousness of the circumstances, which may include those that involve threats to, or effects on, health or safety;

that its judicial [VN propose: or other]authorities shallhave the authority to order the seizure of suspected counterfeit trademark goods or pirated copyright goods, any related materials and implements used in the commission of the alleged offense, documentary evidence relevant to the alleged offense [MY oppose: , and assetsderived from, or obtained directly [VNoppose: or indirectly] through the alleged infringing activity].

Where a Party requires the identification of items subject to seizure as a prerequisite for issuing any such judicial order, that Party shall not require the items to be described in greater detail than necessary to identify them for the purpose of seizure;

that its judicial authorities shall have the authority to order the forfeiture, at least for serious offenses, of any assets derived from, or obtained directly [VN oppose: or indirectly] through the infringing activity;

that its judicial authorities shall have the authority to order the forfeiture or destruction of:

all counterfeit trademark goods or pirated copyright goods; and

materials and implements [CA/VN/MX propose: predominantly][CA/VN/MX oppose: that have been] used in the creation of pirated copyright goods or counterfeit trademark goods; and

[CL/PE/VN/BN/SG/AU/CA/MX/JP oppose: (iii) any other articles consisting of a counterfeit trademark].

In cases where counterfeit trademark goods and pirated copyright goods are not destroyed, the [MY oppose: judicial][MY/SG/CL/AU/PE/MX/VN/JP: competent] authorities shall ensure that , except in exceptional circumstances, such goods shall be disposed of outside the channels of commerce in such a manner as to avoid causing any harm to the right holder. Each Party shall further provide that forfeiture or destruction under this subparagraph and subparagraph (c)shall occur without compensation of any kind to the defendant;

[US/NZ propose; BN/SG/MY/CL/PE/AU/VN/CA/MX/JP oppose: (f)that its judicial authorities have the authority to order the seizure or forfeiture of assets the value of which corresponds to that of the assets derived from, or obtained directly or indirectly through, the infringing activity];

that its judicial or other competent authorites shall have the authority to release or, in the alternative, provide access to, goods, material, implements, and other evidence held by the authority to a right holder for civilinfringement proceedings.

[US/NZ/PE/SG/BN/CL/AU/MY/CA/MX propose: VN/JP oppose: (h) that its competent authorities may act upon their own initiative to initiate a legal action without the need for a formal complaint by a private party or right holder].

1.[CL propose: In the course of ensuring effective protection against unfair competition as provided in Article 10bisof the Paris Convention] Parties shall ensure that natural and legal persons have the legal means to prevent trade secrets lawfully in their control from being disclosed to, acquired by, or used by others (including state commercial enterprises)without their consent in a manner contrary to honest commercial practices.[] As used in this Chapter, trade secrets encompass, at a minimum, undisclosed information as provided for in Article 39.2 of the TRIPS Agreement.

[US/MX/CA/NZ/JPpropose; SG/MY/PE/VN/CL/AU/BN oppose: 2. Each Party shall provide for criminal procedures and penalties at least in cases in which a trade secret relating to a product in national or international commerce is misappropriated, or disclosed, willfully and without authority for purposes of commercial advantage or financial gain, and with the intent to injure the owner of such trade secret.]

Each Party shall make it a [CL/MX propose: civil or,] [VN propose: administrative or] criminal offense to:

manufacture, assemble, modify, import, export, sell, lease, or otherwise distribute a tangible or intangible device or system, knowing[CL] [CL/JP oppose: or having reason to know] that the device or [CL oppose: system is primarily of assistance] [CL propose: system's principal function is solely to assist] in decoding an encrypted program-carrying satellite [CL/VN/SG/PE/CA/MX oppose: or cable] signal without the authorization of the lawful distributor of such signal; and

[US/AU/NZ/PE/MY/SG/MX/VN/CA/CL propose, BN/JP oppose: (b) [VN oppose: [CA propose: except in circumstances where the lawful distributor has not made the signal available to persons in the area where the decoding occurs,] willfully receive[CL oppose: and make use of,][] or] willfully further distribute a program-carrying signal that originated as an encrypted satellite [PE/SG/MX/VN/CL/CA oppose: or cable] signal knowing that it has been decoded without the authorization of the lawful dstributor of the signal, [PE/SG/MX/VN/CL/CA oppose: or if the signal has been decoded with the authorization of the lawful distributor of the signal, willfully to further distribute the signal for purposes of commercial advantage knowing that the signal originated as an encrypted program-carrying signal and that such further distribution is without the authorization of the lawful signal distributor.] ]

[US/AU/PE/NZ/MX/CLpropose, MY/BN/VN/CA oppose: 2. Each Party shall provide for civil remedies, [CL/MX oppose: including compensatory damages,] for any person injured by any activity described in paragraph [1], including any person that holds an interest in the encrypted programming signal or its content.]

[US/AU/CA/SG/NZ/PE propose, VN/ oppose:1. Each Party shall ensure that enforcement procedures, to the extent set forth in the civil and criminal enforcement sections of this Chapter, are available under its law so as to permit effective action against an act of trademark, copyright or related rights infringement which takes place in the digital environment, including expeditious remedies to prevent infringement and remedies which constitute a deterrent to further infringement.]

Each Partyshall adopt or maintain appropriate laws, regulations, policies, orders, government-issued guidelines, or administrative or executive decrees providing that its [US/AU/CA/MY/VN/MX propose: central] government agencies use only non-infringingcomputer software [US/AU/CA/MX propose:; SG/CL/PE/NZ/MY/BN/VN oppose: and other materials protected by copyright or related rights] in a manner authorized by law and by the relevant license. These measures shall apply to the acquisition and [PE/CA oppose: management] [PE/CA propose: use] of such software [PE/CL/BN/SG/NZ/MY/VN oppose: and other materials] for government use.

[US propose: Notwithstanding Article QQ.G.16 [limitations and exceptions] and Article QQ.G.14.3(b) [over the air broadcasting reference], no Party may permit the retransmission of television signals (whether terrestrial, cable, or satellite) on the Internet without the authorization of the rightholder or right holders of the content of the signal and, if any, of the signal.]

Article QQ.I.1: {Internet Service Provider Liability}[CL/BN/NZ/MY/VN/CA/SG/MX propose; AU/US oppose: 1. Each Party shall limit the liability of, or the availability of remedies against, internet service providers [when acting as intermediaries], for infringement of copyright or related rights that take place on or through communication networks, in relation to the provision or use of their services.]

[CA propose: 2. Limitations referred to in the previous paragraph shall cover at least the following functions:

mere conduit, which consist of the provision of the means to transmit information provided by a user, or the means of access to a communication network;

hosting of information at the request of a user of the hosting services;

caching carried out through an automated process, when the internet service provider:

does not modify information other than for technical reasons;

ensures that any directions related to the caching of information that are specified in a manner widely recognized and used by industry are complied with; and

does not interfere with the use of technology that is lawful and widely recognized and used by the industry in order to obtain data on the use of information;

providing an information location tool, by making reproductions of copyright material in an automated manner, and communicating the reproductions.]

[CA propose: 3. Qualification by an internet service provider for the limitations as to each function in the previous paragraph shall be considered separately from qualification for the limitations as to each other function. Eligibility for the limitations in the previous paragraph may not be conditioned on the internet service provider monitoring its service, or affirmatively seeking facts indicating infringing activity.]

[CL/BN/NZ/VN/MX propose; AU/US/SG/MY oppose: 2. The framework in Paragraph 1 [CA oppose: will only apply if an internet service provider meets conditions, including] [CA/CL/VN propose; NZ/MX oppose: shall be accompanied in a Party's law by]:

(a) [CA/NZ/CL/VN/MX propose: procedures for notifications of claimed infringement and for] removing or disabling access to infringing material [CA/CL/MX oppose: upon notification from the right holder through a procedure established by each Party]; and]

[CA/NZ/CL/VN propose: (b) legal incentives for internet service providers to comply with these procedures, or remedies against internet service providers who fail to comply.]]

[CA propose: 4. Each Party shall provide legal incentives for internet service providers to comply, or remedies against internet service providers who fail to comply, with any procedures established in each party's law for:

(a) effective notifications of claimed infringement; or

(b) removing or disabling access to infringing material residing on its networks.]

[CA/CL/VN] propose: [CA oppose: 3.] [CA propose: 5.] The framework in Paragraph 1 will not apply to the extent that an internet service provider provides a service primarily for the purpose of enabling acts of copyright or related right infringement.]

[CA propose: 6. This Article is without prejudice to the availability in a Party's law of other defences, limitations and exceptions to the infringement of copyright or related rights. This Article shall not affect the possibility of a court or administrative authority, in accordance wth Parties' legal systems, or requiring the internet service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.]

[US/AU/SG/NZ/PE propose; BN/VN/CA/MX oppose: 1. [SG/MY oppose: For the purpose of providing enforcement procedures that permit effective action against any act of copyright infringement covered by this Chapter, including expeditious remedies to prevent infringements and criminal and civil remedies] each Party shall provide, consistent with the framework set out in this Article:

[MY/VN oppose: legal incentives for service providers to cooperate with copyright owners in deterring the unauthorized storage and transmission of copyrighted materials; and]

limitations in its law [MY/NZ/SG propose: on the liability of, or on the remedies] [NZ/MY/VN oppose: regarding the scope of remedies ] available against service providers for copyright infringements that they do not control, initiate or direct, and that take place through systems or networks controlled or operated by them or on their behalf, as set forth in this subparagraph (b). [PE propose: ]

[MY/VN oppose: These limitations shall preclude monetary relief and provide reasonable restrictions on court-ordered relief to compel or restrain certain actions for the following functions, [NZ oppose: and shall be confined to those functions]][]:

transmitting, routing, or providing connections for material without modification of its content[CL propose:], or the [MY oppose: intermediate and] transient storage of such material in the course thereof;

caching carried out through an automatic process;

storage, at the direction of a user, of material residing on a system or network controlled or operated by or for the service provider; and

referring or linking users to an online location by using information location tools, including hyperlinks and directories.

These limitations shall apply only where the service provider does not initiate the transmission of the material, and does not select the material or its recipients (except to the extent that a function described in clause (i)(D) in itself entails some form of selection).

Qualification by a service provider for the limitations as to each function in clauses (i)(A) through (D) shall be considered separately from qualification for the limitations as to each other function[CL oppose: , in accordance with the conditions for qualification set forth in clauses (iv) through (vii)]

With respect to functions referred to in clause (i)(B), the limitations shall be conditioned on the service provider:

[CL/MY oppose: (A) permitting access to cached material in significant part only to users of its system or network who have met conditions [NZ propose: imposed by the originator of the material] on user access to that material;]

complying with rules concerning the refreshing, reloading, or other updating of the cached material when specified by the [CL oppose: person making the material available online] [CL propose: supplier of the material] in accordance with arelevant industry standard data communications protocol for the system or network through which that person makes the material available that is generally accepted in the Party's territory;

not interfering with technology usedat the originating site consistent with industry standards generally accepted in the Party's territory to obtain information about the use of the material, and not modifying its content in transmission to subsequent users; and

[MY oppose: expeditiously] removing or disabling access, on receipt of an effective notification of claimed infringement, to cached material that has been removed or access to which has been disabled at the originating site.

With respect to functions referred to in clauses (i)(C) and (D), the limitations shall be conditioned on the service provider:

(A) not receiving a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity, in circumstances where it has the right and ability to control such activity;

(B) [MY oppose: expeditiously] removing or disabling access to the material residing on its system or network on obtaining actual knowledge of the infringement or becoming aware of facts or circumstances from which the infringement was apparent, such as through effective notifications of claimed infringement in accordance with clause (ix); [NZ oppose: and

(C ) publicly designating a representative to receive such notifications.]

[MY/NZ oppose: (vi) Eligibility for the limitations in this subparagraph shall be conditioned on the service provider:

(A) adopting and reasonably implementing a policy that provides for termination in appropriate circumstances of the accounts of repeat infringers; and

(B) accommodating and not interfering with standard technical measures accepted in the Party's territory that protect and identify copyrighted material, that are developed through an open, voluntary process by a broad consensus of interested parties, that are available on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms, and that do not impose substantial costs on service providers or substantial burdens on their systems or networks.]

Eligibility for the limitations in this subparagraph may not be conditioned on the service provider monitoring its service, or affirmatively seeking facts indicating infringing activity [NZ/MY oppose: , except to the extent consistent with such technical measures.]

[NZ oppose: (viii) If the service provider qualifies for the limitations with respect to the function referred to in clause (i)(A), court-ordered relief to compel or restrain certain actions shall be limited to terminating specified accounts, or to taking reasonable steps to block access to a specific, non-domestic online location.[MY oppose: If the service provider qualifies for the limitations with respect to any other function in clause (i), court-ordered relief to compel or restrain certain actions shall be limited to removing or disabling access to the infringing material, terminating specified accounts, and other remedies that a court may find necessary, provided that such other remedies are the least burdensome to the service provider [CL propose: and users or subscribers] among comparably effective forms of relief. Each Party shall provide that any such relief shall be issued with due regard for the relative burden to the service provider [CL propose: ,to users or subscribers] and harm to the copyright owner, the technical feasibility and effectiveness of the remedy and whether less burdensome, comparably effective enforcement methods are available. Except for orders ensuring the preservation of evidence, or other orders having no material adverse effect on the operation of the service provider's communications network, each Party shall provide that such relief shall be available only where the service provider has received notice of the court order proceedings referred to in this subparagraph and an opportunity to appear before the judicial authority.]]

[NZ oppose: (ix) For purposes of the notice and take down process for the functions referred to in clauses (i) [CL propose: (B)] (C) and (D), each Party shall establish appropriate procedures in its law or in regulations for effective notifications of claimed infringement, and effective counter-notifications by those whose material is removed or disabled through mistake or misidentification. Each Party shall also provide for monetary remedies against any person who makes a knowing material misrepresentation in a notification or counter-notification that causes injury to any interested party as a result of a service provider relying on the misrepresentation.]

[NZ oppose: (x) If the service provider removes or disables access to material in good faith based on claimed or apparent infringement, each Party shall provide that the service provider shall be exempted from liability for any resulting claims, provided that, in the case of material residing on its system or network, it takes reasonable steps promptly to notify the [CL oppose: person making the material available on its system or network] [CL propose: supplier of the material] that it has done so and, if such person makes an effective counter-notification and is subject to jurisdiction in an infringement suit, to restore the material online unless the person giving the original effective notification seeks judicial relief within a reasonable time.]

Each Party shall establish an administrative or judicial procedure enabling copyright owners [NZ oppose: who have given effective notification of claimed infringement] to obtain expeditiously from a service provider information in its possession identifying the alleged infringer.

For purposes of the function referred to in clause (i)(A), service provider means a provider of transmission, routing, or connections for digital online communications without modification of their content between or among points specified by the user of material of the user's choosing, [NZ oppose: and for purposes of the functions referred to in clauses (i)(B) through (D) service provider means a provider or operator of facilities for online services or network access.]]

In meeting the obligations of Article QQ.I.1.3(b)(ix), each Party shall adopt or maintain requirements for: (a) effective written notice to service providers with respect to materials that are claimed to be infringing, and (b) effective written counter-notification by those whose material is removed or disabled and who claim that it was disabled through mistake or misidentification, as set forth in this letter. Effective written notice means notice that substantially complies with the elements listed in section (a) of this letter, and effective written counter-notification means counter-notification that substantially complies with the elements listed in section (b) of this letter.

(a) Effective Written Notice, by a Copyright Owner or Person Authorized to Act

on Behalf of an Owner of an Exclusive Right, to a Service Provider's Publicly Designated Representative

In order for a notice to a service provider to comply with the relevant requirements set out in Article QQ.I.1.3(b)(ix), that notice must be a written communication, which may be provided electronically, that includes substantially the following:

the identity, address, telephone number, and electronic mail address of the complaining party (or its authorized agent);

information reasonably sufficient to enable the service provider to identify the copyrighted work(s) claimed to have been infringed;

3. information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to identify and locate the material residing on a system or network controlled or operated by it or for it that is claimed to be infringing, or to be the subject of infringing activity, and that is to be removed, or access to which is to be disabled;

a statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law;

a statement that the information in the notice is accurate;

a statement with sufficient indicia of reliability [SG propose:] (such as a statement under penalty of perjury or equivalent legal sanctions) that the complaining party is the [SG/AU oppose: holder] [SG/AU propose: owner] of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed, or is authorized to act on the owner's behalf; and

the signature of the person giving notice.

(b) Effective Written Counter-Notification by a SubscriberWhose Material Was Removed or Disabled as a Result of Mistake or Misidentification of Material

In order for a counter-notification to a service provider to comply with the relevant requirements set out in Article QQ.I.1.3.(b)(ix), that counter-notification must be a written communication, which may be provided electronically, that includes substantially the following:

the identity, address, [SG/AU propose: electronic mail address] and telephone number of the subscriber;

the identity of the material that has been removed or to which access has been disabled;

the location at which the material appeared before it was removed or access to it was disabled;

a statement with sufficient indicia of reliability (such as a statement under penalty of perjury or equivalent legal sanctions) that the subscriber [SG/AU propose: is the supplier of the material and] has a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material;

a statement that the subscriber agrees to be subject to orders of any court that has jurisdiction over the place where the subscriber's address is located, or, if that address is located outside the Party's territory, any other court with jurisdiction over any place in the Party's territory where the service provider may be found, and in which a copyright infringement suit could be brought with respect to the alleged infringement;

a statement that the subscriber will accept service of process in any such suit; and

the signature of the subscriber.

]]

[CL propose: Annex ['...]

List of Geographical Indications from ChileWINES Name of Indication

Valle de Aconcagua

Alhu(C)

Valle del B­o B­o

Buin

Valle del Cachapoalf

Valle de Casablanca

Cauquenes

Chilln

Chimbarongo

Valle del Choapa

Coelemu

Valle de Colchagua

Valle de Copiap"

Valle de Curic"

Region de Aconcagua

Region de Atacama

Region de Coquimbo

Valle del Claro

Region del Sur

Region del Valle Central

Valle del Elqui

Valle del Huasco

Illapel

Isla de Maipo

Valle del Itata

Valle de Leyda

Valle de Limar­

Linares

Valle del Loncomilla

Valle del Lontu(C)

Lolol

Valle del Maipo

Maria Pinto

Valle del Marga-Marga

Valle del Maule

Marchigue

Valle del Malleco

Melipilla

Molina

Monte Patria

Mulch(C)n

Nancagua

Ovalle

Paiguano

Pajarete

Palmilla

Panquehue

Parral

Pencahue

Peralillo

Peumo

Pirque

Portezuelo

Puente Alto

Punitaqui

Quill"n

Rancagua

Valle del Rapel

Rauco

Rengo

Requ­noa

R­o Hurtado

Romeral

Sagrada Familia

Valle de San Antonio

San Juan

Salamanca

San Clemente

San Fernando

San Javier

San Rafael

Santa Cruz

Santiago

Talagante

Talca

Valle del Teno

Valle delTutuv(C)n

Traigu(C)n

Vicu±a

Villa Alegre

Vino Asoleado

Yumbel

SPIRITS Name of Indication Country

Pisco Chile

AGRICULTURAL Name of Indication Country

Lim"n de Pica Chile]

TPP Analysis Citizen.org

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 21:35

Nov. 13, 2013

Leaked Documents Reveal Obama Administration Push for Internet Freedom Limits, Terms That Raise Drug Prices in Closed-Door Trade Talks

U.S. Demands in Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement Text, Published Today by WikiLeaks, Contradict Obama Policy and Public Opinion at Home and Abroad

WASHINGTON, D.C. '' Secret documents published today by WikiLeaks and analyzed by Public Citizen reveal that the Obama administration is demanding terms that would limit Internet freedom and access to lifesaving medicines throughout the Asia-Pacific region and bind Americans to the same bad rules, belying the administration's stated commitments to reduce health care costs and advance free expression online, Public Citizen said today.

WikiLeaks published the complete draft of the Intellectual Property chapter for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a proposed international commercial pact between the United States and 11 Asian and Latin American countries. Although talks started in 2008, this is the first access the public and press have had to this text. The text identifies which countries support which terms. The administration has refused to make draft TPP text public, despite announcing intentions to sign the deal by year's end. Signatory nations' laws would be required to conform to TPP terms.

The leak shows the United States seeking to impose the most extreme demands of Big Pharma and Hollywood, Public Citizen said, despite the express and frequently universal opposition of U.S. trade partners. Concerns raised by TPP negotiating partners and many civic groups worldwide regarding TPP undermining access to affordable medicines, the Internet and even textbooks have resulted in a deadlock over the TPP Intellectual Property Chapter, leading to an impasse in the TPP talks, Public Citizen said.

''The Obama administration's proposals are the worst '' the most damaging for health '' we have seen in a U.S. trade agreement to date. The Obama administration has backtracked from even the modest health considerations adopted under the Bush administration,'' said Peter Maybarduk, director of Public Citizen's global access to medicines program. ''The Obama administration's shameful bullying on behalf of the giant drug companies would lead to preventable suffering and death in Asia-Pacific countries. And soon the administration is expected to propose additional TPP terms that would lock Americans into high prices for cancer drugs for years to come.''

Previously, some elements of U.S. proposals for the Intellectual Property Chapter of the TPP had been leaked in 2011 and 2012. This leak is the first of a complete chapter revealing all countries' positions. There are more than 100 unresolved issues in the TPP Intellectual Property chapter. Even the wording of many footnotes is in dispute; one footnote negotiators agree on suggests they keep working out their differences over the wording of the other footnotes. The other 28 draft TPP chapters remain shrouded in secrecy.

Last week, the AARP and major consumer groups wrote to the Obama administration to express their ''deep concern'' that U.S. proposals for the TPP would ''limit the ability of states and the federal government to moderate escalating prescription drug, biologic drug and medical device costs in public programs,'' and contradict cost-cutting plans for biotech medicines in the White House budget.

Other U.S.-demanded measures for the TPP would empower the tobacco giants to sue governments before foreign tribunals to demand taxpayer compensation for their health regulations and have been widely criticized. ''This supposed trade negotiation has devolved into a secretive rulemaking against public health, on behalf of Big Pharma and Big Tobacco,'' said Maybarduk.

''It is clear from the text obtained by WikiLeaks that the U.S. government is isolated and has lost this debate,'' Maybarduk said. ''Our partners don't want to trade away their people's health. Americans don't want these measures either. Nevertheless, the Obama administration '' on behalf of Big Pharma and big movie studios '' now is trying to accomplish through pressure what it could not through persuasion.''

''The WikiLeaks text also features Hollywood and recording industry-inspired proposals '' think about the SOPA debacle '' to limit Internet freedom and access to educational materials, to force Internet providers to act as copyright enforcers and to cut off people's Internet access,'' said Burcu Kilic, an intellectual property lawyer with Public Citizen. ''These proposals are deeply unpopular worldwide and have led to a negotiation stalemate.''

''Given how much text remains disputed, the negotiation will be very difficult to conclude,'' said Maybarduk. ''Much more forward-looking proposals have been advanced by the other parties, but unless the U.S drops its out-there-alone demands, there may be no deal at all.''

''We understand that the only consideration the Obama administration plans to propose for access to affordable generic medicines is a very weak form of differential treatment for developing countries,'' said Maybarduk.

The text obtained by WikiLeaks is available at wikileaks.org/tpp. Analysis of the leaked text is available at www.citizen.org/access.

More information about the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations is available at www.citizen.org/tpp.

TPP Leak Confirms the Worst: US Negotiators Still Trying to Trade Away Internet Freedoms | Electronic Frontier Foundation

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Nov 2013 03:24

After years of secret trade negotiations over the future of intellectual property rights (and limits on those rights), the public gets a chance to looks at the results. For those of us who care about free speech and a balanced intellectual property system that encourages innovation, creativity, and access to knowledge, it's not a pretty picture.

Today Wikileaks published a complete draft of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement's chapter on ''intellectual property rights.'' The leaked text, from August 2013, confirms long-standing suspicions about the harm the agreement could do to users' rights and a free and open Internet. From locking in excessive copyright term limits to further entrenching failed policies that give legal teeth to Digital Rights Management (DRM) tools, the TPP text we've seen today reflects a terrible but unsurprising truth: an agreement negotiated in near-total secrecy, including corporations but excluding the public, comes out as an anti-user wish list of industry-friendly policies.

Despite the Obama administration's top U.S. negotiators' fast approaching their self-imposed 2013 deadline to complete the agreement, today's leak is the public's first look at the sprawling text since a February 2011 leak [pdf] of the same chapter and a July 2012 leak of an individual section. And even as the public has been completely shut out, the U.S. Trade Representative has lobbied for wider latitude to negotiate and for ''fast-track authority'' to bypass Congressional review.

The document Wikileaks has published contains nearly 100 pages of bracketed text'--meaning it includes annotated sections that are proposed and opposed by the negotiating countries. The text is not final, but the story it tells so far is unmistakable: United States negotiators (with occasional help from others) repeatedly pushing for restrictive policies, and facing only limited opposition, coming from countries like Chile, Canada, New Zealand, and Malaysia.

Copyright TermsThe leaked chapter features proposals for setting a new ''floor'' for copyright duration, ranging from the already problematic U.S. term of life of the author plus 70 years to an incredible life of the author plus 100 years, proposed by Mexico. Such bloated term lengths benefit only a vanishingly small portion of available works, and impoverish the public domain of our collective history. The U.S. is also pushing for countries to embrace terms lengths of 95 years for corporate and 120 years for unpublished works.

Extending term lengths in the U.S. was already a bad idea. The U.S. Trade Rep shouldn't be compounding it by forcing other countries to follow suit. Countries around the world that have shorter term lengths than the U.S. celebrate the arrival each year of new works into the public domain, and the economic activity that can accompany them. Since the 1998 passage of the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, however, the U.S. will see no new published works enter the public domain until 2019. The proposal in TPP would export that sort of restriction to all the countries that join it.

These expansive terms have also exacerbated the widely recognized problem of ''orphan works'' also known as ''hostage works.'' These are works where the rightsholder can't be identified or located and, therefore, folks are afraid to use them, publish them online, etc, lest the rightsholder appear at last and file a lawsuit. As a result, millions of works effectively disappear from the cultural commons until their copyright terms at long last expire. Earlier this year, the U.S. Register of Copyrights advised a reduction or limitation in term length as a possible solution. Crystallizing U.S. term lengths in international agreements would frustrate efforts to enact such reasonable policies. This is a classic example of policy laundering, whereby corporate interests use secretive international forums to trump the democratic process at the national level.

Fair Use and Fair DealingAlthough the addition of the ''3-step test'' for fair use provisions was hailed by the U.S. Trade Representative as a major step forward for users' rights in trade agreements, its original intention has been subverted. It now may serve as a ceiling on rights, and not a floor.

The agreement claims not to confine copyright limitations and exceptions further than earlier deals, such as the Berne Convention, but early analysis from groups like Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) suggests that's not the case. Functionally, TPP as drafted creates a tightly circumscribed space in which countries can grant rights like fair use and fair dealing to its citizens.

Given the important role that flexibility in copyright has played in enabling innovation and free speech, it's a terrible idea to restrict that flexibility in a trade agreement.

Intermediary liabilityThe newly leaked text reveals substantial disagreement over the language on copyright liability for Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and other online platforms. The February 2011 leak contained extensive language that would have imposed regulatory requirements to police users' activities online and paved the way for systems like three-strikes take down policies and ISPs filtering and blocking access to websites that allegedly infringe or facilitate copyright infringement.

Even though the text appears to be very much in flux, it's clear from the leaked chapter that Canada is pushing back hard against U.S. pressure to adopt draconian copyright enforcement measures. A majority of countries appear to be proposing language that would give them some flexibility to limit the liability of ISPs, so they can develop enforcement frameworks that best suit their national laws and priorities. That flexibility is essential to staving off copyright enforcement laws that in practice would violate users' free speech and privacy. And yet the U.S., backed by Australia, opposes this language.

Anti-CircumventionThe leaked draft includes controversial language calling for laws prohibiting the circumvention of ''technological protection measures,'' also known as DRM. The U.S. has had such a law in place for over 15 years, and it's been a disaster for free speech and competition, chilling the legitimate speech of innovators, filmmakers, security researchers, and many others. In fact, it's so bad that President Obama and many in Congress have said it must be reformed. Just as much of the U.S. public is realizing our anti-circumvention law was a mistake in the first place, we're not only trying to export it but also potentially impeding our own ability to fix it.

Despite numerous heroic proposals for fixes, most notably from Canada and Chile, the articles as drafted include many such dangerous provisions. Though the text remains unsettled, the current proposal calls for criminal liability for violations of these anti-circumvention provisions, except for when conducted by a non-profit.

Worse, because of the broad language, this criminal liability could apply to people circumventing these restrictions even where the underlying work is not covered by copyright.

Temporary CopiesThe strict regulation of temporary copies reflected in the February 2011 leak was a startling throwback to an outmoded and dangerous idea: that copyright should apply even to ephemeral copies. The implications are staggering. Computers and networks create, in the normal course of operation, temporary and ephemeral copies. Regulations on these sorts of copies, as described in the earlier leak, would interfere with basic technical operations and give rightsholders an opportunity to sit on an essential chokepoint of the Internet.

Fortunately, negotiators may have recognized the fundamental folly of this proposal. Although the U.S. has yet to support any reasonable text on this topic, the draft leaked today included a proposed clarification that temporary copies may be exempted from copyright restrictions. Language from Chile, New Zealand, and Malaysia proposes that countries may make these exemptions for:

temporary acts of reproduction which are transient or incidental and an integral and essential part of a technological process and whose sole purpose is to enable (a) a lawful transmission in a network between third parties by an intermediary; or (b) a lawful use of a work; and which have no independent economic significance.

Similar language appears in a footnote proposed by a larger group of countries that does not include the U.S., and which negotiators have noted faces ''no substantive objection to the concept'' but which is not yet finalized.

PatentsThe leaked draft reveals that the US is pushing hard for provisions expanding the reach of patent law and limiting ways in which a patent may be revoked. These proposals are meeting widespread opposition from the other participants. For example, the U.S. proposes'--and nearly every other nation opposes'--that patents be made available for inventions that are ''plants and animals.''

The U.S. also proposes language that would prohibit denying ''a patent solely on the basis that the product did not result in enhanced efficacy of the known product.'' Again, nearly every other nation opposes the U.S. on this issue. And a good thing too. Setting the bar to patentability too low locks up innovation. Advocates for access to medicine argue that it allows pharmaceutical companies delay generic entry through ''evergreening.'' In other technology areas, the U.S. is seeing the terrible consequences of a flood of low-quality software patents, many of which are for minor improvements on existing technology. There's no reason for an international treaty to export the problems of the U.S. patent regime.

ConclusionThe latest TPP leak confirms our longstanding fears about these negotiations. The USTR is pushing for regulations that would, for the most part, put the desires of major content and patent owners over the needs of the public. No wonder the negotiators want to keep the process secret. There are marginal improvements since February 2011, but they are not enough. Real and substantially balanced proposals will not happen unless and until negotiators can be held accountable to the public for the proposals they are making.

Rest assured: if they can't be challenged now, they will surely be challenged later. Internet users have proven that they will not stand for backroom deals that put their freedoms at risk.

Thanks to WikiLeaks, we see just how bad TPP trade deal is for regular people | Dan Gillmor | Comment is free | theguardian.com

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 22:11

A protester demonstrates against the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa) in New York. It might be time to do the same against the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty Images

Among the many betrayals of the Obama administration is its overall treatment of what many people refer to as "intellectual property" '' the idea that ideas themselves and digital goods and services are exactly like physical property, and that therefore the law should treat them the same way. This corporatist stance defies both reality and the American Constitution, which expressly called for creators to have rights for limited periods, the goal of which was to promote inventive progress and the arts.

In the years 2007 and 2008, candidate Obama indicated that he'd take a more nuanced view than the absolutist one from Hollywood and other interests that work relentlessly for total control over this increasingly vital part of our economy and lives. But no clearer demonstration of the real White House view is offered than a just-leaked draft of an international treaty that would, as many had feared, create draconian new rights for corporate "owners" and mean vastly fewer rights for the rest of us.

I'm talking about the appalling Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, a partial draft of which WikiLeaks has just released. This treaty has been negotiated in secret meetings dominated by governments and corporations. You and I have been systematically excluded, and once you learn what they're doing, you can see why.

The outsiders who understand TPP best aren't surprised. That is, the draft "confirms fears that the negotiating parties are prepared to expand the reach of intellectual property rights, and shrink consumer rights and safeguards," writes James Love a longtime watcher of this process.

Needless to say, copyright is a key part of this draft. And the negotiators would further stiffen copyright holders' control while upping the ante on civil and criminal penalties for infringers. The Electronic Frontier Foundation says TPP has "extensive negative ramifications for users' freedom of speech, right to privacy and due process, and hinder peoples' abilities to innovate". It's Hollywood's wish list.

Canadian intellectual property expert Michael Geist examined the latest draft of the intellectual property chapter. He writes that the document, which includes various nations' proposals, shows the US government, in particular, taking a vastly different stance than the other nations. Geist notes:

[Other nations have argued for] balance, promotion of the public domain, protection of public health, and measures to ensure that IP rights themselves do not become barriers to trade. The opposition to these objective[s] by the US and Japan (Australia has not taken a position) speaks volumes about their goals for the TPP.

The medical industry has a stake in the outcome, too, with credible critics saying it would raise drug prices and, according to Love's analysis, give surgeons patent protection for their procedures.

Congress has shown little appetite for restraining the overweening power of the corporate interests promoting this expansion. With few exceptions, lawmakers have repeatedly given copyright, patent and trademark interests more control over the years. So we shouldn't be too optimistic about the mini-flurry of Capitol Hill opposition to the treaty that emerged this week. It's based much more on Congress protecting its prerogatives '' worries about the treaty's so-called "fast track" authorities, giving the president power to act without congressional approval '' than on substantive objections to the document's contents.

That said, some members of Congress have become more aware of the deeper issues. The public revolt against the odious "Stop Online Piracy Act" two years ago was a taste of what happens when people become more widely aware of what they can lose when governments and corporate interests collude.

If they become aware '' that's the key. One of TPP's most odious elements has been the secrecy under which it's been negotiated. The Obama administration's fondness for secret laws, policies and methods has a lot to do with a basic reality: the public would say no to much of which is done in our names and with our money if we knew what was going on. As Senator Elizabeth Warren pointed out, in a letter to the White House:

I have heard the argument that transparency would undermine the administration's policy to complete the trade agreement because public opposition would be significant. If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that trade agreement should not be the policy of the United States. I believe in transparency and democracy and I think the US Trade Representative should too.

Thanks to WikiLeaks, we have at least partial transparency today. The more you know about the odious TPP, the less you'll like it '' and that's why the administration and its corporate allies don't want you to know.

------------------------------------------------

KEI analysis of Wikileaks leak of TPP IPR text, from August 30, 2013 | Knowledge Ecology International

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 22:40

KEI Comments on the August 30, 2013 version of the TPP IP Chapter

For more information, contact James Love, mailto:james.love@keionline.org, mobile +1.202.361.3040.

Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) has obtained from Wikileaks a complete copy of the consolidated negotiating text for the IP Chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). (Copy here, and on the Wikileaks site here: https://wikileaks.org/tpp/) The leaked text was distributed among the Chief Negotiators by the USTR after the 19th Round of Negotiations at Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei, in August 27th, 2013.

There have been two rounds since Brunei, and the latest version of the text, from October, will be discussed in Salt Lake City next week.

The text released by Wikileaks is 95 pages long, with 296 footnotes and 941 brackets in the text, and includes details on the positions taken by individual countries.

The document confirms fears that the negotiating parties are prepared to expand the reach of intellectual property rights, and shrink consumer rights and safeguards.

Compared to existing multilateral agreements, the TPP IPR chapter proposes the granting of more patents, the creation of intellectual property rights on data, the extension of the terms of protection for patents and copyrights, expansions of right holder privileges, and increases in the penalties for infringement. The TPP text shrinks the space for exceptions in all types of intellectual property rights. Negotiated in secret, the proposed text is bad for access to knowledge, bad for access to medicine, and profoundly bad for innovation.

The text reveals that the most anti-consumer and anti-freedom country in the negotiations is the United States, taking the most extreme and hard-line positions on most issues. But the text also reveals that several other countries in the negotiation are willing to compromise the public's rights, in a quest for a new trade deal with the United States.

The United States and other countries have defended the secrecy of the negotiations in part on the grounds that the government negotiators receive all the advice they need from 700 corporate advisors cleared to see the text. The U.S. negotiators claim that the proposals need not be subject to public scrutiny because they are merely promoting U.S. legal traditions. Other governments claim that they will resist corporate right holder lobbying pressures. But the version released by Wikileaks reminds us why government officials supervised only by well-connected corporate advisors can't be trusted.

An enduring mystery is the appalling acceptance of the secrecy by the working news media.

With an agreement this complex, the decision to negotiate in secret has all sorts of risks. There is the risk that the negotiations will become hijacked by corporate insiders, but also the risk that negotiators will make unwitting mistakes. There is also the risk that opportunities to do something useful for the public will be overlooked or abandoned, because the parties are not hearing from the less well-connected members of the public.

The U.S. proposals are sometimes more restrictive than U.S. laws, and when consistent, are designed to lock-in the most anti-consumer features. On top of everything else, the U.S. proposals would create new global legal norms that would allow foreign governments and private investors to bring legal actions and win huge damages, if TPP member countries does not embrace anti-consumer practices.

General provisions, and dispute resolution

The existing multilateral copyright and trade treaties, negotiated in the light of day, generally provide better balance between right holders and users. The WTO TRIPS Agreement is the only multilateral agreement with impressive enforcement mechanisms. The TRIPS agreement is defined not only by the specific provisions setting out rights and exceptions, but general provisions, such as Articles 1, 6, 7,8, 40 and 44, that provide a variety of safeguards and protections for users and the public interest. The US is proposing that the new TPP IPR provisions be implemented with few if any of the safeguards found in the TRIPS, or weaker versions of them.

The dispute resolution provisions in the TPP permit both governments and private investors to bring actions and obtain monetary damages if arbitrators find that the implementation of the agreement is not favorable enough to right holders. This effectively gives right holders three bites at the apple -- one at the WTO and two at the TPP. They can lobby governments to advance their positions before a WTO panel, and/or, the separate dispute mechanisms available to governments and investors in the TPP. There are no opportunities for consumers to bring such disputes.

The addition of the investor state dispute resolution provisions in the TPP greatly increases the risks that certain issues will be tested in the TPP, particularly when the TPP provisions are modified to be more favorable to right holders, or lack the moderating influence of the TRIPS type safeguards which the US is blocking in the TPP.

Access to Medicines

The trade agreement includes proposals for more than a dozen measures that would limit competition and raise prices in markets for drugs. These include (but are not limited to) provisions that would lower global standards for obtaining patents, make it easier to file patents in developing countries, extend the term of patents beyond 20 years, and create exclusive rights to rely upon test data as evidence that drugs are safe and effective. Most of these issues have brackets in the text, and one of the most contentious has yet to be tabled -- the term of the monopoly in the test data used to register biologic drugs. The United States is consistently backing the measures that will make drugs more expensive, and less accessible.

Some of the issues are fairly obvious, such as those requiring the granting of more patents with longer effective terms, or monopolies in test data. Others are more technical or subtle in nature, such as the unbracketed wording of Article QQ.A.5, which is designed to narrow the application of a 2001 WTO Doha Agreement TRIPS and Public Health, and its obligations to provide for ''access to medicine for all.'' By changing the language, the TPP makes it seem as if the provision is primarily about ''HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, [US oppose: chagas] and other epidemics as well as circumstances of extreme urgency or national emergency,'' instead of all medicines and all diseases, including cancer.

Patents on Surgical Methods

An interesting example of how the US seeks to change national and global norms are the provisions in the TPP over patents on surgical methods. The WTO permits countries to exclude ''diagnostic, therapeutic and surgical methods for the treatment of humans or animals.'' The US wants to flip this provision, so that ''may also exclude from patentability'' becomes ''shall make patents available.'' However, when a version of the IP Chapter was leaked in 2011, the US trade negotiators were criticized for ignoring the provisions in 28 USC 287 that eliminated remedies for infringement involving the ''medical activity'' of a ''medical practitioner.'' The exception in US law covered ''the performance of a medical or surgical procedure on a body.'' The US trade negotiators then proposed adding language that would permit an exception for surgery, but only ''if they cover a method of using a machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.'' The US proposal, crafted in consultation with the medical devices lobby, but secret from the general public, was similar, but different from the U.S. statute, which narrowed the exception in cases involving ''the use of a patented machine, manufacture, or composition of matter in violation of such patent.'' How different? As Public Citizen's Burcu Kilic puts it, under the US proposal in the TPP, the exception would only apply to ''surgical methods you can perform with your bare hands.''

Why is the United States putting so much effort into narrowing if not eliminating the flexibility in the WTO agreement to provide exceptions for patents on ''diagnostic, therapeutic, and surgical methods for the treatment of humans or animals''? It did not hurt that AdvaMed, the trade association for the medical device manufacturers, hired Ralph F. Ives as Executive Vice President for Global Strategy & Analysis. Before becoming a lobbyist for the medical device industry, Ives was the head of pharmaceutical policy for USTR. And Ives is just one of an army of lobbyists (including former Senator Evan Bayh) representing the medical devices industry. ITAC3, the USTR advisory board for Chemicals, Pharmaceuticals, Health/Science Products And Services, includes not only Ralph Ives, but also representatives from Medronic, Abbott, Johnson and Johnson, DemeTech, North Coast Medical and Airmed Biotech -- all companies involved in the medical device business. All are considered ''cleared advisors'' to USTR and have access to the TPP text.

Uncertainty over compulsory licenses on patents

At present, exceptions to exclusive rights of patents may be implemented under a general exceptions clause (Article 30 of the TRIPS), a rules based system (Article 31), or under other provisions, including limitations to remedies, the first sale doctrine, or the control of anticompetitive practices. The option to use the TRIPS Article 31 mechanisms has been proposed by New Zealand, Canada, Singapore, Chile and Malaysia, but is not currently supported by the US, Japan or other countries. This presents significant uncertainty over the freedom to use compulsory licenses. If QQ.E5quater is not accepted, the rules based WTO approach will not be possible, and governments will have to satisfy a restrictive three step test, and run the risk of litigation under investor state dispute resolution provisions of the TPP.

Article QQ.E.5quater: {Other Use Without Authorisation of the Right Holder}

[NZ/CA/SG/CL/MY propose: Nothing in this Chapter shall limit a Party's rights and obligations under Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement or any amendment thereto.]

Copyright

There is little reason for any language on copyright in the TPP. All of the TPP member countries are already members of the WTO, which has its own extensive obligations as regards copyright, including obligations to implement Articles 1 through 21 of the Berne Convention. The TRIPS has already expanded copyright coverage to software, and provides extensive protections to performers, producers of phonograms (sound recordings) and broadcasting organizations. Moreover, the United States and Australia have proposed that all TPP member countries ''ratify or accede'' to two 1996 treaties (the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty), as well as the 1974 Brussels Convention Relating to the Distribution of Programme-Carrying Signals Transmitted by Satellite. Despite this, the TPP provides its own nuanced and often detailed lists of obligations. Collectively, the copyright provisions are designed to extend copyright terms beyond the life plus 50 years found in the Berne Convention, create new exclusive rights, and provide fairly specific instructions as to how copyright is to be managed in the digital environment.

Copyright terms

There are significant differences in the positions of the parties on the term of protection. Some countries are opposing any expansion of the term found in the Berne Convention, the TRIPS or the WCT, which is generally life plus 50 years, or 50 years for corporate owned works.

For the TPP copyright terms, the basics are as follows. The US, Australia, Peru, Singapore and Chile propose a term of life plus 70 years for natural persons. For corporate owned works, the US proposes 95 years exclusive rights, while Australia, Peru, Singapore and Chile propose 70 years for corporate owned works. Mexico wants life plus 100 years for natural persons and 75 years for corporate owned works. For unpublished works, the US wants a term of 120 years.

While the US negotiators are indeed promoting US legal norms, they are promoting norms that most experts and consumers see as a mistake, that should be corrected. There is no justification for 95 year copyright terms for corporations, or 70 years of protection after an author is dead, or 120 years for unpublished works.

3-Step Test

One set of technically complex but profoundly important provisions are those that define the overall space that governments have to create exceptions to exclusive rights. The Berne Convention established a system combining ''particular'' exceptions for the most common and important topics such as quotations, news of the day, public affairs, speeches, uses of musical compensations, and education, and a general purpose exception to the reproduction right that could be implemented in any other case not covered by the particular exception. Any exception not spelled out as a particular exception was subject to a very restrictive three step test. When the WTO incorporated the bulk of the Berne Convention articles, it retained this system, and added additional areas of flexibility, including very broad freedom to apply the first sale doctrine (Article 6 of the TRIPS), to control anti-competitive practices (Articles 8 and 40), and to implement a liability rule approach through Article 44.2 of the TRIPS.

In recent years, the publisher lobby has sought to elevate the 3-step test to a high level filter to limit all copyright exceptions, including the so called ''particular'' Berne exceptions, as well as anything else that limits exclusive rights. In the TPP, the copyright lobby has succeeded in obtaining a formulation based in part upon the 1996 WIPO WCT treaty, which can be read to provide some recognition of the Berne particular exceptions, but (unlike the 2012 Beijing treaty) does not specifically reference the important agreed upon statements in the 1996 WCT, which support more robust exceptions.

In its current form, the TPP space for exceptions is less robust than the space provided in the 2012 WIPO Beijing treaty or the 2013 WIPO Marrakesh treaty, and far worse than the TRIPS Agreement. While this involves complex legal issues, the policy ramifications are fairly straightforward. Should governments have a restrictive standard to judge the space available to fashion exceptions for education, quotations, public affairs, news of the day and the several other ''particular'' exceptions in the Berne Convention, and more generally, why would any government want to give up its general authority to consider fashioning new exceptions, or to control abuses by right holders?

Formalities

The TPP goes beyond the TRIPS agreement in terms of prohibiting the use of formalities for copyright. While the issue of formalities may seem like a settled issue, there is a fair amount of flexibility that will be eliminated by the TPP. At present, it is possible to have requirements for formalities for domestically owned works, and to impose formalities on many types of related rights, including those protected under the Rome Convention. In recent years, copyright policy makers and scholars have begun to reconsider the benefits of the registration of works and other formalities, particularly in light of the extended terms of copyright and the massive orphan works problems.

In April 2013 a major workshop on this topic took place in Berkeley, titled: ''Reform(aliz)ing Copyright for the Internet Age?'' (http://www.law.berkeley.edu/formalities.htm), where the benefits and challenges of reintroducing formalities was discussed.

On the issue of formalities, the TPP language is an unnecessary and unwelcome barrier to introducing reforms.

TPM/DRM

The copyright section also includes extensive language on technical protection measures, and in particular, the creation of a separate cause of action for breaking technical protection measures. The US wants this separate cause of action to extend even to cases where there is no copyrighted works, such as in cases of public domain materials, or data not protected by copyright. It is worth noting that the restrictions on breaking technical protection measures include several exceptions, including, for example:

''lawfully authorized activities carried out by government employees, agents, or contractors for the purpose of law enforcement, intelligence, essential security, or similar governmental purposes''

In the United States the problem of TPMs and the complicated rulemaking process for exceptions and limitations to anticircumvention measures was part of a recent controversy when the Librarian of Congress refused to renew an exemption to allow the unlocking of cell-phones. After a petition by over 100,000 to the White House, the Obama Administration responded, agreeing that an exemption should exist to permit unlocking of cell-phones. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) introduced a bill, co-sponsored with bipartisan support, called the "Unlocking Technology Act" which would make clear that there is no liability for circumvention of a TPM where circumvention is done to engage in a use that is not an infringement of copyright. Such a bill is potentially threatened by the aggressive proposals on TPMs in the TPP.

The TPP provisions on technological protection measures and copyright and related rights management information are highly contentious and complex, and as a practical matter, impossible to evaluate without access to the negotiating text. Given the enormous public interest in this issue and other issues, it is very unfortunate that governments have insisted on secret negotiations.

Damages

One of the largest disappointments in the ACTA negotiations was the failure to sufficiently moderate the aggressive new norms for damages associated with infringements. The TPP negotiation has been far more secretive than the ACTA negotiation, and what is now clear is that as far as the issue damages is concerned, the TPP text is now much worse than the ACTA text. Particularly objectionable is the unbracketed Article QQ.H.4: 2ter, which reads as follows:

2ter. In determining the amount of damages under paragraph 2, its judicial authorities shall have the authority to consider, inter alia, any legitimate measure of value the right holder submits, which may include lost profits, the value of the infringed goods or services measured by the market price, or the suggested retail price.

Aside from the obvious overreaching of requiring consideration of "the suggested retail price," the US is ignoring all sorts of national laws for copyright, patents and trademarks, and TRIPS rules as regards layout-designs (topographies) of integrated circuits, that set different standards for damages in cases of infringements. The following are just a few examples:

Under the Article 36 of TRIPS, damages for certain infringement are limited, by the WTO, to "a sum equivalent to a reasonable royalty such as would be payable under a freely negotiated licence in respect of such a layout-design."

Under the Affordable Care Act, a company infringing on undisclosed patents for biologic drugs is only liable for a reasonable royalty, or no royalty, depending upon the nature of the disclosure.

The US DOJ and the USPTO recently took the position that certain patents infringements related to standards setting activities, should be limited to a reasonable royalty.

The US proposal in the TPP will also prevent the United States from using limitations on remedies for infringement as part of a larger effort to expand access to orphaned copyright works -- an approach that has been endorsed by the US Copyright Office, and by Senator Patrick Leahy.

For several other examples, see: " Two areas where ACTA is inconsistent with US law, injunctions and damages, KEI Policy Brief, 2011:2, as well as: Access to Orphan Works, and ACTA provisions on damages KEI Policy Brief 2010: 1.

Concluding comments

Although there are some areas of agreed to text, the leaked text from August 30, 2013 also highlights the numerous areas where parties have yet to finalize the agreement. That there are over 900 brackets means that there is still plenty of opportunity for countries to take positions that will promote the public interest and preserve consumer rights. These areas include substantive sections of the most controversial provisions on patents, medicines, copyright and digital rights where there are often competing proposals. The publication of the text by Wikileaks has created a rare and valuable opportunity to have a public debate on the merits of the agreement, and actions to fix, change or stop the agreement.

KEI-OSI-ROCKEFELLER-ETC-Funding | Knowledge Ecology International

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 22:41

KEI is a U.S. tax exempt organization, under 501(3)(c) of the IRS rules.

In 2006 KEI received a MacArthur Award for Creative and Effective Institutions

KEI receives contributions from individuals, by check, or through the web here.

We are also supported by grants, including in recent years from the following charitable foundations:

Ford FoundationGordon R Irlam Charitable FoundationThe John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur FoundationOpen Society InstitutePerls FoundationRockefeller FoundationKEI has not received contributions from for-profit corporations.

------------------------------------------------

WikiLeaks Reveals Obama Deal Some Say Could Undermine Global Health, Internet Freedom

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Nov 2013 01:03

WASHINGTON -- WikiLeaks on Wednesday published a critical chapter of an international trade deal the United States is currently negotiating with 11 Pacific nations.

The document confirms what some public health experts and Internet freedom advocates had long feared: The Obama administration is aggressively pursuing terms that would increase the cost of medicines and hamper an open Internet.

"The U.S. is refusing to back down from dangerous provisions that will impede timely access to affordable medicines," said Judit Rius Sanjuan, U.S. manager of the Access Campaign at Doctors Without Borders, a humanitarian group that won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2000.

Most major provisions of the Trans-Pacific Partnership document, which is dated at Aug. 30, are nearly identical to previous leaks that drew criticism from tech activists and consumer groups. But the public disclosure of which countries support or object to which terms, is new. The U.S. government considers the draft text to be classified, a status which has stymied access for congressional aides, and prevented some lawmakers from airing their complaints.

"The Obama administration's proposals are the worst ''- the most damaging for health we have seen in a U.S. trade agreement to date,'' said Peter Maybarduk, director of Public Citizen's global access to medicines program.

Countries that violate the terms of trade agreements can be sued in international courts.

The TPP deal would explicitly empower corporations to directly challenge government laws and regulations, a political power that World Trade Organization treaties have reserved for other sovereign nations. The U.S. has endorsed such corporate political powers in previous trade agreements, including the North American Free Trade Agreement. Companies including Exxon Mobil, Dow Chemical and Eli Lilly have attempted to invoke NAFTA to overrule Canadian regulations on offshore oil drilling, fracking, pesticides, drug patents and other issues.

"With both copyright and patent, the really alarming thing is, there's talk about major systemic changes that could be made in the next couple of years," said Parker Higgins, spokesman for the internet freedom group Electronic Frontier Foundation. "The last thing we want to do is crystallize current U.S. law in a trade agreement that we would have to renegotiate."

The administration, however, rejected criticism that it is pursuing an unhealthy deal.

"We are working with Congress, stakeholders, and our TPP negotiating partners to reach an outcome that promotes high-paying jobs in innovative American industries and reflects our values, including by seeking strong and balanced copyright protections, as well as advancing access to medicines while incentivizing the development of new, lifesaving drugs," said Carol Guthrie, a spokeswoman for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

The leaked document shows U.S. negotiators pursuing a host of policies that could drive up medical costs by extending drug companies' and other corporations' monopolies on their products beyond the normal 20-year patent term. These provisions include standards to lengthen patent terms, expand the criteria for which countries must grant drug patents, require countries to issue new patents on minor alterations to a drug, and establish barriers on the use of pharmaceutical test data, all of which prevent market competition from generic drugs.

A coalition of five nations consistently offered alternatives to the U.S. language, including New Zealand, Singapore, Canada, Chile and Malaysia. The only language mitigating this effort to drive up drug prices is a vague exemption for HIV, tuberculosis and malaria drugs.

"The obligations of this Chapter do not and should not prevent a Party from taking measures to protect public health by promoting access to medicines for all, in particular concerning cases such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, [US oppose: chagas] and other epidemics as well as circumstances of extreme urgency or national emergency," the document reads.

Prior WTO agreements have included similar protections, but the U.S. has repeatedly brought political pressure against countries that attempted to grant access to generic AIDS drugs. The U.S. has had several recent disputes with India over the country's decision to issue a $157 generic cancer drug for which Bayer had charged more than $5,000 a month.

"People die from cancer, too," notes Sanjuan. "The public health challenges we see in the countries where we work are much broader than HIV, TB and malaria. Even if this is a sincere effort at a solution, it's a fake solution and won't really work."

The draft's copyright standards would require countries to adopt digital distribution rules similar to those the United States has had in place since the late 1990s. Those rules have come under fire for establishing a host of legal liabilities for normal internet functions. The rules have made tech start-ups targets of costs and legal threats from movie studios and record labels, and created conflicts over simple actions like linking to copyrighted content.

The U.S. has avoided some of the most damaging implications of its broad copyright definitions by relying on a robust set of exemptions, including fair use and other terms that permit using some copyrighted information without paying royalties. But the TPP draft would establish a narrow international standard for fair use, and thwart other types of exemptions. EFF and others have warned against exporting the U.S. copyright criteria without including U.S.-style exemptions.

WikiLeaks, the government transparency organization, released the document on the same day that 151 congressional Democrats sent a letter to President Barack Obama objecting to the "fast-track" process the president hopes to use to approve the TPP deal. Two separate letters from dozens of House Democrats and Republicans objecting to the same process were sent to Obama on Tuesday.

Also on HuffPost:

------------------------------------------------

Getting Japan to Guzzle American Gas - Bloomberg

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Nov 2013 03:50

(Corrects scale of U.S. natural gas production in sixth paragraph, size of exports in seventh.)

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe expected a sharp debate at home when he said his country wanted to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership. He may not have anticipated a sharp debate in the U.S.

After all, rarely does Washington have the pleasure of opening new trade negotiations when the potential benefits are so heavily stacked in the U.S.'s favor.

Why so? Because Japan's nontariff barriers -- protecting major sectors of the economy, including services, agriculture and selected manufactures -- start from much higher levels than equivalent U.S. barriers, and the TPP aims to reduce them all, preferably to zero. Japan's inclusion in the trade pact will boost American exports, create American jobs and make both economies more efficient, now and well into the future.

Few sectors stand to gain so much as the growing U.S. liquefied-natural-gas industry. Japan's membership in the TPP, coupled with long-term U.S. supply assurances, will deliver exponential LNG export growth to a huge market hungry for alternative energy supplies. The timing couldn't be better: Right now, America's competitive advantage in exploration and extraction is unrivaled.

Japan, the world's third-largest economy, is also the single-largest buyer of natural gas. Given the country's indefinite moratorium on expanding the nuclear-energy program, Japan's reliance on natural gas is sure to increase. In fact, Japan faces the prospect of replacing some 12,000 megawatts of nuclear-generating capacity. The total dearth of natural-gas resources means that Japan must rely heavily on LNG imports as an alternative source of clean power.

Gas RichesEven though the U.S. is one of the world's largest and most advanced natural gas producers (the industry is already responsible for half a million jobs), and the U.S.-Japan security alliance is critical, the U.S. hasn't yet capitalized on Japan's need for assured LNG.

In 2012, Japan imported a record 87 million tons -- an increase of 11 percent compared with the previous year -- from nations such as Qatar, Russia, Australia and Indonesia. But the U.S. share of this business has been tiny.

After the Fukushima disaster, Japan was able to meet its immediate energy needs by paying premiums for the diversion of LNG shipments from intended markets. But Japan harbors a determined interest in long-term agreements with U.S. exporters. Abundant American supplies, their reliability (with the right U.S. policies), and the prospect that U.S. LNG will be among the cheapest all make American LNG an ideal long-term source.

Under current U.S. law and Energy Department regulations, the export of LNG to Japan can be ensured only by a free-trade relationship with the U.S., and the only prospect for this relationship is the TPP agreement. To be sure, the Energy Department could amend its rules so that LNG could be exported to any country, with or without a free-trade pact.

A reform of this sort is being debated by senior energy officials, and President Barack Obama will probably have the last word. But even if the current regulations are changed, Japanese LNG buyers and U.S. LNG sellers will all feel much more secure with a guarantee of free trade in energy written into the TPP. LNG export and import terminals, and specialized ships to carry the LNG, require investment of $10 billion or more, and the payback time is typically 20 years. Companies contemplating investments of this size and duration need legal security.

A trade pact deal that includes Japan will open new and lucrative markets to U.S. exporters in other sectors, including services, agriculture, automobiles, select manufactures, and possibly coal from the Powder River Basin.

Creating JobsMeanwhile, Japan will continue to expand its already large stock of direct investment in the U.S. Both through trade and investment, the TPP with Japan will support far more U.S. jobs than a TPP without Japan.

Obama declared on his first presidential trip to Asia, back in November 2009, that the U.S. would engage with the other TPP countries -- Australia, Brunei, Chile, Canada, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam -- to shape an effective, mutually beneficial regional-trade agreement.

Japan's inclusion will immediately elevate the stature of this 21st-century pact into an opportunity to renew the U.S.- Japan partnership. It will establish firmer rules for resolving commercial differences between the world's No. 1 and No. 3 economies, and ensure that the pact covers roughly 40 percent of global gross domestic product. It recognizes the importance for the U.S. of trans-Pacific trade and affirms Japan as a strategic ally.

Not least, it ensures that the U.S. LNG industry can lead the world to a cleaner, more efficient and more affordable energy future.

(Gary Clyde Hufbauer is the Reginald Jones senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. The opinions expressed are his own.)

To contact the writer of this article: Gary Clyde Hufbauer at ghufbauer@piie.com.

To contact the editor responsible for this article: Katy Roberts at kroberts29@bloomberg.net.

------------------------------------------------

Trans-Pacific Partnership Ready for Christmas Delivery? >> WTF RLY REPORT

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:09

The New Americanby Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.

As the end of 2013 approaches, so does President Obama's deadline for approving the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

The TPP is a direct and deadly attack on sovereignty and representative government masquerading as a Pacific Rim trade pact.

Currently, there are 12 countries negotiating in secret to create this regional trade agreement that some have called NAFTA on steroids. The number of participants could rise to a baker's dozen should China be welcomed on board by the United States (President Obama has signaled that he would recognize the Chinese communist government's partnership in the bloc).

President Obama's fascination with intertwining the economic welfare of the United States with China is perhaps one reason a recent commentator called the TPP ''another disaster from a proven liar.''

Writing in an op-ed for the Washington Times, Judson Phillips lists several of the principal criticisms of the TPP:

Barack Obama is asking for fast track authority for the Trans Pacific Partnership. Consider that to be another version of ''you have to pass this to see what is in it.'' With fast track authority, there will be no hearings on this treaty. It will be negotiated then sent to the Senate for a simple up or down vote. The Senate will not be able to provide advice and consent because they cannot offer amendments under fast track.

Less than one fifth of the Trans Pacific Partnership deals with trade. The remainder of the treaty governs a myriad of things, including regulating the price of medicines. A few months ago, a mix of conservative and liberal groups stopped the ''Stop Online Piracy Act'' or SOPA. Most of the provisions of SOPA are included in the Trans Pacific Partnership.

Under the proposals of the TPP, American sovereignty would be eroded. American courts would be inferior to foreign trade courts and disputes between American citizens and foreign corporations would not be litigated in American courts but in these trade tribunals.

The TPP is guilty of each of those charges, and the evidence is overwhelming.

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of all the roster of frightening things about the TPP is the secrecy surrounding the details of the agreement.

A few federal lawmakers have tried in vain to bring into the light the frightening compromises being made by our trade representatives at the TPP negotiations.

Zach Carter of the online Huffington Post reported that Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee's Subcommittee on International Trade, Customs and Global Competitiveness, was stonewalled by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) when he attempted to see any of the draft documents related to the governance of the TPP.

In response to this rebuff, Wyden proposed a measure in the Senate that would force transparency on the process, and that was enough to convince the USTR to grant the senator a peek at the documents, though his staff was not permitted to peruse them.

Wyden spokeswoman Jennifer Hoelzer told the Huffington Post that such accommodations were ''better than nothing'' but not ideal in light of the well-known fact that on Capitol Hill the real work of drafting and evaluating legislation is performed by the representatives' staff members who are often experts in particular areas of domestic and foreign policy.

''I would point out how insulting it is for them to argue that members of Congress are to personally go over to USTR to view the trade documents,'' Hoelzer said. ''An advisor at Halliburton or the MPAA is given a password that allows him or her to go on the USTR website and view the TPP agreement anytime he or she wants.''

It is instructive that a duly elected senator of the United States has to beg and plead and threaten legislation in order to see the TPP trade agreement negotiations, but corporate interests are given a password by the USTR that grants them full, unrestricted access to those same documents.

U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) issued a statement criticizing the Obama administration for the lack of oversight into an agreement with devastating potential:

After more than a decade of broken promises from NAFTA, CAFTA, and normalized trade relations with China, we can now add a credibility deficit to the trade deficits we've seen. The leaked documents surfacing today only underscore the secrecy surrounding TPP negotiations and confirm worst suspicions about the direction trade negotiations are heading. It's telling that it is easier for the CEO of a major corporation to access information about the negotiations than the American people's elected representatives.

The negotiations must involve more transparency and bring more voices to the table.

Apart from the secrecy, a few drafts of key provisions of the TPP have been leaked to the Internet. One thing all the leaks reveal is that large corporations would be allowed to assume powers that constitutionally belong to Congress and to the states.

Notably, in both statements announcing the hemispheric enlargement of the trade bloc, former U.S. Trade Representative Kirk places the approval of ''domestic stakeholders'' (read: large corporations) on a level with that of Congress. It is precisely this exalting of big business, as well as the as-yet-impenetrable wall of secrecy surrounding the drafting of the TPP treaty, that has troubled many of the people's representatives in Congress.

Although the treaty negotiations are being kept under a thick veil of secrecy, a draft document leaked to the Internet discloses that as part of its membership in the TPP, the United States would agree to exempt foreign corporations from our laws and regulations, placing the resolution of any disputes as to the applicability of those matters to foreign business in the hands of an international arbitration tribunal overseen by the secretary-general of the United Nations.

The leaked information also confirms the fears of many who from the beginning have opposed the entry of the United States into this trade agreement. The alarms sounded by several groups on the Left and the Right warning of the wholesale damage that the TPP could cause to commerce, copyrights, and the Constitution now seem vindicated.

An organization actively protecting the sovereignty of the United States is Americans for Limited Government (ALG). In June 2012, ALG released a statement drawing attention to critical provisions of the leaked TPP agreement, as well as ably pointing out some of the most noxious aspects of the proposed agreement:

These new trade agreements will place domestic U.S. firms that do not do business overseas at a competitive disadvantage. Based on these leaked documents, foreign firms under this trade pact could conceivably appeal federal regulatory and court rulings against them to an international tribunal with the apparent authority to overrule our sovereignty. If foreign companies want to do business in America, they should have to follow the same rules as everyone else. No special favors.

It is telling that the only apparent way these Pacific nations will enter a free trade agreement with the U.S. is if they are exempt from our onerous environmental and financial regulations that make it cost-ineffective to do business here. Instead of making these foreign firms exempt from these burdensome rules, they should just repeal the regulations and make it cheaper to do business here.

This poses an even wider problem, though. Obama is negotiating a trade pact that would constitute a judicial authority higher than even the U.S. Supreme Court that could overrule federal court rulings applying U.S. law to foreign companies. That is unconstitutional'....

This tribunal needs to be removed from this agreement, and no foreign company doing business on our soil should have a competitive advantage, created by some dumb agreement, over American companies. What is Obama thinking? He is placing international organizations above the interests of our own country.

Just days after the proposed provisions of the TPP appeared online, The New American interviewed ALG President Bill Wilson. Wilson was asked what he believes Americans have to fear should the United States enter the TPP and why he thinks the negotiations have been conducted in secret.

''These trade pacts, starting with NAFTA and before [GATT], strike at the heart of national sovereignty, ours and that of the other member nations,'' Wilson warned. ''At their core they diminish the prerogatives and powers of a specific country and surrender them to international bodies or corporations.''

Other observers agree. In fact, an organization calling itself ''Just Foreign Policy'' has created a crowd-sourced bounty on the TPP agreement. On the group's website, individuals interested in exposing the secret TPP agreement and the pro-corporate corruption included in it can donate money to increase the potential reward for the pact's revelation. The project explains:

At this very moment, the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP) '-- a trade agreement that could affect the health and welfare of billions of people worldwide '-- is being negotiated behind closed doors. While 600 corporate lobbyists have access to the text, the press, the public, and even members of the US Congress are being kept in the dark.

But we don't have to stand meekly by as corporate cronies decide our futures. Concerned citizens from around the world are pooling together their resources as a reward to WikiLeaks if it makes the negotiating text of the TPP public. Our pledge, as individuals, is to donate this money to WikiLeaks should it leak the document we seek.

As WikiLeaks likes to say, information wants to be free. The negotiating text for the TPP wants to be free. Someone just needs to release it.

Unfortunately, the balance seems to be tipping in favor of finishing the TPP in time for Christmas. In a November 5 editorial, the New York Timescame out in favor of the secret surrender of sovereignty, describing the agreement as ''a trade agreement '... that could help all of our economies and strengthen relations between the United States and several important Asian allies.''

Leading opponent of the TPP, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), senses a couple of sinister explanations for the Old Gray Lady's support of the secret attempt at economic integration of a dozen economies. EFF's Maira Sutton writes:

That raises two distressing possibilities: either in an act of extraordinary subservience, the Times has endorsed an agreement that neither the public nor its editors have the ability to read. Or, in an act of extraordinary cowardice, it has obtained a copy of the secret text and hasn't fulfilled its duty to the public interest to publish it.

Regardless, President Obama is determined to get approval from Congress to fast-track the TPP negotiations. Not surprisingly, senators from both major parties are ready to make it a Merry Christmas for the president. The Hill reports:

Senate Finance Committee leaders called on Wednesday for Congress to pass fast-track legislation aimed at smoothing the passage of any future trade deals.

Panel Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and ranking member Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said during a trade hearing that they are working on crafting trade promotion authority (TPA) legislation and are expecting the Obama administration to work with them toward gaining its approval in Congress.

Baucus said it is time to ''pass TPA and do it soon.''

There is still time for Americans to contact their senators and encourage them to refuse to ratify any agreement that is worked out in secret, grants corporations lawmaking power that the Constitution gives exclusively to Congress, and ties the future financial well-being of the United States to countries ruled by communists, dictators, and with economies that will adversely affect nearly every aspect of American manufacturing and agriculture.

The New American

------------------------------------------------

Slave Training / Shut Up Slave!

------------------------------------------------

Criticism of New Injunctions to Prevent Nuisance and Annoyance

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 10:22

Injunctions to Prevent Nuisance and Annoyance (IPNAs) have been heavily criticised by the children's commissioner who say the same could prevent ball games, skateboarding and youths 'hanging around'. New laws to clamp down on antisocial behaviour will "promote intolerance of youth" and damage the relationship between young people and the Police, the children's commissioner and leading organisations representing young people warn today.

Promoting Youth IntoleranceIn a letter to the Observer last weekend children's commissioner Dr Maggie Atkinson, together with other campaigners, has criticised the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill which is currently going through parliament.

The letter suggests that the proposed legislation dealing with unruly behavior will "punish children over the age of 10 simply for being children". The measures are widening the definition of antisocial behaviour and reducing the burden of proof so that the effect could be to "outlaw everyday activities" such as skateboarding or ball games.

The letter reads:"We acknowledge that antisocial behaviour can blight the lives of individuals and communities, but this bill is not the answer. It promotes intolerance of youth, is a blow for civil liberties and will damage children's relationship with the Police. Children learn the importance of right and wrong from their parents, teachers and communities. We do not need to create more laws to do it."

Injunctions to Prevent Nuisance and AnnoyanceThe Home Office argues that the measures will deliver speedier and more effective curbs on unruly activity. Under the proposals, antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs) will be replaced by new Injunctions to Prevent Nuisance and Annoyance (IPNAs). The injunctions, together with other measures, are being introduced under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill and can be of an unlimited duration. Breach of such an injunction could result in two years imprisonment or an unlimited fine.

Whilst breach of an INPA is not itself a criminal penalty, the bill does allow courts to use similar powers in punishing breaches as a 'criminal contempt of court'.

Currently, to be given an ASBO a person must have behaved in a way that "caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress". But under the new legislation, a person would have to have behaved only in a way that is "capable of causing nuisance or annoyance" to be given such an injunction.

On the Balance of ProbabilitiesAdditionally, the burden of proof in relation to the orders has been altered. For a court to grant an ASBO, it must be satisfied to the criminal burden of proof e.g. "beyond reasonable doubt" that a person has behaved antisocially and conclude that an ASBO is necessary to protect others from further antisocial acts. However, in order to grant one of the new injunctions, the court would have to satisfy the civil burden of proof e.g. believe only that "on the balance of probabilities" a person had behaved antisocially and to conclude that it is "just and convenient" to grant an injunction to stop their antisocial behavior.

Critics of the new powers suggest that under the new legislation, if the police or local council believe that "on the balance of probabilities" a weekly football game is capable of irritating locals and that an injunction would be a way of stopping the game, they could ask the court to issue an injunction against those playing to stop the game.

Signatories to the letter, who also include the chief executive of the National Children's Bureau, Dr Hilary Emery, say that the measures are particularly unfortunate at a time when youth services are being cut.

Penelope Gibbs, chair of the Standing Committee for Youth Justice, added:"It's hard to believe that the Government is planning to outlaw teenagers just for being annoying '' unopposed by Labour. Many teenagers already feel they are pariahs in their communities. What are teenagers supposed to do? Youth services have been cut, they are told not to spend too much time indoors playing computer games. Yet this law means they may be afraid to skateboard on the street or just hang out with their friends."

Samantha Doyle

VIDEO-IPNA-The Birth of a Police State | Trebuchet Magazine

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 10:00

by Kerry Anne Mendoza on Jul 27, 2013

The UK government is about to pass legislation which will make any behaviour perceived to potentially 'cause a nuisance or annoyance' a criminal offence.The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill also grants local authorities, police and even private security firms sweeping powers to bar citizens from assembling lawfully in public spaces. Those who refuse orders under the new rules will face arrest, fines and even prison time.

The Ever Increasing PowersSince the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, which introduced Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) the government has invented and legislated for a litany of such orders covering everything from dog poo to drug addiction, including but not limited to: Control Orders; Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Orders; Intervention Orders; Crack House Closure Orders; Premise Closure Orders; Brothel Closure Orders; Gang Related Violence Injunctions; Designated Public Place Orders; Special Interim Management Orders; Gating Orders; Dog Control Orders; Letter Clearing Notices; Noise Abatement Orders; Graffiti/Defacement Removal Notices; Directions to Leave and Dispersal Orders.

The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill, which passed the committee stage of its progress through the House of Commons on Monday 15th July, purports to simplify this legacy of New Labour's legislative promiscuity. In reality, it creates a series of wildly ambiguous, generic orders which grant officers of the state and private sector even greater powers to issue tougher sentences, with fewer checks and balances to protect citizens.

Being Annoying is Now IllegalThe Bill introduces Injunctions to Prevent Nuisance and Annoyance (IPNAs) to replace ABSOs. Almost no one will be sad to say goodbye to ASBOs. The orders, designed to allow police to tackle anti-social behaviour, simply became a means of criminalising youthful indiscretion '' and eventually a means of criminalising anything people found annoying. Some of the bizarre abuses of this power include:

Stuart Hunt of Loch Ness brought to court 100 times since 2007 for breaching an ASBO preventing him from laughing, staring or slow hand clappingHomeless, alcoholic and mentally ill Michael Gilligan given a 99 year ASBO rather than the welfare support that might have made a differenceA profoundly deaf 17 year old girl given an ASBO and a jail sentence for spitting in the streetA 13 year old banned from using the word 'grass' in England or WalesManchester Council applied an ASBO to prevent a mobile soup kitchen from feeding the homelessCouncils placing ASBOs on homeless people resulting in prison sentences for begging 'earnestly and humbly'An 87 year old man was given an ASBO threatening a prison sentence if he was sarcastic to his neighboursThe ASBO has allowed the line between criminal behaviour and annoying behaviour to become hopelessly blurred '' and the IPNAs will only serve to increase the problem. We have seen the abuses permitted under ASBO legislation, the test for which included wording to the effect that ASBOs could only be issued where an actual act of 'harassment, alarm or distress' had occurred.

Many believe they have rightsto protest, assemble and

associate that they lost a

decade ago, simply because

they have never actually

attempted to claim them

IPNAs have a much weaker test, applicable where on the 'balance of probabilities' a person has or might engage in behaviour 'capable of causing annoyance' to another person.

How many times a day could this legislation apply to any of us?

Eating with our mouths open, talking too loudly into our phones in a public space, walking too slowly or quickly or belching without saying 'pardon me'. All of this may very well cause annoyance '' but soon it might well also be illegal.

The orders can be issued to anyone aged 10 or over (and we all know how well 10 year olds are at being annoying), and there is no limit on how long an IPNA can be applied to a person for. A person could receive an IPNA for 10 and retain it their entire life.

Whereas an ASBO could only desist the subject from certain actions, the IPNA includes 'positive obligations' (p10). This means the subject of an IPNA can be found in breach not simply for doing things they have been banned from doing, but from not doing things that the IPNA states they must. This makes an IPNA much closer to probation and other post-conviction arrangements than a civil order.

An IPNA can be applied for by Local Authorities, police, some transport bodies and some NHS authorities.

The consequences of breaching an IPNA are serious. The breaching of an IPNA has been added to the conditions for securing possession of a home '' meaning a 10 year old child breaching their IPNA could result in the entire family being evicted from their council house. Breaching the orders can also result in jail time for anyone over 14.

Even the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), giving evidence on the proposals, argued that this could lead to further criminalisation of children and called on the government to think again.

But the plans move along unaltered.

Kiss Goodbye to Freedom of AssemblyPublic Spaces Protection Orders (PSPOs), and new Dispersal Orders will replace Designated Public Space Orders, Dog Control Orders, Gating Orders and a host of other orders intended to keep aggressive drunken people or drug dealers or dog poo off our streets. But it is plain that the target for these laws is no longer the person peddling illegal drugs, but the people sharing politically challenging ideas.

These new powers present the most significant threat to lawful assembly and protest in modern history.

Public Space Protection Orders

PSPOs will be granted where 'activities carried on or likely to be carried on in a public place will have or have had a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality' (p21). They can be used to restrict an activity or require people to perform an activity in a certain way.

They require substantially less consultation than current alcohol free zones or dog control zones and rather than applying to everyone, they can be applied to specific groups of people (the homeless, the unemployed, racial/religious groups etc.) '' opening the door for discrimination. These rules could see homeless people or young people lawfully excluded from public spaces.

PSPOs are subject to 'on the spot' fines, rather than attendance at a Magistrates' Court, reducing the scrutiny and checks on police power.

These orders are also by no means short term. They can be applied for up to three years, and continued for another three years at the end of their term.

The orders have been heavily challenged by Liberty and The Manifesto Club on the basis that they will seriously infringe upon people's freedom to assemble, associate and protest. The Ramblers (the walking charity) have also given written evidence to the government raising their fears about the further appropriation of public highways, by ways and footpaths under the PSPO powers.

Dispersal Orders

Under the current Direction to Leave powers, anyone over 10 years of age can be asked to disperse from a 'locality' and stay dispersed for period not exceeding 48 hours.

Current Dispersal Orders mean a Police Superintendent (or an officer with specific written authority from the SI) can disperse groups or two or more people in areas where there has been 'persistent anti-social behaviour' or take home any young person under the age of 16 who is in a dispersal zone between 9pm and 6am.

Anyone failing to comply with a Dispersal Order faces a fine of up to £2,500 or up to three months in prison.

Downing Street clearly do not feel this is tough enough.

The new Dispersal Powers mean police constables and even Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) can issue dispersal orders if they think a group of two or more persons might harass, alarm or distress others in the vicinity (p16).

The PCSO or constable can specify how long the person/group must remain out of the designated area, and by which route they must leave, and also confiscate any items of their property which they deem anti-social. Failure to comply with any element of these orders results in a fine of up to £5,000 or three months in prison.

The new legislation also fails to define 'locality' '' meaning a person could be excluded from a city, a county or even a whole country (p17). In fact, York couldn't even wait for the new legislation to pass and is already implementing the powers.

These new laws effectively end freedom of assembly in England and Wales, as any lawful assembly can be instantly redefined as illegal on the spot by some part time PCSO, people's personal possessions can be confiscated, and anyone who dares to challenge the process will end up in jail.

What Will It Take?One could be forgiven for despairingly enquiring: 'What it will take for the slumbering British public to awake to the fact that the legal and physical infrastructure of a police state is being built around them?'

Many believe they have rights to protest, assemble and associate that they lost a decade ago, simply because they have never actually attempted to claim them. They remain imaginary rights, never cashed in.

As someone who has found herself arrested, locked up and later cleared by a court twice in recent years for peaceful protest '' I discovered for myself how much things had changed while I wasn't looking. So without getting everyone to attend a protest and get arrested, we rely on communicating the changes to those who might not experience them directly.

These new powers presentthe most significant threat

to lawful assembly and

protest in modern history

But while the BBC, our main broadcaster, has devoted its resources to stick a correspondent up the arse of anyone with the faintest connection to the Royal Baby '' no such resources have been devoted to informing on the curtailing of our most basic freedoms. Defenders of the BBC may argue they are there to cover the news, not make it '' this is an outright lie.

The media create stories as well as cover them, many people glean what is important from how much it is being talked about on the news and in the papers.

Imagine if journalists were door-stepping David Cameron, human rights campaigners and police authorities all day every day asking what on earth was going to happen with our human rights? If 19 pages of the Sun (news)paper wasn't talking about the Royal Baby but our eroded civil liberties? Things would look very, very different.

In the meantime, it's up to all of us with an interest to shout it from the roof tops. We have a hell of a fight on our hands here, and most folks still don't even know it.

SIGN THE PETITION TO OPPOSE THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE

Read Kerry Anne Medoza's report on Occupy's Million Mask March.

Photos: Carl Byron Batson.

By Kerry Anne Mendoza (5 Posts)Kerry-Anne Mendoza is author of the Scriptonite Daily Blog: http://scriptonitedaily.wordpress.com She is also a contributor to New Internationalist, openDemocracy and the Occupy News Network. She is a writer, activist and campaigner for social, economic and environmental justice.

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill (HC Bill 7)

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 10:12

A

BILL

TO

Make provision about anti-social behaviour, crime and disorder, includingprovision about recovery of possession of dwelling-houses; to make provisionamending the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, Schedules 7 and 8 to the TerrorismAct 2000 and the Extradition Act 2003; to make provision about firearms andabout forced marriage; to make provision about the police, the IndependentPolice Complaints Commission and the Serious Fraud Office; to makeprovision about criminal justice and court fees; and for connected purposes.

Be it enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice andconsent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this presentParliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:'--

Part 1Injunctions to prevent nuisance and annoyanceInjunctions to prevent nuisance and annoyance1Power to grant injunctions(1)5A court may grant an injunction under this section against a person aged 10 orover (''the respondent'') if two conditions are met.

(2)The first condition is that the court is satisfied, on the balance of probabilities,that the respondent has engaged or threatens to engage in conduct capable ofcausing nuisance or annoyance to any person (''anti-social behaviour'').

(3)10The second condition is that the court considers it just and convenient to grantthe injunction for the purpose of preventing the respondent from engaging inanti-social behaviour.

(4)An injunction under this section may for the purpose of preventing therespondent from engaging in anti-social behaviour'--

(a)15prohibit the respondent from doing anything described in theinjunction;

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 2

(b)require the respondent to do anything described in the injunction.

(5)Prohibitions and requirements in an injunction under this section must, so faras practicable, be such as to avoid'--

(a)any conflict with the respondent's religious beliefs;

(b)5any interference with the times, if any, at which the respondentnormally works or attends school or any other educationalestablishment;

(c)any conflict with the requirements of any other court order orinjunction to which the respondent may be subject.

(6)10An injunction under this section must'--

(a)specify the period for which it has effect, or

(b)state that it has effect until further order.

In the case of an injunction granted before the respondent has reached the ageof 18, a period must be specified and it must be no more than 12 months.

(7)15An injunction under this section may specify periods for which particularprohibitions or requirements have effect.

(8)Jurisdiction under this Part is exercisable by'--

(a)a youth court, in the case of a respondent aged under 18;

(b)the High Court or the county court, in any other case.

20Contents of injunctions2Requirements included in injunctions(1)An injunction under section 1 that includes a requirement must specify theperson who is to be responsible for supervising compliance with therequirement.

25The person may be an individual or an organisation.

The person may be an individual or an organisation.

(2)Before including a requirement, the court must receive evidence about itssuitability and enforceability from'--

(a)the individual to be specified under subsection (1), if an individual is to30be specified;

(b)an individual representing the organisation to be specified undersubsection (1), if an organisation is to be specified.

(3)Before including two or more requirements, the court must consider theircompatibility with each other.

(4)35It is the duty of a person specified under subsection (1)'--

(a)to make any necessary arrangements in connection with therequirements for which the person has responsibility (the ''relevantrequirements'');

(b)to promote the respondent's compliance with the relevant40requirements;

(c)if the person considers that the respondent'--

(i)has complied with all the relevant requirements, or

(ii)has failed to comply with a relevant requirement,

to inform the person who applied for the injunction and the45appropriate chief officer of police.

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 3

(5)In subsection (4)(c) ''the appropriate chief officer of police'' means'--

(a)the chief officer of police for the police area in which it appears to theperson specified under subsection (1) that the respondent lives, or

(b)if it appears to that person that the respondent lives in more than one5police area, whichever of the relevant chief officers of police that personthinks it most appropriate to inform.

(6)A respondent subject to a requirement included in an injunction under section1 must'--

(a)keep in touch with the person specified under subsection (1) in relation10to that requirement, in accordance with any instructions given by thatperson from time to time;

(b)notify the person of any change of address.

These obligations have effect as requirements of the injunction.

3Power of arrest(1)15A court granting an injunction under section 1 may attach a power of arrest toa prohibition or requirement of the injunction if the court thinks that'--

(a)the anti-social behaviour in which the respondent has engaged orthreatens to engage consists of or includes the use or threatened use ofviolence against other persons, or

(b)20there is a significant risk of harm to other persons from the respondent.

''Requirement'' here does not include one that has the effect of requiring therespondent to participate in particular activities.

(2)If the court attaches a power of arrest, the injunction may specify a period forwhich the power is to have effect which is shorter than that of the prohibition25or requirement to which it relates.

Applications for injunctions4Applications for injunctions(1)An injunction under section 1 may be granted only on the application of'--

(a)a local authority,

(b)30a housing provider,

(c)the chief officer of police for a police area,

(d)the chief constable of the British Transport Police Force,

(e)Transport for London,

(f)the Environment Agency, or

(g)35the Secretary of State exercising security management functions withinthe meaning given by section 195(3) of the National Health Service Act2006, or the Welsh Ministers exercising corresponding functions, or aSpecial Health Authority exercising any such functions on the directionof the Secretary of State or the Welsh Ministers.

(2)40A housing provider may make an application only if the application concernsanti-social behaviour that directly or indirectly relates to or affects its housingmanagement functions.

(3)For the purposes of subsection (2) the housing management functions of ahousing provider include'--

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 4

(a)functions conferred by or under an enactment;

(b)the powers and duties of the housing provider as the holder of an estateor interest in housing accommodation.

(4)The Secretary of State may by order'--

(a)5amend this section;

(b)amend section 19 in relation to expressions used in this section.

5Applications without notice(1)An application for an injunction under section 1 may be made without noticebeing given to the respondent.

(2)10If an application is made without notice the court must either'--

(a)adjourn the proceedings and grant an interim injunction (see section 6),or

(b)adjourn the proceedings without granting an interim injunction, or

(c)dismiss the application.

15Interim injunctions6Interim injunctions(1)This section applies where the court adjourns the hearing of an application(whether made with notice or without) for an injunction under section 1.

(2)The court may grant an injunction under that section lasting until the final20hearing of the application or until further order (an ''interim injunction'') if thecourt thinks it just to do so.

(3)An interim injunction made at a hearing of which the respondent was notgiven notice may not have the effect of requiring the respondent to participatein particular activities.

(4)25Subject to that, the court has the same powers (including powers undersection 3) whether or not the injunction is an interim injunction.

Variation and discharge7Variation or discharge of injunctions(1)The court may vary or discharge an injunction under section 1 on the30application of'--

(a)the person who applied for the injunction, or

(b)the respondent.

(2)The power to vary an injunction includes power'--

(a)to include an additional prohibition or requirement in the injunction, or35to extend the period for which a prohibition or requirement has effect;

(b)to attach a power of arrest, or to extend the period for which a power ofarrest has effect.

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 5

(3)If an application under this section is dismissed, the party by which thedismissed application was made may make no further application under thissection without'--

(a)the consent of the court, or

(b)5the agreement of the other party.

(4)Section 2 applies to additional requirements included under subsection (2)(a)above as it applies to requirements included in a new injunction.

Breach of injunctions8Arrest without warrant(1)10Where a power of arrest is attached to a provision of an injunction undersection 1, a constable may arrest the respondent without warrant if he or shehas reasonable cause to suspect that the respondent is in breach of theprovision.

(2)A constable who arrests a person under subsection (1) must inform the person15who applied for the injunction.

(3)A person arrested under subsection (1) must, within the period of 24 hoursbeginning with the time of the arrest, be brought before'--

(a)a judge of the county court, if the injunction was granted by the countycourt;

(b)20a justice of the peace, if the injunction was granted by a youth court.

(4)In calculating when the period of 24 hours ends, Christmas Day, Good Fridayand any Sunday are to be disregarded.

(5)The judge before whom a person is brought under subsection (3)(a) mayremand the person if the matter is not disposed of straight away.

(6)25The justice of the peace before whom a person is brought under subsection(3)(b) must remand the person to appear before'--

(a)the youth court that granted the injunction, if the person is aged under18;

(b)the county court, if the person is aged 18 or over.

930Issue of arrest warrant(1)If the person who applied for an injunction under section 1 thinks that therespondent is in breach of any of its provisions, the person may apply for theissue of a warrant for the respondent's arrest.

(2)The application must be made to'--

(a)35a judge of the county court, if the injunction was granted by the countycourt;

(b)a justice of the peace, if the injunction was granted by a youth court.

(3)A judge or justice may issue a warrant under this section only if the judge orjustice has reasonable grounds for believing that the respondent is in breach of40a provision of the injunction.

(4)A warrant issued by a judge of the county court must require the respondentto be brought before that court.

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 6

(5)A warrant issued by a justice of the peace must require the respondent to bebrought before'--

(a)the youth court that granted the injunction, if the person is aged under18;

(b)5the county court, if the person is aged 18 or over.

(6)A constable who arrests a person under a warrant issued under this sectionmust inform the person who applied for the injunction.

(7)If the respondent is brought before a court by virtue of a warrant under thissection but the matter is not disposed of straight away, the court may remand10the respondent.

10RemandsSchedule 1 (remands under sections 8 and 9) has effect.

11Powers in respect of under-18sSchedule 2 (breach of injunctions: powers of court in respect of under-18s) has15effect.

Powers of court on application by provider of residential accommodation12Power to exclude person from home in cases of violence or risk of harm(1)An injunction under section 1 may have the effect of excluding the respondentfrom the place where he or she normally lives only if'--

(a)20that place is owned or managed by a local authority or a housingprovider,

(b)the injunction is granted on the application of the local authority orhousing provider, and

(c)the court thinks that'--

(i)25the anti-social behaviour in which the respondent has engagedor threatens to engage consists of or includes the use orthreatened use of violence against other persons, or

(ii)there is a significant risk of harm to other persons from therespondent.

(2)30For the purposes of this section a local authority or housing provider owns aplace if'--

(a)the authority or provider is a person (other than a mortgagee not inpossession) entitled to dispose of the fee simple of the place, whether inpossession or in reversion, or

(b)35the authority or provider is a person who holds or is entitled to the rentsand profits of the place under a lease that (when granted) was for a termof not less then 3 years.

13Tenancy injunctions: exclusion and power of arrest(1)In this section ''tenancy injunction'' means an injunction granted'--

(a)40on the application of a local authority or a housing provider,

(b)against a person who has a tenancy agreement with the applicant,

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 7

(c)in respect of a breach or anticipated breach of the agreement on theground that the tenant'--

(i)is engaging or threatening to engage in anti-social behaviour, or

(ii)is allowing, inciting or encouraging any other person to engage5or threaten to engage in anti-social behaviour.

''Tenancy agreement'' here includes any agreement for the occupation ofresidential accommodation.

(2)Subsections (3) and (4) apply where the High Court or the county court grantsa tenancy injunction and is satisfied that'--

(a)10the behaviour referred to in subsection (1)(c) consists of or includes theuse or threatened use of violence (or would do so if engaged in), or

(b)there is a significant risk of harm to any person.

(3)The court may include in the tenancy injunction a provision prohibiting theperson against whom it is granted from entering or being in'--

(a)15any premises specified in the injunction (including the premises wherethe person normally lives);

(b)any area specified in the injunction.

(4)The court may attach a power of arrest to any provision of the tenancyinjunction.

(5)20The following provisions of this Part apply to a tenancy injunction as theyapply to an injunction under section 1'--

(a)section 1(6);

(b)sections 3(2) and 8 (if a power of arrest is attached);

(c)sections 5 to 7;

(d)25section 9;

(e)section 10 and Schedule 1;

(f)section 11 and Schedule 2;

(g)section 18(1).

Supplemental1430Requirements to consult etc(1)A person applying for an injunction under section 1 must before doing so'--

(a)consult the local youth offending team about the application, if therespondent will be aged under 18 when the application is made;

(b)inform any other body or individual the applicant thinks appropriate35of the application.

This subsection does not apply to a without-notice application.

(2)Where the court adjourns a without-notice application, before the date of thefirst on-notice hearing the applicant must'--

(a)consult the local youth offending team about the application, if the40respondent will be aged under 18 on that date;

(b)inform any other body or individual the applicant thinks appropriateof the application.

(3)A person applying for variation or discharge of an injunction under section 1granted on that person's application must before doing so'--

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 8

(a)consult the local youth offending team about the application forvariation or discharge, if the respondent will be aged under 18 whenthat application is made;

(b)inform any other body or individual the applicant thinks appropriate5of that application.

(4)In this section'--

''local youth offending team'' means'--

(a)

the youth offending team in whose area it appears to theapplicant that the respondent lives, or

(b)

10if it appears to the applicant that the respondent lives in morethan one such area, whichever one or more of the relevant youthoffending teams the applicant thinks it appropriate to consult;

''on-notice hearing'' means a hearing of which notice has been given to theapplicant and the respondent in accordance with rules of court;

15''without-notice application'' means an application made without noticeunder section 5.

15Appeals against decisions of youth courts(1)An appeal lies to the Crown Court against a decision of a youth court madeunder this Part.

(2)20On an appeal under this section the Crown Court may make'--

(a)whatever orders are necessary to give effect to its determination of theappeal;

(b)whatever incidental or consequential orders appear to it to be just.

(3)An order of the Crown Court made on an appeal under this section (other than25one directing that an application be re-heard by the youth court) is to be treatedfor the purposes of section 7 as an order of the youth court.

16Special measures for witnesses(1)Chapter 1 of Part 2 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999(special measures directions in the case of vulnerable and intimidated30witnesses) applies to proceedings under this Part as it applies to criminalproceedings, but with'--

(a)the omission of the provisions of that Act mentioned in subsection (2)(which make provision appropriate only in the context of criminalproceedings), and

(b)35any other necessary modifications.

(2)The provisions are'--

(a)section 17(4) to (7);

(b)section 21(4C)(e);

(c)section 22A;

(d)40section 27(10);

(e)section 32.

(3)Rules of court made under or for the purposes of Chapter 1 of Part 2 of that Actapply to proceedings under this Part'--

(a)to the extent provided by rules of court, and

(b)45subject to any modifications provided by rules of court.

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 9

(4)Section 47 of that Act (restrictions on reporting special measures directions etc)applies with any necessary modifications'--

(a)to a direction under section 19 of that Act as applied by this section;

(b)to a direction discharging or varying such a direction.

5Sections 49 and 51 of that Act (offences) apply accordingly.

17Children and young persons: disapplication of reporting restrictionsSection 49 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (restrictions on reportsof proceedings in which children and young persons are concerned) does notapply to proceedings under this Part.

1810Rules of court(1)Rules of court may provide that an appeal from a decision of the High Court,the county court or a youth court'--

(a)to dismiss an application for an injunction under section 1 madewithout notice being given to the respondent, or

(b)15to refuse to grant an interim injunction when adjourning proceedingsfollowing such an application,

may be made without notice being given to the respondent.

(2)In relation to a respondent attaining the age of 18 after proceedings under thisPart have begun, rules of court may'--

(a)20provide for the transfer of the proceedings from the youth court to theHigh Court or the county court;

(b)prescribe circumstances in which the proceedings may or must remainin the youth court.

19Interpretation etc(1)25In this Part'--

''anti-social behaviour'' has the meaning given by section 1(2);

''court'' is to be read in accordance with section 1(8);

''harm'' includes serious ill-treatment or abuse, whether physical or not;

''housing accommodation'' includes'--

(a)

30flats, lodging-houses and hostels;

(b)

any yard, garden, outhouses and appurtenances belonging tothe accommodation or usually enjoyed with it;

(c)

any common areas used in connection with theaccommodation;

35''housing provider'' means'--

(a)

a housing trust, within the meaning given by section 2 of theHousing Associations Act 1985, that is a charity;

(b)

a housing action trust established under section 62 of theHousing Act 1988;

(c)

40in relation to England, a non-profit private registered providerof social housing;

(d)

in relation to Wales, a Welsh body registered as a sociallandlord under section 3 of the Housing Act 1996;

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 10

(e)

any body (other than a local authority or a body withinparagraphs (a) to (d)) that is a landlord under a secure tenancywithin the meaning given by section 79 of the Housing Act 1985;

''local authority'' means'--

(a)

5in relation to England, a district council, a county council, aLondon borough council, the Common Council of the City ofLondon or the Council of the Isles of Scilly;

(b)

in relation to Wales, a county council or a county boroughcouncil;

10''respondent'' has the meaning given by section 1(1).

(2)A person's age is treated for the purposes of this Part as being that which itappears to the court to be after considering any available evidence.

20Saving and transitional provision(1)In this section ''existing order'' means any of the following injunctions and15orders'--

(a)an anti-social behaviour injunction under section 153A of the HousingAct 1996;

(b)an injunction under section 153B of that Act (injunction againstunlawful use of premises);

(c)20an injunction in which anything is included by virtue of section 153D(3)or (4) of that Act (power to include provision banning person frompremises or area, or to include power of arrest, in injunction againstbreach of tenancy agreement);

(d)an order under section 1 or 1B of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (anti-25social behaviour orders etc);

(e)an individual support order under section 1AA of that Act made inconnection with an order under section 1 or 1B of that Act;

(f)an intervention order under section 1G of that Act;

(g)a drinking banning order under section 3 or 4 of the Violent Crime30Reduction Act 2006.

(2)The repeal or amendment by this Act of provisions about any of the existingorders specified in subsection (1)(a) to (d), (f) and (g) does not apply in relationto'--

(a)an application made before the commencement day for an existing35order;

(b)an existing order (whether made before or after that day) applied forbefore that day;

(c)anything done in connection with such an application or order.

(3)The repeal or amendment by this Act of provisions about an order specified in40subsection (1)(e) does not apply in relation to'--

(a)an individual support order made before the commencement day;

(b)anything done in connection with such an order.

(4)As from the commencement day there may be no variation of an existing orderthat extends the period of the order or of any of its provisions.

(5)45At the end of the period of 5 years beginning with the commencement day'--

(a)in relation to any of the existing orders specified in subsection (1)(a), (b)and (d) to (g) that is still in force, this Part has effect, with any necessary

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 11

modifications (and with any modifications specified in an order undersection 141(6)), as if the provisions of the order were provisions of aninjunction under section 1;

(b)the provisions of this Part set out in section 13(5) apply to any5injunction specified in subsection (1)(c) that is still in force as they applyto an injunction under section 1;

(c)subsections (2) to (4) cease to have effect.

(6)In deciding whether to grant an injunction under section 1 a court may takeaccount of conduct occurring up to 6 months before the commencement day.

(7)10In this section ''commencement day'' means the day on which this Part comesinto force.

Part 2Criminal behaviour ordersCriminal behaviour orders2115Power to make orders(1)This section applies where a person (''the offender'') is convicted of an offence.

(2)The court may make a criminal behaviour order against the offender if twoconditions are met.

(3)The first condition is that the court is satisfied that the offender has engaged in20behaviour that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress toone or more persons not of the same household as the offender.

(4)The second condition is that the court considers that making the order will helpin preventing the offender from engaging in such behaviour.

(5)A criminal behaviour order is an order which, for the purpose of preventing25the offender from engaging in such behaviour'--

(a)prohibits the offender from doing anything described in the order;

(b)requires the offender to do anything described in the order.

(6)The court may make a criminal behaviour order against the offender only if itis made in addition to'--

(a)30a sentence imposed in respect of the offence, or

(b)an order discharging the offender conditionally.

(7)The court may make a criminal behaviour order against the offender only onthe application of the prosecution.

(8)The prosecution must find out the views of the local youth offending team35before applying for a criminal behaviour order to be made if the offender willbe under the age of 18 when the application is made.

(9)Prohibitions and requirements in a criminal behaviour order must, so far aspracticable, be such as to avoid'--

(a)any conflict with the offender's religious beliefs;

(b)40any interference with the times, if any, at which the offender normallyworks or attends school or any other educational establishment;

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 12

(c)any conflict with the requirements of any other court order orinjunction to which the offender may be subject.

(10)In this section ''local youth offending team'' means'--

(a)the youth offending team in whose area it appears to the prosecution5that the offender lives, or

(b)if it appears to the prosecution that the offender lives in more than onesuch area, whichever one or more of the relevant youth offendingteams the prosecution thinks appropriate.

22Proceedings on an application for an order(1)10For the purpose of deciding whether to make a criminal behaviour order thecourt may consider evidence led by the prosecution and evidence led by theoffender.

(2)It does not matter whether the evidence would have been admissible in theproceedings in which the offender was convicted.

(3)15The court may adjourn any proceedings on an application for a criminalbehaviour order even after sentencing the offender.

(4)If the offender does not appear for any adjourned proceedings the court may'--

(a)further adjourn the proceedings,

(b)issue a warrant for the offender's arrest, or

(c)20hear the proceedings in the offender's absence.

(5)The court may not act under paragraph (b) of subsection (4) unless it is satisfiedthat the offender has had adequate notice of the time and place of theadjourned proceedings.

(6)The court may not act under paragraph (c) of subsection (4) unless it is satisfied25that the offender'--

(a)has had adequate notice of the time and place of the adjournedproceedings, and

(b)has been informed that if the offender does not appear for thoseproceedings the court may hear the proceedings in his or her absence.

(7)30Subsection (8) applies in relation to proceedings in which a criminal behaviourorder is made against an offender who is under the age of 18.

(8)In so far as the proceedings relate to the making of the order'--

(a)section 49 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (restrictions onreports of proceedings in which children and young persons are35concerned) does not apply in respect of the offender;

(b)section 39 of that Act (power to prohibit publication of certain matters)does so apply.

23Requirements included in orders(1)A criminal behaviour order that includes a requirement must specify the40person who is to be responsible for supervising compliance with therequirement.

The person may be an individual or an organisation.

The person may be an individual or an organisation.

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 13

(2)Before including a requirement, the court must receive evidence about itssuitability and enforceability from'--

(a)the individual to be specified under subsection (1), if an individual is tobe specified;

(b)5an individual representing the organisation to be specified undersubsection (1), if an organisation is to be specified.

(3)Before including two or more requirements, the court must consider theircompatibility with each other.

(4)It is the duty of a person specified under subsection (1)'--

(a)10to make any necessary arrangements in connection with therequirements for which the person has responsibility (the ''relevantrequirements'');

(b)to promote the offender's compliance with the relevant requirements;

(c)if the person considers that the offender'--

(i)15has complied with all the relevant requirements, or

(ii)has failed to comply with a relevant requirement,

to inform the prosecution and the appropriate chief officer of police.

(5)In subsection (4)(c) ''the appropriate chief officer of police'' means'--

(a)the chief officer of police for the police area in which it appears to the20person specified under subsection (1) that the offender lives, or

(b)if it appears to that person that the offender lives in more than onepolice area, whichever of the relevant chief officers of police that personthinks it most appropriate to inform.

(6)An offender subject to a requirement in a criminal behaviour order must'--

(a)25keep in touch with the person specified under subsection (1) in relationto that requirement, in accordance with any instructions given by thatperson from time to time;

(b)notify the person of any change of address.

These obligations have effect as requirements of the order.

2430Duration of order etc(1)A criminal behaviour order takes effect on the day it is made, subject tosubsection (2).

(2)If on the day a criminal behaviour order (''the new order'') is made the offenderis subject to another criminal behaviour order (''the previous order''), the new35order may be made so as to take effect on the day on which the previous orderceases to have effect.

(3)A criminal behaviour order must specify the period (''the order period'') forwhich it has effect.

(4)In the case of a criminal behaviour order made before the offender has reached40the age of 18, the order period must be a fixed period of'--

(a)not less than 1 year, and

(b)not more than 3 years.

(5)In the case of a criminal behaviour order made after the offender has reachedthe age of 18, the order period must be'--

(a)45a fixed period of not less than 2 years, or

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 14

(b)an indefinite period (so that the order has effect until further order).

(6)A criminal behaviour order may specify periods for which particularprohibitions or requirements have effect.

Interim orders255Interim orders(1)This section applies where a court adjourns the hearing of an application for acriminal behaviour order.

(2)The court may make a criminal behaviour order that lasts until the finalhearing of the application or until further order (''an interim order'') if the court10thinks it just to do so.

(3)Section 21(6) to (8) and section 24(3) to (5) do not apply in relation to themaking of an interim order.

(4)Subject to that, the court has the same powers whether or not the criminalbehaviour order is an interim order.

15Variation and discharge26Variation or discharge of orders(1)A criminal behaviour order may be varied or discharged by the court whichmade it on the application of'--

(a)the offender, or

(b)20the prosecution.

(2)If an application by the offender under this section is dismissed, the offendermay make no further application under this section without'--

(a)the consent of the court which made the order, or

(b)the agreement of the prosecution.

(3)25If an application by the prosecution under this section is dismissed, theprosecution may make no further application under this section without'--

(a)the consent of the court which made the order, or

(b)the agreement of the offender.

(4)The power to vary an order includes power to include an additional30prohibition or requirement in the order or to extend the period for which aprohibition or requirement has effect.

(5)Section 23 applies to additional requirements included under subsection (4) asit applies to requirements included in a new order.

(6)In the case of a criminal behaviour order made by a magistrates' court, the35references in this section to the court which made the order include a referenceto any magistrates' court acting in the same local justice area as that court.

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing BillPage 15

Review of orders (under-18s)27Review of orders(1)If'--

(a)a person subject to a criminal behaviour order will be under the age of518 at the end of a review period (see subsection (2)),

(b)the term of the order runs until the end of that period or beyond, and

(c)the order is not discharged before the end of that period,

a review of the operation of the order must be carried out before the end of thatperiod.

(2)10The ''review periods'' are'--

(a)the period of 12 months beginning with'--

(i)the day on which the criminal behaviour order takes effect, or

(ii)if during that period the order is varied under section 26, theday on which it is varied (or most recently varied, if the order is15varied more than once);

(b)a period of 12 months beginning with'--

Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill 2013-14 '-- UK Parliament

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:34

Latest BillLatest news on the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill 2013-14Line by line examination of the Bill took place during the first day of committee stage on 12 November.

Amendments discussed covered clauses 106-109 and 151-152 of the Bill.

Committee stage continues on 18 November when further amendments will be discussed.

Summary of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill 2013-14To make provision about anti-social behaviour, crime and disorder, including provision about recovery of possession of dwelling houses; to make provision amending the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, Schedules 7 and 8 to the Terrorism Act 2000 and the Extradition Act 2003; to make provision about firearms and about forced marriage; to make provision about the police, the Independent Police Complaints Commission and the Serious Fraud Office; to make provision about criminal justice and court fees; and for connected purposes.Stay up to dateKeep up to date with the progress of Bills going through Parliament. Sign up for email alerts or use our RSS feeds.

Related informationGuide to the passage of a BillFind out what happens at each stage of a Public Bill's journey through Parliament with the Passage of a Bill guide.

When does a Bill become law?Explanation of what happens after Bills have been passed, and when laws may change.

Human rightsDo you have expertise or a special interest in human rights? The Joint Committee on Human Rights scrutinises the human rights implications of Government Bills.

------------------------------------------------

Flipping your classroom to meet the common core and other standards '' Turn to Your Neighbor: The Official Peer Instruction Blog

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Nov 2013 02:04

As the new school year commences, most K-12 teachers are faced with the reality of standards-based grading and the hurdle of having to cover ridiculous amounts of material in what feels like a nanosecond. While standards-based grading is primarily a phenomena in the K-12 realm, college and university teachers are moving toward similar curricular approaches, such as outcomes-based learning, and so to face coverage dilemmas. Flipping the classroom is a proven method for taming that vexing beast my colleague, James Fraser calls the coverage monster whether you are teaching an in outcomes-based or standard-based classroom.

The vision of standards-based grading is simple: all students will demonstrate mastery of sanctioned and pre-determined content knowledge and related skills and at the end of the year, students grades reflect their mastery. While simple in theory, standards-based or mastery-based grading can be complex in implementation. For one, the pre-determined content knowledge and related skills that make up standards such as the Common Core are rigorous, as they should be. More and more, teachers and students are realizing that success as measured by grades in a standards-based classroom depends on embracing new approaches to both pedagogy and learning.

To kick off the school year, Turn to Your Neighbor is featuring a guest post by April Gudenrath. A high school literature teacher, Gudenrath has been flipping her English class for several years, with great success. And she is doing it in a standards-based grading environment. Her flip has resulted in her students from 2012-2013 scoring 100% proficient or advanced in reading and 92% proficient or advanced in writing on state tests.

Guest post by April Gudenrath Flipping StandardsI have been flipping my English classroom for over four years at a public school in Colorado Springs, Colorado. I have spoken at several conferences and webinars and the topic that I get the most questions from teachers and school leaders about is how flipping and standards-based grading can help promote student success in the classroom. Shortly after flipping my classroom, I was placed on a district committee that was charged with unpacking the common core and cross walking it with, or mapping it to, our state standards. This was an overwhelming task. Talking with other teachers on the committee, I saw pain and frustration. ''How do they expect us to get through all of this in a year?'' ''There are only so many hours in the day and these skills are really high level. How can I make sure that every student is mastering them?'' My peers asked me if I shared in their exacerbations and while I listened, I was once again reaffirmed in my decision to flip my classroom.

When faced with the onslaught of requirements that I now have in front of me from the common core and the state, I approach them with the same single question that I have used since flipping my classroom four years ago''What is the best use of my class time? Then, I decide the aspects of each lesson that need to be a shared learning experience and which aspects can be more independent to help prepare students for the critical thinking skills imbedded in all of the standards.

Since I have flipped my class, I have actually gained time to ensure that my students are progressing toward the common core. I have time to walk around the classroom and by watching them perform key learning tasks, I really get to know exactly where each student is in their progress toward each standard. Whether it is having writer's workshops one on one, or walking around during a Socratic Seminar discussion of literature, I can easily assess each students' level of proficiency and guide them toward further progress. I am only able to do this because of flipping my classroom. I decided a long time ago that the best use of my class time is not lecture or giving rote memorization exercises. Although I can't get rid of those things completely, I refused to let content coverage take my class time away from my students. Students don't need me to be there when they are taking notes on Chaucer; they need me when they are reading it, thinking about it, and puzzling through the text.

From there, I realized that just knowing the standards was not enough for my students. The vision of standards-based grading is one that implies a mastery of knowledge where students can apply what they know, rather than simply repeat it. I started to do some research on Robert Marzano and others and decided that evaluating students' movement towards mastery was the best way for me to evaluate the learning that was happening in my classroom. I was one of the pilot teachers for standards-based grading in our high school and my department was the first to adopt it in my district. Standards-based grading allows teachers to celebrate student successes and have students see that learning is a growing process. Standards-based grading also allows students to have some failures but not get crucified for them, learn and grow from them, and to see the pay off of subsequent effort. Such perseverance is a skill that my students will need to succeed in college, their careers, and lives.

I know that flipping has allowed me to address the heart of the common core or any standards that might come my way, which is preparing students for life beyond high school.

How I FlipFlipping is more of a new trend in the sciences, but it works in every content area. When I am prepping a lesson I go back to the basic framework of examining the best use of my class time. The first thing I do is ask myself: What can my students do on their own to reach mastery of this content? For which activities would my presence or the presence of their peers facilitate mastery?

For example, I taught a British Literature class last year and I decided that the best use of class time was reading the texts together and writing about what we read and discussed, all during class. After that decision, I laid out a plan of the learning activities my students would need to engage in to show growth both on standardized tests and in their critical thinking. I then categorized these activities as in-class or out-of-class. With that list done, I further organized the outside work into additional categories: learning objects (a resource, such as a reading or video, to support learning), low-level Blooms taxonomy, and independent work. I then started brainstorming and researching how to best get the learning to the students. Sometimes, I find amazing learning objects in TED videos or from SAS Curriculum Pathways and other times I find that I need to make some type of learning object myself to better direct what will happen in class.*

The ResultsDoes this take time? Definitely. But it also makes my time as a teacher more valuable and efficient. I would not change my process for anything and the results stand for themselves. Our ACT scores are above National and State average, my IB scores are consistently above the International average, and my students last year were 100% proficient or advanced in reading and 92% proficient or advanced in writing on the state tests.

*Check out April's terrific TED-Ed Original Lesson, made by the TED-Ed team, on heroes in literature., which she uses to expose her students to the different kinds of heroes they will be getting to know in her classroom.

April Gudenrath is an English teacher at Discovery Canyon High School in Colorado Springs, CO. She has been flipping for over four years and has never looked back. She has spoken for both national and international audiences on flipping and standards based grading. She will be a part of a new flipped book featuring Jon Bergmann and Aaron Sams that will be released in January by ISTE publishing. You can contact her at agudteach@gmail.com or follow her on her blog.

Like this:LikeLoading...

LA education board approves continuing iPad plan

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: Phys.org - latest science and technology news stories

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 23:55

LA education board approves continuing iPad plan4 hours agoThe nation's second-largest school district will move ahead with an ambitious $1 billion plan to provide iPads to all students after problems emerged when some of the first to get them used the tablets to tweet, text and play games instead of studying.

The Los Angeles Times reports the Los Angeles Board of Education voted 6-1 on Tuesday that 35 campuses will receive the devices this year in addition to nearly 50 in the first group.

Superintendent John Deasy says it is important to get the tablets to students quickly because computerized state testing is being introduced in 2015.

The rollout of the iPads quickly encountered problems when more than 300 students at three of the first campuses quickly cracked their security settings and began surfing the Internet.

Explore further:LA students get iPads, start playing video games

(C) 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

More from Physics Forums - General Engineering

Related StoriesLA students get iPads, start playing video games Oct 05, 2013

Education officials in the nation's second-largest school district are working to reboot a $1 billion plan to put an iPad in the hands of each of their 650,000 students after an embarrassing glitch emerged when the first ...

LA students breach school iPads' security Sep 25, 2013

Los Angeles school officials have halted home use of iPads after nearly 300 students at Roosevelt High made quick work of hacking through security so they could surf the Web and access social media sites.

LA to give every student an iPad; $30M order Jun 19, 2013

Los Angeles' school system, the second largest in the United States, is ordering iPads for all its students, handing Apple a major success in its quest to make the tablet computer a replacement for textbooks.

LA school head joins chef Oliver on TV after clash Apr 27, 2011

(AP) -- The superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District says he wants to stop offering chocolate- and strawberry-flavored milk to students as part of an attempt to curb childhood obesity.

Schools shift from textbooks to tablets Mar 06, 2013

(AP)'--Schools no longer have to wait for textbook companies to print new editions to get the latest events. In some cases, it's as simple as a teacher hitting "refresh."

LA students more true to their charter schools than teachers Jul 20, 2011

Teachers in Los Angeles Unified School District's charter schools are up to three times more likely to leave their school at year's end compared with their peers in other LAUSD schools, according ...

Recommended for youSmall bag offers solution to Kenyan slum's 'flying toilets' 13 hours ago

The usually straightforward act of going to the toilet ls is far from simple in Kibera, the sprawling slum on the edge of Kenya's capital.

Film group backs antipiracy curriculum for schools Nov 11, 2013

When it comes to learning about the evils of Internet piracy, Hollywood studios and the major music labels want kids to start young.

Airline industry swooping in to prevent cyberattacks Nov 08, 2013

Worried that computer hackers attacking banks and media companies could easily shift targets, the airline industry is taking preemptive steps to ensure it doesn't become the next victim.

New framework for 3D tele-immersive social networking Nov 08, 2013

It's Friday night, you're exhausted after a long week in the office. You're not going to leave the house so you could either watch TV or spend a few hours catching up on your social networks. But how about doing both? Thanks ...

Exploring public perceptions of future wearable computing Nov 07, 2013

As scientists develop the next wave of smartwatches and other wearable computing, they might want to continue focusing their attention on the arms and the wrists. According to a recent Georgia Tech study, ...

Fish packaging with built-in nose Nov 07, 2013

From the outside you can't see whether supermarket fish is still fresh. Once you remove the plastic foil it's immediately obvious how fresh it is, but by then it has already reached your kitchen. PhD candidate ...

User comments : 0More news stories

Snapchat rejected $3 bn offer from FacebookThe mobile messaging service Snapchat recently rejected a $3 billion cash offer from Facebook, The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday.

Sprint latest to waive fees to contact PhilippinesSprint is waiving and crediting fees for phone calls and text messages made by its U.S. customers to the Philippines in the wake of a Typhoon Haiyan.

Cisco's 1Q revenue falls below estimatesCisco's fiscal first-quarter revenue grew slower than expected and net income declined, which sent the technology company's stock lower in extended trading.

Three injured at Tesla factory in CaliforniaTesla Motors says three employees have been injured after an aluminum casting press failed at its factory in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Researchers find way to boost lithium-air battery performance, with help of modified virusesLithium-air batteries have become a hot research area in recent years: They hold the promise of drastically increasing power per battery weight, which could lead, for example, to electric cars with a much ...

Time to tackle cryptosporidiosis: Scientists call for crypto cureA recent study involving more than 22,000 children in Africa and Asia revealed that the protozoan parasite Cryptosporidium is one of four pathogens responsible for the largest part of severe diarrhea in inf ...

Sony PlayStation 4 terrific, but not yet essentialVideo-game fans who reserved Sony's PlayStation 4 several months ago won't have any regrets when it goes on sale in North America on Friday: The PS4 is a terrific game machine that will feel familiar to PlayStation ...

Taiwan scientists report first case of new bird flu virus in humansScientists from Taiwan report on the world's first confirmed case of human infection with a wild avian influenza A H6N1 virus in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine.

Urine tests don't always confirm urinary infections, study finds(HealthDay)'--When doctors suspect a patient has a urinary tract infection, they often request a urine sample so they can test for the presence of bacteria. Now, new research suggests this step may be unnecessary.

Imbruvica approved for mantle cell lymphoma(HealthDay)'--Imbruvica (ibrutinib) has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to treat mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), a rare but aggressive form of blood cancer.

Javascript is currently disabled in your web browser. For full site functionality, it is necessary to enable Javascript. In order to enable it, please see these instructions.(C) Phys.org' 2003-2013

Common Core textbooks arrive late, filled with errors | The Daily Caller

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:54

New York City teachers recently received their new Common Core-approved textbooks '-- a month late '-- and they don't like them one bit.

''They are loaded with errors,'' said Rebecca Murphy a third-grade teacher in Queens, in a statement to the New York Daily News.

The mistakes are numerous. A third-grade workbook contains a set of questions accompanying a mismatched reading selection; one of the pages in another workbook is printed upside down; and some teacher's manuals don't line up with student versions.

Teachers also complained that textbook lessons are lengthy and poorly conceived.

On top of everything else, the textbooks arrived late: a month after school had already begun.

The textbooks were manufactured by Pearson, a company heavily involved in the production and implementation of instructional materials and standardized tests under the national Common Core education guidelines.

Pearson's products have been heavily criticized for incomprehensibility. A first-grade math test was recently scrutinized for asking kids conceptually odd questions that would stump calculus students. (RELATED: Would your first grader pass this weird Common Core math test?)

And a lesson on possessive nouns contained Orwellian statements about the relationship between the individual and government, such as ''The commands of government officials must be obeyed by all,'' and ''An individual's wants are less important than the nation's well-being.''

Joy Pullman, managing editor of School Reform News and a leading critic of Common Core, told The Daily Caller that error-ridden textbooks are the result of heavy government involvement in the education sector.

''Textbook production has actually always been this slipshod, because the government education cartel essentially dictates the market, and has for decades,'' she wrote in an email to The DC. ''Because states and districts have controlled what books children will read, publishers have had an incentive to influence the political process as well as create a poor product, generally, because rushing the first book to market means more sales.''

The problem is likely to get worse under Common Core's national curriculum standards, which weaken state and district autonomy in education matters.

''The really odd thing is that Common Core has been available for three years, now, and Pearson hasn't managed to get an error-free book together yet,'' wrote Pullman. ''It makes one wonder about their other products, which are in millions of schools across the country.''

Follow Robby on Twitter

------------------------------------------------

No Hate Speech-Council of Europe

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Nov 2013 02:21

No Hate Speech ConferenceDeputy Secretary General opens No Hate Speech Conference08/11/2013

"Hate speech online is not any different from hate speech offline", Gabriella Battaini Dragoni underlined at the opening of "No Hate" Conference at the European Youth Centre. The event, that is bringing together the main players and actors of the campaign, from 36 Member States of the Council of Europe, aims at highlighting once more the relevance of the fight against racism and discrimination in the form of hate speech.

"Hate speech is not free speech. Its consequences are anything but free. Hate speech undermines democracy and leads to hate crimes", emphasised the Deputy Secretary General. Ambassador Armen Papikyan, representing the Armenian Chairmanship of the Council of Europe, and the Human Rights Commissioner, Nils Muižnieks, also spoke at the event.

Speech by the Deputy Secretary GeneralRead more about the No Hate Speech Movement

Live webcast of the conference:

Hate Speech Watch

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Nov 2013 02:22

27 October, 2013On 9 November each year European organisations raise awareness about and act against fascism and antisemitism. They do this to commemorate the past and to protest against contemporary forms of fascism and antisemitism. We invite all users of the Hate Speech Watch to report online hate speech related to antisemitism or fascism in November and to collect relevant material and hate speech examples in order to raise awareness and educate about the serious problem of the increasing antisemitism in Europe.Shocking facts about the increase of antisemitisim: A recent survey in nine different European countries almost a quarter of Jewish respondents said they avoid visiting places and wearing symbols that identify them as Jews for fear of antisemitism. View

Share

Share

5 April, 20133 Related reportsA new wave of anti-Muslim intolerance and antagonism is sweeping Europe. The far right political gains seen in some parts of the continent are alarming. Anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim and extreme right parties seem to be cashing in on economic hardship and austerity measures. In a blinkered world of "us" and "them" they have found in Europe's Muslim citizens the "others".

The Hate Speech Watch set Islamophobia as the fourth focus which will soon be the main focus of the months. The Hate Speech Watch is inviting young people who are concerned to identify examples of islamophobic content form the Internet and bring it to Hate Speech Watch for debates and actions. View

Share

Share

22 March, 20130 Related reportsCyberbullyingis the use of the Internet and related technologies to harm other people, in a deliberate, repeated, and hostile manner. As it has become more common in society, particularly among young people, legislation and awareness campaigns have arisen to combat it.View

Share

Share

------------------------------------------------

Typhoon 'relief'

------------------------------------------------

The opening of COP19 in Warsaw in the shade of Philippines' super typhoon Haiyan. - COP19 - CMP9, Conference of Parties and climate change conference

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Nov 2013 02:50

His Excellency Mr. Abdullah Bin Hamad Al-Attiyah, President of COP18/CMP8 has passed on his seat to the President Elect of COP19/CMP9 Marcin Korolec, who at the same moment became the President Elect of COP19/CMP9 till the next COP in Lima in 2014.Passing on the seat has been preceded by speech of His Excellency Mr. Abdullah Bin Hamid Al-Attiyah who welcomed everyone, congratulated Poland its Independence Day and thanked for hospitality. He also referred to the agreements achieved in Doha while underlined the need of continuing and supporting those agreements, as he said: ''I hope that the agreements from Doha will be supported for the good of the planet earth''. President of COP18/CMP8 expressed a hope that agreements from Warsaw will help to reach greater consensus at the COP21/CMP11 in Paris and also declared his support for the President of COP 19/CMP9.

The speech has been followed by the presentation of Marcin Korolec as a President Elect of COP 19/CMP9 to the assembly performed by His Excellency Mr. Abdullah Bin Hamid Al-Attiyah. Next the President Elect has been elected to the position of President COP19/CMP9 by acclamation.

Newly elected President COP19/CMP9 Marcin Korolec gave a speech and thanked previous President for his support and also Executive Secretary of UNFCCC Christiana Figueres and President of City of Warsaw Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz. Marcin Korolec underlined that the work that needs to be done in Warsaw ''Willnotbeeasy''.He also regretted victims and all who suffered from super typhoon, which recently destroyed Philippines and other countries in that region.

While speaking about the challenges, which are ahead of the Warsaw's conference, Marcin Korolec said: ''Changingclimateisaglobalissueandaglobalproblem,butalsoagreatopportunity.Onecountrycan notmakeadifference,butalltogethercan.Allcountriesaredifferent,butitmaybeanadvantage.Eachpartymaybringitsbestforthegoodofallofus.''

At the end of his speech Marcin Korolec wished everyone good COP19.

The next speaker Executive Secretary of UNFCCC Christiana Figueres thanked previous speakers and also Polish Government and President of City of Warsaw for the preparation of the conference and hospitality. Executive Secretary of UNFCCC expressed a hope that the event in Warsaw will drive to the point which bring everyone step closer to the greater agreement in Paris in 2015. In the end of her speech Christiana Figures referred to the venue of the conference saying: ''As the conference takes place at the stadium I would like to refer to the Olympics motto: Citius, Altius, Fortius '' what means Faster, Higher, Stronger and I hope it will be guiding us during our work here''.

All gathered people were also welcomed by President of the City of Warsaw Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz, who underlined that Warsaw is one of the most ''green'' cities in Europe and as only city in the world performed and published ''sustainable report''. The President also wished everyone ''Good time in Warsaw''. Next Beata Jaczewska '' Head of Polish Delegation presented a short movie on people who live at Kiribati in village called ''Poland''. The movie presented day-to-day life of the native community who struggles everyday makes theirself living. Local child narrated the movie. The movie underlined threats of global warming that are visible for the inhabitants of this small island, as they have to wait for the rainy days to get a drinking water. It was also mentioned that due to rising level of the Oceans, the area of the island decreases year by year what will drive one day into a float of the island.

After all planned speeches newly elected President COP19/CMP9 Marci Korolec proposed to the assembly 3 minutes of silence to commemorate victims and all who suffered from the typhoon which hit recently Philippines and neighboring countries.

Soon after that meaningful moment the President of COP19/CMP9 continued to proceed with all required procedures such as adopting: rules procedure; agenda and also election of the officers other than President and admission of organizations as observers.

During the session many countries have requested the right to make a statement, above the all, the most significant was the statement delivered by the representative of the Philippian delegation who in his first words thanked for all the support and all kind words towards his country, which has been touched by the tragedy. However most of his speech was much more emotional and referred to the super typhoon which destroyed his country and caused the death of thousands of people.

In his statement Yeb Sano '' Philippines lead negotiator, Head of Delegation underlined that this ''massive devastation'' should be a warning to the whole world and ''it's time to stop this madness''.

Long, exceeding over a set 3 minutes time limit statement was very warm received by the assembly what was expressed by the a stand-up applause preformed by some people gathered at the plenary session.

See the pictures from the first day of COP19/CMP9 in the gallery.

Amy Goodman: Typhoon Haiyan Demands Climate Action at the U.N. Summit in Warsaw - Truthdig

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Nov 2013 02:48

Typhoon Haiyan Demands Climate Action at the U.N. Summit in WarsawPosted on Nov 13, 2013By Amy Goodman

Typhoon Haiyan, a storm of historic proportions, has devastated the largely impoverished population of the Philippines. Thousands of people are dead, hundreds of thousands are stranded with almost no food or water, and millions have been impacted. The struggle to survive competes with the race to bury the dead, treat the wounded and suffer through the onslaught of tropical storms in Haiyan's wake. In seeming synchrony, halfway around the world, thousands of negotiators, scientists, politicians and journalists are gathering for the annual United Nations Climate Change summit, held this year in Warsaw, Poland. The changing seas that this week have whipped the Philippines demand a sea change in the worldwide response to global warming.

As ''COP 19'' opened in Warsaw - the 19th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol - one courageous climate negotiator took center stage, demanding action on climate change.

''What my country is going through as a result of this extreme climate event is madness. The climate crisis is madness,'' said Naderev ''Yeb'' Sano, representing the typhoon-ravaged Philippines, as the summit opened. ''We can stop this madness right here in Warsaw.'' This was not his first appeal to the U.N. body. Last year, when the summit was in Doha, Qatar, and not long after Typhoon Bopha killed 1,100 people in the Philippines, Sano implored the gathered negotiators, holding back tears: ''The outcome of our work is not about what our political masters want. It is about what is demanded of us by 7 billion people. I appeal to all: Please, no more delays, no more excuses. Please, let Doha be remembered as the place where we found the political will to turn things around.''

Doha did not turn things around. Report after report reinforces the science: Catastrophic climate change is accelerating. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the association of more than 1,800 scientists that is leading the global study of climate change, and which shared the Nobel Peace Prize with former Vice President Al Gore in 2007, recently released its fifth assessment report. With increasing certainty, the IPCC reports, the climate is changing, and humans are the cause.

Jeff Masters is a meteorologist and founder of the popular weather website Weather Underground. Unlike most U.S.-based television weather forecasters, who rarely link extreme weather events to climate change, Masters regularly makes the connection. He said on ''Democracy Now!'' news hour, ''The proportion of these sorts of high-end Category 5 storms has increased ... when we do get them there's a higher proportion of them coming in at these super-high intensities.'' Masters and the IPCC point out that no individual weather event can be directly attributed to climate change, but that the frequency and intensity of the storms will increase.

While the science is dry and peer-reviewed, the reality on the ground is grim and deadly. Typhoon Haiyan (which is called Yolanda in the Philippines) is the latest, epic example. Superstorm Sandy, one year ago, hit New Jersey and New York City, shutting down one of the largest cities on the planet.It's too soon to call the U.N. climate summit in Warsaw a failure. Earnest negotiators have gathered in Poland, alongside activists both inside the National Stadium, where the conference is being held, and outside, in the streets. Activists from Greenpeace called attention to Poland's intense dependence on coal-fueled power plants by projecting messages onto the huge smokestacks stating ''Climate Change Starts Here.'' At the same time, 28 other Greenpeace activists face seven years in prison in Russia for protesting the first exploratory oil-drilling rig in the Arctic. The two journalists covering them face the same charges.

Many consider Warsaw just a steppingstone to the climate summit planned for Paris in 2015, conceding that immediate action is not possible. Why? At the climate summit in 2011, in Durban, South Africa, a representative of the youth delegation addressed the closing plenary, expressing frustration with the slow progress. Anjali Appadurai said: ''You've been negotiating all my life. ... Long-term thinking is not radical. What's radical is to completely alter the planet's climate, to betray the future of my generation, and to condemn millions to death by climate change. What's radical is to write off the fact that change is within our reach.''

Yeb Sano is not giving up, either on his family, many of whom were directly hit by Typhoon Haiyan, or on the process. As he closed his statement at the opening session in Warsaw this week, he announced, ''I will now commence a voluntary fasting for the climate ... during this COP, until a meaningful outcome is in sight.''

Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.

Amy Goodman is the host of ''Democracy Now!,'' a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on more than 1,000 stations in North America. She is the co-author of ''The Silenced Majority,'' a New York Times best-seller.

(C) 2013 Amy Goodman

Distributed by King Features Syndicate

Get truth delivered toyour inbox every week.

Previous item: Obama Needs His Friends Back

New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

------------------------------------------------

USS George Washington battle group ordered to Philippines for typhoon relief | WTKR.com

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:16

Posted on: 9:54 am, November 12, 2013, by Matt Knight, updated on: 10:06am, November 12, 2013

The USS George Washington (U.S. Navy file photo)

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel has ordered the aircraft carrier USS George Washington and other Navy ships to make best speed for the Philippines.

Latest on the relief efforts in the Philippines

The aircraft carrier, which carries 5,000 Sailors and more than 80 aircraft, is currently in Hong Kong for a port visit. The crew is being recalled early from shore leave and the ship is expected to be underway later this evening.

In company with the carrier will be the cruisers USS Antietam and USS Cowpens, and the destroyer USS Mustin. The supply ship USNS Charles Drew is already underway and will rendezvous with the group as they get closer. USS Lassen got underway yesterday for the region. Embarked on board USS George Washington, is Carrier Air Wing Five.

CVW-5 is a collection of aircraft designed to perform various functions including disaster relief and includes the ''Golden Falcons'' of Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 12 flying the MH-60S Seahawk; and the ''Saberhawks'' of Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron 77 flying the MH-60R Seahawk.

As needed, these ships and aircraft will be able to provide humanitarian assistance, supplies, and medical care in support of the ongoing efforts led by the government and military of the Republic of the Philippines.

The ships should be on station within 48-72 hours. The Defense Department is continuing to work closely with the Philippine government to determine what, if any, additional assets may be required.

Philippines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:22

Republic of the PhilippinesRepºblika ng Pilipinas

Motto: "Maka-Diyos, Maka-Tao, Makakalikasan at Makabansa"[1]"For God, People, Nature, and Country"Anthem: Lupang HinirangChosen LandCapitalManila[2]14°35'²N121°0'²E>> / >>14.583°N 121.000°E>> / 14.583; 121.000Largest cityQuezon CityOfficial languagesRecognised regional languagesOptional languagesaDemonymFilipinoGovernmentUnitarypresidentialconstitutionalrepublic - PresidentBenigno Aquino III - Vice PresidentJejomar Binay - Senate PresidentFranklin Drilon - House SpeakerFeliciano Belmonte, Jr. - Chief JusticeMaria Lourdes SerenoLegislatureCongress - Upper houseSenate - Lower houseHouse of RepresentativesIndependence from Spainb and the United States - EstablishedApril 27, 1565 - DeclaredJune 12, 1898 - Self-governmentMarch 24, 1934 - RecognizedJuly 4, 1946 - Current constitutionFebruary 2, 1987 Area - Land300,000 km2[4] (73rd)115,831 sq mi - Water (%)0.61[5] (inland waters)Population - 2013 estimate98,630,000[6] (12th) - Density308.0/km2 (43rd)797.2/sq miGDP (PPP)2013 estimate - Total$454.286 billion[7] - Per capita$4,660[7]GDP (nominal)2013 estimate - Total$272.207 billion[7] - Per capita$2,792[7]Gini (2009)43.0[8]medium ·44thHDI (2013)0.654[9]medium ·114thCurrencyPeso (Filipino: piso) ('‚±) (PHP)Time zonePST(UTC+8) - Summer (DST)not observed (UTC+8)Date formatmm/dd/yyyyDrives on theright[10]Calling code+63ISO 3166 codePHInternet TLD.pha.^a The 1987 Philippine constitution specifies, "Spanish and Arabic shall be promoted on a voluntary and optional basis."[11]b.^b Philippine revolutionaries declared independence from Spain on June 12, 1898, but the Spanish claim of sovereignty was passed from Spain to the United States in the Treaty of Paris. This led to the Philippine''American War.The Philippines (i//; FI-lÉ-peenz; Filipino: Pilipinas[ËŒpɪlɪËpinɐs]), officially known as the Republic of the Philippines (Filipino: Repºblika ng Pilipinas), is a sovereignisland country in Southeast Asia situated in the western Pacific Ocean. To its north across the Luzon Strait lies Taiwan; west across the South China Sea sits Vietnam; southwest is the island of Borneo across the Sulu Sea, and to the south the Celebes Sea separates it from other islands of Indonesia; while to the east it is bounded by the Philippine Sea. Its location on the Pacific Ring of Fire and close to the equator make the Philippines prone to earthquakes and typhoons, but also endows it with abundant natural resources and some of the world's greatest biodiversity. At 300,000 square kilometers (115,831 sq mi), the Philippines is the 73rd-largest country in the world,[12] consisting of an archipelago of 7,107 islands that are categorized broadly under three main geographical divisions: Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. Its capital city is Manila while its most populous city is Quezon City.

With a population of more than 98 million people,[13] the Philippines is the seventh-most populated country in Asia and the 12th most populated country in the world. An additional 12 million Filipinos live overseas, comprising one of the world's largest and most influential diasporas.[14] Multiple ethnicities and cultures are found throughout the islands. In prehistoric times, Negritos were some of the archipelago's earliest inhabitants. They were followed by successive waves of Austronesian peoples who brought with them influences from Malay, Hindu, and Islamic societies. Various nations were established under the rule of Datus, Rajahs, Sultans or Lakans. Trade with China also introduced Chinese culture and settlement, which remain present to this day.

The arrival of Ferdinand Magellan in 1521 marked the beginning of an era of Spanish interest and eventual colonization. In 1543, Spanish explorer Ruy L"pez de Villalobos named the archipelago Las Islas Filipinas in honor of Philip II of Spain. The Spanish Empire began to settle with the arrival of Miguel L"pez de Legazpi from New Spain (present day-Mexico) in 1565 who established the first Spanish settlement in the archipelago, which remained a Spanish colony for more than 300 years. During this time, Manila became the Asian hub of the Manila''Acapulco galleonfleet.

As the 19th century gave way to the 20th, there followed in quick succession the Philippine Revolution, which spawned the short-lived First Philippine Republic; the Spanish''American War; and the Philippine''American War. In the aftermath, the United States emerged as the dominant power; aside from the period of Japanese occupation, the United States retained sovereignty over the islands. After World War II,[15] the Treaty of Manila established the Philippine Republic as an independent nation.[16] Since then, the Philippines has had an often tumultuous experience with democracy, with popular "people power" movements overthrowing a dictatorship in one instance, but also underlining the institutional weaknesses of its constitutional republic in others. The nation's large size and economic potential have led it to be classified as a middle power.[17]

EtymologyThe name Philippines is named in honor of King Philip II of Spain. Spanish explorer Ruy L"pez de Villalobos during his expedition in 1542 named the islands of Leyte and SamarFelipinas after the then Prince of Asturias. Eventually the name Las Islas Filipinas would be used to cover all the islands of the archipelago. Before that became commonplace, other names such as Islas del Poniente (Islands of the West) and Magellan's name for the islands San Lzaro were also used by the Spanish to refer to the islands.[18][19][20][21][22]

The official name of the Philippines has changed several times in the course of the country's history. During the Philippine Revolution, the Malolos Congress proclaimed the establishment of the Repºblica Filipina or the Philippine Republic. From the period of the Spanish''American War (1898) and the Philippine''American War (1899''1902) until the Commonwealth period (1935''46), American colonial authorities referred to the country as the Philippine Islands, a translation of the Spanish name. During the American period,[clarification needed When?] the name Philippines began to appear and it has since become the country's common name.[23] Since independence, the official name of the country has been the Republic of the Philippines.

HistoryPrehistory and early migration wavesThe metatarsal of Callao Man is reported to have been reliably dated by uranium-series dating to 67,000 years ago[24] thereby replacing the Tabon Man of Palawan, carbon-dated to around 24,000 years ago,[25][26] as the oldest human remains found in the archipelago. Negritos were among the archipelago's earliest inhabitants, but their appearance in the Philippines has not been reliably dated.[27] There are several opposing theories regarding the origins of ancient Filipinos. F. Landa Jocano theorizes that the ancestors of the Filipinos evolved locally. Wilhelm Solheim's Island Origin Theory[28] postulates that the peopling of the archipelago transpired via trade networks originating in the antediluvianSundaland area around 48000 to 5000 BCE rather than by wide-scale migration. The Austronesian Expansion Theory states that Malayo-Polynesians coming from Taiwan began migrating to the Philippines around 4000 BCE, displacing earlier arrivals.[29][30] Whatever the case, by 1000 BCE the inhabitants of the archipelago had developed into four kinds of social groups: hunter-gathering tribes, warrior societies, highland plutocracies, and maritime-centered harbor principalities.[31]

Tantric PeriodThe 1st millennium saw the rise of the harbor principalities and their growth into Maritime states composed of autonomous barangays independent of, or allied with, larger nations which were either Malaythalassocracies led by Datus or Indianized Kingdoms led by Rajahs. The chief among which were the Rajahnate of Butuan, which attained prominence under the rule of Rajah Sri Bata Shaja,[32] the Kingdom of Tondo, ruled over by the Lakandula dynasty[33][34] and the Rajahnate of Cebu[35] which was led by Rajamuda Sri Lumay. Other nations in this era include the State of Ma-i and the Confederation of Madja-as. Sulu, before its Islamization was also an Indianized Kingdom under its first ruler, Rajah Sipad the Older.[36] The great epics; the Hinilawod, Darangan, Biag Ni Lam-Ang and etc. trace their origins to this era.[37]

Islamic PeriodThe 1300s heralded the arrival and eventual spread of the Islamic religion in the Philippine archipelago. In 1380, Karim ul' Makdum and Shari'ful Hashem Syed Abu Bakr, an Arab trader born in Johore, arrived in Sulu from Malacca and established the Sultanate of Sulu by converting Sulu's Rajah and marrying his daughter.[38][39] Also, at the end of the 15th century, Shariff Mohammed Kabungsuwan of Johor introduced Islam in the island of Mindanao and he subsequently married Paramisuli, an Iranun Princess from Mindanao, and established the Sultanate of Maguindanao. The sultanate system even extended itself further and the Confederation of sultanates in Lanao was a logical extension of this.[40] Eventually, Islam had begun to spread out from the southern Philippines into the north. Even Manila itself was nominally islamized since the reign of Sultan Bolkiah in 1485 to 1521, wherein, the Sultanate of Brunei subjugated Tondo by installing the Muslim, Rajah Suleiman to the throne.[41][42][43][44]

The rivalries between the disparate Datus, Rajahs, Sultans and Lakans together with their respective states competing over the limited territory and people of the islands eventually simplified Spanish colonization by allowing its conquistadors to effectively employ a strategy of divide and conquer for rapid conquest.[45]

Colonial PeriodIn 1521, Portuguese explorer Ferdinand Magellan arrived in the Philippines and claimed the islands for Spain.[46] Colonization began when Spanish explorer Miguel L"pez de Legazpi arrived from Mexico in 1565 and formed the first European settlements in Cebu. In 1571, after dealing with the local royal families in the wake of the Tondo Conspiracy and defeating the Chinese pirate warlord Limahong, the Spanish established Manila as the capital of the Spanish East Indies.[47][48]

Spanish rule contributed significantly to bringing political unity to the archipelago. From 1565 to 1821, the Philippines was governed as a territory of the Viceroyalty of New Spain and then was administered directly from Madrid after the Mexican War of Independence. The Manila galleons and its large naval fleet linking Manila to Acapulco traveled once or twice a year between the 16th and 19th centuries. Trade introduced foods such as corn, tomatoes, potatoes, chili peppers, and pineapples from the Americas.[48]Roman Catholic missionaries converted most of the lowland inhabitants to Christianity and founded schools, a university, and hospitals. While a Spanish decree introduced free public schooling in 1863, efforts in mass public education mainly came to fruition during the American period.[49]

During its rule, the Spanish fought off various indigenous revolts and several external colonial challenges from Chinese pirates, the Dutch, and the Portuguese. In an extension of the fighting of the Seven Years' War, British forcesoccupied Manila from 1762 to 1764. They found local allies like Diego and Gabriela Silang who took the opportunity to lead a revolt, but Spanish rule was eventually restored following the 1763 Treaty of Paris.[45][50][51]

In the 19th century, Philippine ports opened to world trade and shifts started occurring within Philippine society. Many Spaniards born in the Philippines (criollos) and those of mixed ancestry (mestizos) became wealthy. The influx of Spanish and Latino settlers secularized churches and opened up government positions traditionally held by Spaniards born in the Iberian Peninsula (peninsulares). The ideals of revolution also began to spread through the islands. Criollo dissatisfaction resulted in the revolt in Cavite El Viejo in 1872 that was a precursor to the Philippine Revolution.[45][52][53][54][55]

Revolutionary sentiments were stoked in 1872 after three priests '-- Mariano G"mez, Jos(C) Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora (collectively known as Gomburza) '-- were accused of sedition by colonial authorities and executed.[52][53] This would inspire a propaganda movement in Spain, organized by Marcelo H. del Pilar, Jos(C) Rizal, and Mariano Ponce, lobbying for political reforms in the Philippines. Rizal was eventually executed on December 30, 1896, on charges of rebellion.[56] As attempts at reform met with resistance, Andr(C)s Bonifacio in 1892 established the secret society called the Katipunan, a society along the lines of the freemasons, which sought independence from Spain through armed revolt.[54] Bonifacio and the Katipunan started the Philippine Revolution in 1896. A faction of the Katipunan, the Magdalo of Cavite province, eventually came to challenge Bonifacio's position as the leader of the revolution and Emilio Aguinaldo took over.

American Occupational PeriodIn 1898, the Spanish-American War began in Cuba and reached the Philippines. Aguinaldo declared Philippine independence from Spain in Kawit, Cavite on June 12, 1898, and the insurgent First Philippine Republic was established the following year. Meanwhile, the islands were ceded by Spain to the United States for 20 million US dollars in the 1898 Treaty of Paris.[57] As it became increasingly clear the United States would not recognize the First Philippine Republic, the Philippine''American War broke out. The Americans then destroyed the first Philippine Republic, nevertheless, it was survived by three cantonal republics: The Republic of Zamboanga, The Republic of Negros and The Tagalog Republic. Yet, these too were crushed and total American control was expanded over the entirety of the archipelago which was administered as an insular area.[58]

In 1935, the Philippines was granted Commonwealth status. Plans for independence over the next decade were interrupted by World War II when the Japanese Empire invaded and established a puppet government. Many atrocities and war crimes were committed during the war such as the Bataan Death March and the Manila massacre that culminated during the Battle of Manila.[59] Allied troops defeated the Japanese in 1945. By the end of the war it is estimated over a million Filipinos had died.[60]

IndependenceOn July 4, 1946, the Philippines attained its independence.[5] Immediately after World War II, the Philippines faced a number of challenges. The country had to be rebuilt from the ravages of war. It also had to come to terms with Japanese collaborators. Meanwhile, disgruntled remnants of the Hukbalahap communist rebel army that had previously fought against and resisted the Japanese continued to roam the rural regions. This threat to the government was dealt with by Secretary of National Defense and later President Ramon Magsaysay, but sporadic cases of communist insurgency continued to flare up long afterward.[61][62] In 1965, Ferdinand Marcos was elected president. Nearing the end of his second term and constitutionally barred from seeking a third, he declared martial law on September 21, 1972. By using political divisions, the tension of the Cold War, and the specter of communist rebellion and Islamic insurgency as justifications, he governed by decree.[63]

On August 21, 1983, Marcos' chief rival opposition leader Benigno "Ninoy" Aquino, Jr. ignored warnings and returned from exile in the United States. He was assassinated as he was taken off the plane at the Manila International Airport (now called the Ninoy Aquino International Airport in his memory). With political pressure building, Marcos eventually called for snap presidential elections in 1986.[61]Corazon Aquino, Benigno's widow, was persuaded to become the presidential candidate and standard bearer of the opposition. The elections were widely considered rigged when Marcos was proclaimed the winner. This led to the People Power Revolution, instigated when two long-time Marcos allies '' Armed Forces of the Philippines Vice Chief-of-Staff Fidel V. Ramos and Secretary of National Defense Juan Ponce Enrile '' resigned and barricaded themselves in Camp Aguinaldo and Camp Crame. Exhorted by the CardinalArchbishop of ManilaJaime Sin, people gathered in support of the rebel leaders and protested on Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA). In the face of mass protests and military defections, Marcos and his allies fled to Hawaii and into exile. Corazon Aquino was recognized as president.[62][64]

The return of democracy and government reforms after the events of 1986 were hampered by national debt, government corruption, coup attempts, a persistent communist insurgency, and military conflict with Islamic separatists. The economy improved during the administration of Fidel V. Ramos, who was elected president in 1992.[65] However, the economic improvements were negated with the onset of the East Asian financial crisis in 1997. In 2001, amid charges of corruption and a stalled impeachment process, Ramos' successor Joseph Estrada was ousted from the presidency by the 2001 EDSA Revolution and replaced by Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Her administration that lasted 9 years was tied with graft and corruption and numerous political scandals.[66][67][68] As a result of the May 2010 elections, Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III was elected president.

Politics and governmentThe Philippines has a democratic government.[69] It is a constitutional republic with a presidential system. It is governed as a unitary state with the exception of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao which is largely free from the national government. There have been attempts to change the government to a federal, unicameral, or parliamentary government since the Ramos administration.[70][71]

The President functions as both head of state and head of government and is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. The president is elected by popular vote for a single six-year term, during which he or she appoints and presides over the cabinet.[3] The bicameralCongress is composed of the Senate, serving as the upper house, with members elected to a six-year term, and the House of Representatives, serving as the lower house, with members elected to a three-year term. The senators are elected at large while the representatives are elected from both legislative districts and through sectoral representation.[3] The judicial power is vested in the Supreme Court, composed of a Chief Justice as its presiding officer and fourteen associate justices, all of whom are appointed by the President from nominations submitted by the Judicial and Bar Council.[3]

Security and defensePhilippine defense is handled by the Armed Forces of the Philippines and is composed of three branches: the Air Force, the Army, and the Navy (including the Marine Corps). Civilian security is handled by Philippine National Police under the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG).

In the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, the largest separatist organization, the Moro National Liberation Front, is now engaging the government politically. Other more militant groups like the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, the communist New People's Army, and the Abu Sayyaf still roam the provinces, but their presence has decreased in recent years due to successful security provided by the Philippine government.[72][73]

The Philippines has been an ally of the United States since World War II. A mutual defense treaty between the two countries was signed in 1951. The Philippines supported American policies during the Cold War and participated in the Korean and Vietnam wars. It was a member of the now dissolved SEATO, a group that was intended to serve a role similar to NATO and that included Australia, France, New Zealand, Pakistan, Thailand, the United Kingdom, and the United States.[74] After the start of the War on Terror, the Philippines was part of the coalition that gave support to the United States in Iraq.[75] The United States designated the country a major non-NATO ally. The Philippines is currently working to end its domestic insurgency with help from the United States.

International relationsThe Philippines' international relations are based on trade with other nations and the well-being of the 11 million overseas Filipinos living outside the country.[76] As a founding and active member of the United Nations, the Philippines has been elected several times into the Security Council. Carlos P. Romulo was a former President of the United Nations General Assembly. The country is an active participant in the Human Rights Council as well as in peacekeeping missions, particularly in East Timor.[77][78][79][80]

In addition to membership in the United Nations, the country is also a founding and active member of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), an organization designed to strengthen relations and promote economic and cultural growth among states in the Southeast Asian region.[81] It has hosted several summits and is an active contributor to the direction and policies of the bloc.[82] The relations it currently enjoys with other Southeast Asian states are in contrast to its relations with them before the 1970s when it was one of the allies of the US Forces against, with then the North Vietnam and was heavily disputing Sabah with Malaysia; although, disagreements continue to exist due to the Spratly Islands.[83]

The Philippines values its relations with the United States.[76] It supported the United States during the Cold War and the War on Terror and is a major non-NATO ally. Despite this history of goodwill, controversies related to the presence of the now former U.S. military bases in Subic Bay and Clark and the current Visiting Forces Agreement have flared up from time to time.[76] Japan, the biggest contributor of official development assistance to the country,[84] is thought of as a friend. Although historical tensions still exist on issues such as the plight of comfort women, much of the animosity inspired by memories of World War II have faded.[85]

Relations with other nations are generally positive. Shared democratic values ease relations with Western and European countries while similar economic concerns help in relations with other developing countries. Historical ties and cultural similarities also serve as a bridge in relations with Spain and Latin America. Despite issues such as domestic abuse and war affecting overseas Filipino workers and obstacles posed by Islamic insurgency in Mindanao, relations with Middle Eastern countries (including Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates) are friendly as seen in the continuous employment of more than two million overseas Filipinos living there.

With communism no longer the threat it once was, once hostile relations in the 1950s between the Philippines and the People's Republic of China have improved greatly. Issues involving Taiwan, the Spratly Islands, and concerns of expanding Chinese influence, however, still encourage a degree of caution.[85] Recent foreign policy has been mostly about economic relations with its Southeast Asian and Asia-Pacific neighbors.[76]

The Philippines is an active member of the East Asia Summit (EAS), the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the Latin Union, the Group of 24, and the Non-Aligned Movement.[3] It is also seeking to strengthen relations with Islamic countries by campaigning for observer status in the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.[86][87]

Administrative divisionsThe Philippines is divided into three island groups: Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. As of March 2010[update], these were divided into 17 regions, 80 provinces, 138 cities, 1,496 municipalities, and 42,025 barangays.[88] In addition, Section 2 of Republic Act No. 5446 asserts that the definition of the territorial sea around the Philippine archipelago does not affect the claim over Sabah.[89]

A clickable map of the Philippines exhibiting its 17 regions and 80 provinces.

GeographyThe Philippines is an archipelago of 7,107 islands[3] with a total land area, including inland bodies of water, of approximately 300,000 square kilometers (115,831 sq mi). Its 36,289 kilometers (22,549 mi) of coastline makes it the country with the 5th longest coastline in the world.[3][92] It is located between 116° 40', and 126° 34' E. longitude and 4° 40' and 21° 10' N. latitude and is bordered by the Philippine Sea to the east, the South China Sea to the west, and the Celebes Sea to the south. The island of Borneo is located a few hundred kilometers southwest and Taiwan is located directly to the north. The Moluccas and Sulawesi are located to the south-southwest and Palau is located to the east of the islands.[3]

Most of the mountainous islands are covered in tropical rainforest and volcanic in origin. The highest mountain is Mount Apo. It measures up to 2,954 meters (9,692 ft) above sea level and is located on the island of Mindanao. The Galathea Depth in the Philippine Trench is the deepest point in the country and the third deepest in the world. The trench is located in the Philippine Sea. The longest river is the Cagayan River in northern Luzon. Manila Bay, upon the shore of which the capital city of Manila lies, is connected to Laguna de Bay, the largest lake in the Philippines, by the Pasig River. Subic Bay, the Davao Gulf, and the Moro Gulf are other important bays. The San Juanico Strait separates the islands of Samar and Leyte but it is traversed by the San Juanico Bridge.[93]

Situated on the western fringes of the Pacific Ring of Fire, the Philippines experiences frequent seismic and volcanic activity. The Benham Plateau to the east in the Philippine Sea is an undersea region active in tectonicsubduction.[94] Around 20 earthquakes are registered daily, though most are too weak to be felt. The last major earthquake was the 1990 Luzon earthquake.[95] There are many active volcanoes such as the Mayon Volcano, Mount Pinatubo, and Taal Volcano. The eruption of Mount Pinatubo in June 1991 produced the second largest terrestrial eruption of the 20th century.[96] Not all notable geographic features are so violent or destructive. A more serene legacy of the geological disturbances is the Puerto Princesa Subterranean River, the area represents a habitat for biodiversity conservation, the site also contains a full mountain-to-the-sea ecosystem and has some of the most important forests in Asia.[97] The white sand beaches that make Boracay a popular vacation getaway are made of coral remnants.

Due to the volcanic nature of the islands, mineral deposits are abundant. The country is estimated to have the second-largest gold deposits after South Africa and one of the largest copper deposits in the world.[98] It is also rich in nickel, chromite, and zinc. Despite this, poor management, high population density, and environmental consciousness have resulted in these mineral resources remaining largely untapped.[98]Geothermal energy, however, is another product of volcanic activity that the country has harnessed more successfully. The Philippines is the world's second-biggest geothermal producer behind the United States, with 18% of the country's electricity needs being met by geothermal power.[99]

Flora and faunaThe Philippines' rainforests and its extensive coastlines make it home to a diverse range of birds, plants, animals, and sea creatures.[100] It is one of the ten most biologically megadiverse countries and is at or near the top in terms of biodiversity per unit area.[101][102][103] Around 1,100 land vertebrate species can be found in the Philippines including over 100 mammal species and 170 bird species not thought to exist elsewhere.[104]Endemic species include the tamaraw of Mindoro, the Visayan spotted deer, the Philippine mouse deer, the Visayan warty pig, the Philippine flying lemur, and several species of bats.[105] The Philippines has among the highest rates of discovery in the world with sixteen new species of mammals discovered in the last ten years. Because of this, the rate of endemism for the Philippines has risen and likely will continue to rise.[106]

The Philippines lacks large predators, with the exception of snakes, such as pythons and cobras, saltwater crocodiles and birds of prey, such as the national bird, known as the Philippine Eagle, which scientists suggest as the largest eagle in the world.[107][108] The largest crocodile in captivity was captured in the southern island of Mindanao.[109] Other native animals include the palm civet cat, the dugong, and the Philippine tarsier associated with Bohol. With an estimated 13,500 plant species in the country, 3,200 of which are unique to the islands,[104] Philippine rainforests boast an array of flora, including many rare types of orchids and rafflesia.[110][111] The narra is considered as the most important type of hardwood.

Philippine maritime waters encompass as much as 2,200,000 square kilometers (849,425 sq mi) producing unique and diverse marine life and are an important part of the Coral Triangle.[89] The total number of corals and marine fish species was estimated at 500 and 2,400 respectively.[100][104] However, new records [112][113] and species discoveries[114][115] continuously increase these numbers underlining the uniqueness of the marine resources in the Philippines. The Apo Reef is the country's largest contiguous coral reef system and the second-largest in the world.[116] The Tubbataha Reef in the Sulu Sea was declared a World Heritage Site in 1993. Philippine waters also sustain the cultivation of pearls, crabs, and seaweeds.[100][117]

Deforestation, often the result of illegal logging, is an acute problem in the Philippines. Forest cover declined from 70% of the country's total land area in 1900 to about 18.3% in 1999.[118][119] Many species are endangered and scientists say that Southeast Asia, which the Philippines is part of, faces a catastrophic extinction rate of 20% by the end of the 20th century.[120] According to Conservation International, "the country is one of the few nations that is, in its entirety, both a hotspot and a megadiversity country, placing it among the top priority hotspots for global conservation."[110]

ClimateThe Philippines has a tropical maritime climate and is usually hot and humid. There are three seasons: tag-init or tag-araw, the hot dry season or summer from March to May; tag-ulan, the rainy season from June to November; and tag-lamig, the cool dry season from December to February. The southwest monsoon (from May to October) is known as the Habagat, and the dry winds of the northeast monsoon (from November to April), the Amihan.[121] Temperatures usually range from 21 °C(70 °F) to 32 °C(90 °F) although it can get cooler or hotter depending on the season. The coolest month is January; the warmest is May.[3][122]

The average yearly temperature is around 26.6 °C(79.9 °F).[121] In considering temperature, location in terms of latitude and longitude is not a significant factor. Whether in the extreme north, south, east, or west of the country, temperatures at sea level tend to be in the same range. Altitude usually has more of an impact. The average annual temperature of Baguio at an elevation of 1,500 meters (4,900 ft) above sea level is 18.3 °C(64.9 °F), making it a popular destination during hot summers.[121] Likewise, Tagaytay is a favored retreat.

Sitting astride the typhoon belt, most of the islands experience annual torrential rains and thunderstorms from July to October,[123] with around nineteen typhoons entering the Philippine area of responsibility in a typical year and eight or nine making landfall.[124][125][126] Annual rainfall measures as much as 5,000 millimeters (200 in) in the mountainous east coast section but less than 1,000 millimeters (39 in) in some of the sheltered valleys.[123] The wettest known tropical cyclone to impact the archipelago was the July 1911 cyclone, which dropped over 1,168 millimeters (46.0 in) of rainfall within a 24-hour period in Baguio City.[127]Bagyo is the local term for a tropical cyclone in the Philippines.[127] For the PAGASA, at least 19-22 storms would enter in their area and 10-13 storms would hit the Philippines.

EconomyThe national economy of the Philippines is the 41st largest in the world, with an estimated 2013 gross domestic product (nominal) of $272.207 billion.[7] Primary exports include semiconductors and electronic products, transport equipment, garments, copper products, petroleum products, coconut oil, and fruits.[5] Major trading partners include the United States, Japan, China, Singapore, South Korea, the Netherlands, Hong Kong, Germany, Taiwan, and Thailand.[5] Its unit of currency is the Philippine peso ('‚± or PHP).

A newly industrialized country, the Philippine economy has been transitioning from one based on agriculture to one based more on services and manufacturing. Of the country's total labor force of around 38.1 million,[5] the agricultural sector employs close to 32% but contributes to only about 14% of GDP. The industrial sector employs around 14% of the workforce and accounts for 30% of GDP. Meanwhile the 47% of workers involved in the services sector are responsible for 56% of GDP.[128][129]

The unemployment rate as of July 2009 stands at around 7.6% and due to the global economic slowdown inflation as of September 2009 reads 0.70%.[129] Gross international reserves as of July 2011 are $83.201 billion.[130] In 2004, public debt as a percentage of GDP was estimated to be 74.2%; in 2008, 56.9%.[5] Gross external debt has risen to $66.27 billion.[5] The country is a net importer.[129]

After World War II, the country was for a time regarded as the second wealthiest in East Asia, next only to Japan.[76][131][132] However, by the 1960s its economic performance started being overtaken. The economy stagnated under the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos as the regime spawned economic mismanagement and political volatility.[76][132] The country suffered from slow economic growth and bouts of economic recession. Only in the 1990s with a program of economic liberalization did the economy begin to recover.[76][132]

The 1997 Asian Financial Crisis affected the economy, resulting in a lingering decline of the value of the peso and falls in the stock market. But the extent it was affected initially was not as severe as that of some of its Asian neighbors. This was largely due to the fiscal conservatism of the government, partly as a result of decades of monitoring and fiscal supervision from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), in comparison to the massive spending of its neighbors on the rapid acceleration of economic growth.[65] There have been signs of progress since. In 2004, the economy experienced 6.4% GDP growth and 7.1% in 2007, its fastest pace of growth in three decades.[133][134][135] Yet average annual GDP growth per capita for the period 1966''2007 still stands at 1.45% in comparison to an average of 5.96% for the East Asia and the Pacific region as a whole and the daily income for 45% of the population of the Philippines remains less than $2.[136][137] Despite enjoying sustained economic growth during the 2000s (decade), as of 2010[update], the country's economy remains smaller than those of its Southeast Asian neighbors Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, and Singapore in terms of GDP and GDP per capita (nominal).[138]

Other incongruities and challenges exist. The economy is heavily reliant on remittances which surpass foreign direct investment as a source of foreign currency. Regional development is uneven with Luzon '' Metro Manila in particular '' gaining most of the new economic growth at the expense of the other regions,[139] although the government has taken steps to distribute economic growth by promoting investment in other areas of the country. Despite constraints, service industries such as tourism and business process outsourcing have been identified as areas with some of the best opportunities for growth for the country.[129][140]Goldman Sachs includes the country in its list of the "Next Eleven" economies.[141] but China and India have emerged as major economic competitors.[142]

Goldman Sachs estimates that by the year 2050, it will be the 14th largest economy in the world. HSBC also projects the Philippine economy to become the 16th largest economy in the world, 5th largest economy in Asia and the largest economy in the South East Asian region by 2050.[143]

The Philippines is a member of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Asian Development Bank which is headquartered in Mandaluyong City, the Colombo Plan, the G-77, and the G-24 among other groups and institutions.[5]

DemographicsPopulation in Philippines increased from 1990 to 2008 by approximately 28 million, a 45% growth in that time frame.[144] The first official census in the Philippines was carried out in 1877 and recorded a population of 5,567,685.[145] As of 2011, the Philippines has become the world's 12th most populous nation, with a population of over 94 million. It is estimated that half of the population resides on the island of Luzon. The population growth rate between 1995 to 2000 of 3.21% decreased to an estimated 1.95% for the 2005 to 2010 period, but remains a contentious issue.[146][147] The population's median age is 22.7 years with 60.9% aged from 15 to 64 years old.[5] Life expectancy at birth is 71.94 years, 75.03 years for females and 68.99 years for males.[148]

There are about 11 million Filipinos outside the Philippines.[149] Since the liberalization of United States immigration laws in 1965, the number of people in the United States having Filipino ancestry has grown substantially. In 2007 there were an estimated 3.1 million.[150][151] According to the United States Census Bureau, immigrants from the Philippines made up the second largest group after Mexico that sought family reunification.[152] Some two million Filipinos work in the Middle East, with nearly a million in Saudi Arabia alone.[153]

EthnicityAccording to the 2000 census, 28.1% of Filipinos are Tagalog, 13.1% Cebuano, 9% Ilocano, 7.6% Bisaya/Binisaya, 7.5% Hiligaynon, 6% Bikol, 3.4% Waray, and 25.3% as "others",[5][154] which can be broken down further to yield more distinct non-tribal groups like the Moro, the Kapampangan, the Pangasinense, the Ibanag, and the Ivatan.[155] There are also indigenous peoples like the Igorot, the Lumad, the Mangyan, the Bajau, and the tribes of Palawan.[156]Negritos, such as the Aeta and the Ati, are considered among the earliest inhabitants of the islands.[157]

Filipinos generally belong to several Asian ethnic groups classified linguistically as part of the Austronesian or Malayo-Polynesian speaking people.[156] It is believed that thousands of years ago Austronesian-speaking Taiwanese aborigines migrated to the Philippines from Taiwan, bringing with them knowledge of agriculture and ocean-sailing, eventually displacing the earlier Negrito groups of the islands.[158] They were later supplanted by arrivals of Chinese and Japanese in the northern islands, and Malays, Indians, Arabs in the southern islands. Later arrivals during the colonial period include more Japanese, Indians, Spaniards, Americans, as well as other European peoples. Intermarriage between the groups is evident in the major cities and urban areas.[159][160][161] Descendants of such mixed couples are known as mestizos.[162]

The two most important non-indigenous minorities include the Chinese and the Spaniards. Chinese Filipinos, mostly descended from immigrants from Fujian, China after 1898, number 2 million, although there is an estimated 28 million Filipinos who have partial Chinese ancestry, stemming from precolonial Chinese migrants.[163] Chinese Filipinos have a prominent role in the country's private sector, and are part of the larger bamboo network, a network of overseas Chinese businesses operating in the markets of Southeast Asia that share common family and cultural ties.[164] Other significant minorities include Americans, mostly White, numbering 300,000, and Koreans, numbering 96,000.

CitiesMetro Manila is the most populous of the 12 defined metropolitan areas in the Philippines and the 11th most populous in the world. As of the 2007 census, it had a population of 11,553,427, comprising 13% of the national population.[165] Including suburbs in the adjacent provinces (Bulacan, Cavite, Laguna, and Rizal) of Greater Manila, the population is around 21 million.[165][166]

Metro Manila's gross regional product is estimated as of July 2009 to be '‚±468.4 billion (at constant 1985 prices) and accounts for 33% of the nation's GDP.[167] In 2011, it ranked as the 28th wealthiest urban agglomeration in the world and the 2nd in Southeast Asia, according to PricewaterhouseCoopers.[168]Cebu City in the Visayas and Davao City in Mindanao are other important urban centers.

Largest cities or towns of the PhilippinesPhilippines 2010 CensusRankNameRegionPop.RankNameRegionPop.1Quezon CityNational Capital Region2,761,72011Para±aqueNational Capital Region588,1262ManilaNational Capital Region1,652,17112Dasmari±asCALABARZON575,8173CaloocanNational Capital Region1,489,04013ValenzuelaNational Capital Region575,3564Davao CityDavao Region1,449,29614Las Pi±asNational Capital Region552,5735Cebu CityCentral Visayas866,17115General SantosSOCCSKSARGEN538,0866Zamboanga CityZamboanga Peninsula807,12916MakatiNational Capital Region529,0397AntipoloCALABARZON677,74117BacoorCALABARZON520,2168PasigNational Capital Region669,77318BacolodWestern Visayas511,8209TaguigNational Capital Region644,47319MuntinlupaNational Capital Region459,94110Cagayan de OroNorthern Mindanao602,08820San Jose del MonteCentral Luzon454,553LanguageEthnologue lists 175 individual languages in the Philippines, 171 of which are living languages while 4 no longer have any known speakers. They are part of the Borneo''Philippines group of the Malayo-Polynesian languages, which is itself a branch of the Austronesian language family.[156]

According to the 1987 Philippine Constitution, Filipino and English are the official languages. Filipino is a standardized version of Tagalog, spoken mainly in Metro Manila and other urban regions. Both Filipino and English are used in government, education, print, broadcast media, and business. The constitution designates regional languages such as Bicolano, Cebuano, Hiligaynon, Ilocano, Kapampangan, Pangasinan, Tagalog, and Waray-Waray as auxiliary official languages and mandates that Spanish and Arabic shall be promoted on a voluntary and optional basis.[11]

Other languages such as Aklanon, Cuyonon, Ifugao, Itbayat, Ivatan, Kalinga, Kamayo, Kankanaey, Kinaray-a, Maguindanao, Maranao, Masbate±o, Romblomanon, Surigaonon, Tausug, Yakan, and several Visayan languages are prevalent in their respective provinces. The Chavacano language, a creole language born from Spanish, is also spoken in Cavite and Zamboanga.[170]

ReligionAccording to the 2000 census[update], the religious distribution of the country's population was as follows:[171]

The Philippines is a secular nation having a constitution separating the state and church. However, more than 90% of the population are Christians: about 80% belong to the Roman Catholic Church while 10% belong to other Christian denominations, such as the Iglesia ni Cristo, the Philippine Independent Church, United Church of Christ in the Philippines (a mainline Protestantunited church), and Jehovah's Witnesses.[172] As a result of Spanish cultural influence, the Philippines is one of two predominantly Roman Catholic countries in Asia, the other being East Timor, a former Portuguese colony.

Between 5% and 10% of the population are Muslim, most of whom live in parts of Mindanao, Palawan, and the Sulu Archipelago '' an area known as Bangsamoro or the Moro region.[173][174] Some have migrated into urban and rural areas in different parts of the country. Most Muslim Filipinos practice Sunni Islam according to the Shafi'i school.[42]Philippine traditional religions are still practiced by many aboriginal and tribal groups, often syncretized with Christianity and Islam. Animism, folk religion, and shamanism remain present as undercurrents of mainstream religion, through the albularyo, the babaylan, and the manghihilot. Buddhism, Taoism, and Chinese folk religion, are dominant in Chinese communities.[174] There are also followers of Hinduism, Sikhism,[160] and Judaism and Baha'i.[175]

EducationThe National Statistics Office reports a simple literacy rate of 93.4% and a functional literacy rate of 84.1% for 2003.[5][129][136] Literacy is about equal for males and females.[5] Spending for education is around 2.5% of GDP.[5] According to the Department of Education, or DepEd, there were 44,846 elementary schools and 10,384 secondary schools registered for the school year 2009''2010[176] while the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) lists 2,180 higher education institutions, 607 of which are public and 1,573 private.[177] Classes start in June and end in March. The majority of colleges and universities follow a semester calendar from June to October and November to March. There are a number of foreign schools with study programs.[3] Republic Act No. 9155 gives the framework of basic education in the Philippines and provides for compulsory elementary education and free high school education.[178]

Several government agencies are involved with education. The Department of Education covers elementary, secondary, and nonformal education; the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) administers the post-secondary middle-level education training and development; and the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) supervises the college and graduate academic programs and degrees as well as regulates standards in higher education.[179] In 2004, madaris were mainstreamed in 16 regions nationwide mainly in Muslim areas in Mindanao under the auspices and program of the Department of Education.[180] Public universities are all non-sectarian entities, and are further classified as State University and College (SUC) or Local College and University (LCU).[177] SUCs are funded by the national government as determined by the Philippine Congress.[181] The University of the Philippines is the national university of the Philippines.[182]

HealthMost of the national burden of health care is taken up by private health providers. In 2006, total expenditures on health represented 3.8% of GDP. 67.1% of that came from private expenditures while 32.9% was from government. External resources accounted for 2.9% of the total. Health expenditures represented about 6.1% of total government spending. Per capita total expenditure at average exchange rate was $52.[183] The proposed national health budget for 2010 is '‚±28 billion (about $597 million) or '‚±310 ($7) per person.[184] The government share of total spending on health has declined steadily, and with more people, there has been less to spend per person.

There are an estimated 90,370 physicians or 1 per every 833 people, 480,910 nurses, 43,220 dentists, and 1 hospital bed per every 769 people.[183] Retention of skilled practitioners is a problem. 70% of nursing graduates go overseas to work. The country is the biggest supplier of nurses.[185] In 2001 there were about 1,700 hospitals, of which about 40% were government-run and 60% private. Cardiovascular diseases account for more than 25% of all deaths. According to official estimates, 1,965 cases of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) were reported in 2003, of which 636 had developed acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). Other estimates have as many as 12,000 people living with HIV/AIDS in 2005.[186]

InfrastructureTransportationThe transportation infrastructure in the country is relatively underdeveloped. Partly this is due to the mountainous terrain and the scattered geography of the islands, but it is also the result of the government's persistent underinvestment in infrastructure. In 2003, only 3.6% of GDP went to infrastructure development which was significantly lower than that of some of its neighbors.[123] Consequently, while there are 203,025 kilometers (126,154 mi) of roads in the country, only around 20% of the total is paved.[187]

Nevertheless there are many ways to get around, especially in urban areas. Buses, jeepneys, taxis, and motorized tricycles are commonly available in major cities and towns. In 2007, there were about 5.53 million registered motor vehicles with registration increasing at an average annual rate of 4.55%.[188] Train services are provided by three main railway networks that serve different areas of Metro Manila and parts of Luzon: the Manila Light Rail Transit System (LRT), the Manila Metro Rail Transit System (MRT), and the Philippine National Railways (PNR).

As an archipelago, inter-island travel via watercraft is often necessary. The busiest seaports are Manila, Cebu, Iloilo, Davao, Cagayan de Oro, and Zamboanga.[189] Passenger ships and other sea vessels such as those operated by 2GO Travel and Sulpicio Lines serve Manila, with links to various cities and towns. In 2003, the 919-kilometer (571 mi) Strong Republic Nautical Highway (SRNH), an integrated set of highway segments and ferry routes covering 17 cities was established.[190]

Some rivers that pass through metropolitan areas, such as the Pasig River and Marikina River, have air-conditioned commuter ferries. The Pasig River Ferry Service has numerous stops in Manila, Makati, Mandaluyong, Pasig and Marikina.[191] There are 3,219 kilometers (2,000 mi) of navigable inland waterways.[5]

There are 85 public airports in the country, and around 111 more that are private.[187] The Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) is the main international airport. Other important airports include the Clark International Airport, Mactan-Cebu International Airport, Francisco Bangoy International Airport and Zamboanga International Airport. Philippine Airlines, Asia's oldest commercial airline still operating under its original name, and Cebu Pacific, the leading low-cost airline, are the major airlines serving most domestic and international destinations.[192][193][194]

CommunicationsThe Philippines has a sophisticated cellular phone industry and a high concentration of users.[195] As of 2008, there are about 67.9 million cellular phone subscribers in the Philippines.[196]Text messaging is a popular form of communication and has fostered a culture of quick greetings and forwarded jokes among Filipinos. In 2007, the nation sent an average of one billion SMS messages per day.[197] Out of this growing number of avid text message senders, over five million of them use their cellular phones as virtual wallets, making it a leader among developing nations in providing financial transactions over cellular networks.[198]

The Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company commonly known as PLDT is the leading telecommunications provider. It is also the largest company in the country.[195][199] Its wholly owned subsidiaries Smart Communications and Piltel, along with Globe Telecom of the Ayala Group, BayanTel, and Sun Cellular are the major cellular service providers in the country.

There are approximately 383 AM and 659 FM radio stations and 297 television and 873 cable television stations.[200] Estimates for internet penetration in the Philippines vary widely ranging from a low of 2.5 million to a high of 24 million people.[201][202]Social networking and watching videos are among the most frequent internet activities.[203][204]

Culture and societyPhilippine culture is a combination of Eastern and Western cultures. The Philippines exhibits aspects found in other Asian countries with a Malay[205] heritage, yet its culture also displays a significant amount of Spanish and American influences. Traditional festivities known as barrio fiestas (district festivals) to commemorate the feast days of patron saints are common. The Moriones Festival and Sinulog Festival are a couple of the most well-known. These community celebrations are times for feasting, music, and dancing. Some traditions, however, are changing or gradually being forgotten due to modernization. The Bayanihan Philippine National Folk Dance Company has been lauded for preserving many of the various traditional folk dances found throughout the Philippines. They are famed for their iconic performances of Philippine dances such as the tinikling and singkil that both feature the use of clashing bamboo poles.[206]

One of the most visible Hispanic legacies is the prevalence of Spanish names and surnames among Filipinos. However, a Spanish name and surname does not necessarily denote Spanish ancestry. This peculiarity, unique among the people of Asia, came as a result of a colonial decree, the Claver­a edict, for the systematic distribution of family names and implementation of the Spanish naming system on the population.[207] The names of many streets, towns, and provinces are also in Spanish. Spanish architecture has left an imprint in the Philippines in the way many towns were designed around a central square or plaza mayor, but many of the buildings bearing its influence were demolished during World War II.[33] Some examples remain, mainly among the country's churches, government buildings, and universities. Four Philippine baroque churches are included in the list of UNESCO World Heritage Sites: the San Agust­n Church in Manila, the Paoay Church in Ilocos Norte, the Nuestra Se±ora de la Asunci"n (Santa Mar­a) Church in Ilocos Sur, and the Santo Toms de Villanueva Church in Iloilo.[208]Vigan in Ilocos Sur is also known for the many Hispanic-style houses and buildings preserved there.[209]

The common use of the English language is an example of the American impact on Philippine society. It has contributed to the ready acceptance and influence of American pop cultural trends. This affinity is seen in Filipinos' love of fast food, film, and music. Fast food outlets are found on many street corners. American global fast food chain stalwarts have entered the market, but local fast food chains like Goldilocks and most notably Jollibee, the leading fast food chain in the country, have emerged and compete successfully against their foreign rivals.[210][211] Filipinos regularly listen to and watch contemporary American, Asian, and European music and film just as they enjoy Original Pilipino Music (also known as OPM) and local films.

CuisinePhilippine cuisine has evolved over several centuries from its Malayo-Polynesian origins to become a mixed cuisine with many Hispanic, Chinese, American, and other Asian influences that have been adapted to local ingredients and the Filipino palate to create distinctively Filipino dishes. Dishes range from the very simple, like a meal of fried salted fish and rice, to the elaborate, such as the paellas and cocidos created for fiestas. Popular dishes include lech"n, adobo, sinigang, kare-kare, tapa, crispy pata, pancit, lumpia, and halo-halo. Some common local ingredients used in cooking are calamondins, coconuts, saba (a kind of short wide plantain), mangoes, milkfish, and fish sauce. Filipino taste buds tend to favor robust flavors but the cuisine is not as spicy as those of its neighbors.[211][212]

Unlike many of their Asian counterparts, Filipinos do not eat with chopsticks; they use Western cutlery. However, possibly due to rice being the primary staple food and the popularity of a large number of stews and main dishes with broth in Philippine cuisine, the main pairing of utensils seen at the Filipino dining table is that of spoon and fork, not knife and fork.[213] The traditional way of eating with the hands known as kamayan is seen more often in less urbanized areas.[214]

Mythology and literaturePhilippine mythology has been handed down primarily through the traditional oral folk literature of the Filipino people. While each unique ethnic group has its own stories and myths to tell, Hindu and Spanish influences can nonetheless be detected in many cases. Philippine mythology mostly consists of creation stories or stories about supernatural creatures, such as the aswang, the manananggal, the diwata/engkanto, and nature. Some popular figures from Philippine mythologies are Maria Makiling, Lam-Ang, and the Sarimanok.[215]

Philippine literature comprises works usually written in Filipino, Spanish, or English. Some of the most known were created in the 19th century. Francisco Balagtas the poet and playwright who wrote Florante at Laura is recognized as a preeminent writer in the Filipino language. Jos(C) Rizal wrote the novels Noli Me Tngere (Touch Me Not) and El Filibusterismo (The Filibustering, also known as The Reign of Greed) and is considered a national hero. His depiction of the injustices of Spanish rule, and his death by firing squad, inspired other Philippine revolutionaries to seek independence. In the 20th century, among those officially recognized as National Artists of the Philippines in literature are NVM Gonzalez, Nick Joaquin, F. Sionil Jose, and Alejandro Roces.[216]

MediaPhilippine media uses mainly Filipino and English. Other Philippine languages, including various Visayan languages are also used, especially in radio due to its ability to reach remote rural locations that might otherwise not be serviced by other kinds of media. The dominant television networks ABS-CBN, GMA and TV5 also have extensive radio presence.[217]

The entertainment industry is vibrant and feeds broadsheets and tabloids with an unending supply of details about celebrities and sensationalist scandals du jour. Drama and fantasy shows are anticipated as are Latin telenovelas, Asianovelas, and anime. Daytime television is dominated by game shows, variety shows, and talk shows such as Eat Bulaga and It's Showtime.[218]Philippine cinema has a long history and is popular domestically, but has faced increasing competition from American, Asian and European films. Critically acclaimed directors and actors include Lino Brocka and Nora Aunor for films like Maynila: Sa mga Kuko ng Liwanag (Manila: In the Claws of Light) and Himala (Miracle). In recent years it has become common to see celebrities flitting between television and movies and then moving into politics provoking concerns.[219]

SportsVarious sports and pastimes are popular in the Philippines including basketball, boxing, cockfighting, volleyball, football, badminton, karate, taekwondo, billiards, ten-pin bowling, chess, and sipa. Motocross, cycling, and mountaineering are also becoming popular. Basketball is played at both amateur and professional levels and is considered to be the most popular sport in the Philippines.[220] In almost every corner of the cities, there is a basketball court.[206]

The Philippines has participated in the Summer Olympic Games since 1924, making it the first country in Southeast Asia to compete and win a medal.[221] The country had competed in every Summer Olympic Games since then, except when they participated in the American-led boycott of the 1980 Summer Olympics. The Philippines is also the first tropical nation to compete at the Winter Olympics.

Traditional Philippine games such as luksung baka, patintero, piko, and tumbang preso are still played primarily as children's games among the youth.[222][223]Sungka is a traditional native Philippine board game. Card games are popular during festivities, with some, including pusoy and tong-its, being used as a form of illegal gambling. Mahjong is played in some Philippine communities. The yo-yo, a popular toy in the Philippines, was introduced in its modern form by Pedro Flores with its name from the Ilokano language.[224]

Arnis (Eskrima or Kali in some regions) is the national martial art and sport.[225] Today there are said to be almost as many Philippine fighting styles as there are islands in the Philippines. In 1972, the Philippine government included Filipino martial arts into the national sports arena. The Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports also incorporated them into the physical education curriculum for high school and college students.

Some Filipinos recognized for their achievements include Francisco Guilledo, Flash Elorde, Nonito Donaire and Manny Pacquiao in boxing; Paulino Alcntara in football (soccer); Carlos Loyzaga, Robert Jaworski, and Ramon Fernandez in basketball; Efren Reyes in billiards; Eugene Torre in chess; and Rafael Nepomuceno in bowling.[226][227][228]

See alsoReferences^"Republic Act No. 8491". Republic of the Philippines. Archived from the original on 2007-12-05. Retrieved 2008-09-30. Link revisited on November 19, 2010.^"Presidential Decree No. 940". May 29, 1976. ^ abcdefghijGeneral Information. (older version '' as it existed in 2007 '' during the presidency of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo), The Official Government Portal of the Republic of the Philippines.^"Based on the official mapping authority of the Philippines (as of 201)". Namria.gov.ph. Retrieved 2013-05-04. ^ abcdefghijklmn"East & Southeast Asia :: Philippines". The World Factbook. Washington, D.C.: Author: Central Intelligence Agency. 2009-10-28. Retrieved 2009-11-07. ^Projected Population as of November 8, 2013, PH: Commission on Population, November 8, 2013 ^ abcde"Philippines". International Monetary Fund. Retrieved October 2013. ^"Gini Index". World Bank. Retrieved 2 March 2011. ^"National Human Development Reports for the Philippines". United Nations. Retrieved 20 May 2013. ^Lucas, Brian (August 2005). "Which side of the road do they drive on?". Retrieved 2009-02-22. ^ abJoselito Guianan Chan, Managing Partner. "1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, Article XIV, Section 7.". Chan Robles & Associates Law Firm. Retrieved 2013-05-04. ^General Profile of the Philippines : Geography (archived from the original on 2005-11-04), Philippine Information Agency.^Projected Population as of May 6, 2013, PH: Commission on Population, May 6, 2013 ^Global Pinoys to rally at Chinese consulates '' The Philippine Star >> News >> Headlines. Philstar.com (2012-04-27). Retrieved on 2012-07-04.^"Cebu". encyclopedia.com, citing The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. Retrieved 2010-07-04. ^Zaide, Sonia M. (1994). The Philippines: A Unique Nation. All-Nations Publishing Co. p. 354. ISBN 971-642-071-4. ^Jonathan H. Ping Middle Power Statecraft (p 104)^Scott, William Henry. (1994). Barangay: Sixteenth-century Philippine Culture and Society. Ateneo de Manila University Press. p. 6. ISBN 971-550-135-4. ^Spate, Oskar H. K. (1979). "Chapter 4. Magellan's Successors: Loaysa to Urdaneta. Two failures: Grijalva and Villalobos". The Spanish Lake '' The Pacific since Magellan, Volume I. Taylor & Francis. p. 97. ISBN 0-7099-0049-X. Retrieved 2010-01-07. ^Friis, Herman Ralph. (Ed.). (1967). The Pacific Basin: A History of Its Geographical Exploration. American Geographical Society. p. 369. ^Galang, Zoilo M. (Ed.). (1957). Encyclopedia of the Philippines, Volume 15 (3rd ed.). E. Floro. p. 46. ^Tarling, Nicholas. (1999). The Cambridge History of Southeast Asia '' Volume One, Part Two '' From c. 1500 to c. 1800. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. p. 12. ISBN 0-521-66370-9. ^Quezon, Manuel, III. (2005-03-28). "The Philippines are or is?". Manuel L. Quezon III: The Daily Dose. Retrieved 2009-12-20.^Henderson, Barney (August 4, 2010). "Archaeologists unearth 67000-year-old human bone in Philippines". The Daily Telegraph (London). Retrieved August 4, 2010. ^Fox, Robert B. (1970). The Tabon Caves: Archaeological Explorations and Excavations on Palawan. National Museum. p. 44. ASIN B001O7GGNI. Retrieved 2009-12-16. ^Scott, William Henry. (1984). Prehispanic Source Materials for the Study of Philippine History. Quezon City: New Day Publishers. p. 15. ISBN 971-10-0227-2. ^Scott, William Henry. (1984). Prehispanic Source Materials for the Study of Philippine History. Quezon City: New Day Publishers. p. 138. ISBN 971-10-0227-2. "Not one roof beam, not one grain of rice, not one pygmy Negrito bone has been recovered. Any theory which describes such details is therefore pure hypothesis and should be honestly presented as such." ^Solheim, Wilhelm G., II. (2006). Archeology and Culture in Southeast Asia. University of the Philippines Press. pp. 57''139. ISBN 978-971-542-508-7.^Solheim, Wilhelm G., II. (January 2006). Origins of the Filipinos and Their Languages. Archived from the original on 2008-08-03. Retrieved 2009-08-27. ^Mijares, Armand Salvador B. (2006). The Early Austronesian Migration To Luzon: Perspectives From The Pe±ablanca Cave Sites. Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association26: 72''78.^Legarda, Benito, Jr. (2001). "Cultural Landmarks and their Interactions with Economic Factors in the Second Millennium in the Philippines". Kinaadman (Wisdom) A Journal of the Southern Philippines23: 40. ^"Timeline of history". Retrieved 2009-10-09. ^ abRing, Trudy, Robert M. Salkin, and Sharon La Boda. (1996). International Dictionary of Historic Places: Asia and Oceania. Taylor & Francis. pp. 565''569. ISBN 1-884964-04-4. Retrieved 2010-01-07. ^Zaide, Gregorio F. (1957). Philippine Political and Cultural History. Philippine Education Co. p. 42. Retrieved 2010-01-07. ^Zhang Xie. (1618) (in Chinese). Dong Xi Yang Kao [A Study of the Eastern and Western Oceans] Volume 5 (Chinese: æ'±è¥æ´‹èƒ). ISBN 7532515931. MID 00024687. Retrieved 2009-12-18.^Ibrahim 1985, p. 51[citation not found]^"Filipino epic comes to life". ^100 Events That Shaped The Philippines (Adarna Book Services Inc. 1999 Published by National Centennial Commission) Page 72 "The Founding of the Sulu Sultanate"^Bascar, C.M. (n.d.). Sultanate of Sulu, "The Unconquered Kingdom". Retrieved 2009-12-19 from The Royal Hashemite Sultanate of Sulu & Sabah Official Website.^"The Maguindanao Sultanate", Moro National Liberation Front web site. "The Political and Religious History of the Bangsamoro People, condensed from the book Muslims in the Philippines by Dr. C. A. Majul." Retrieved January 9, 2008.^Pusat Sejarah Brunei. Retrieved February 7, 2009.^ abMcAmis, Robert Day (2002). Malay Muslims: The History and Challenge of Resurgent Islam in Southeast Asia. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. pp. 18''24, 53''61. ISBN 0-8028-4945-8. Retrieved 2010-01-07. ^Munoz, Paul Michel (2006). Early Kingdoms of the Indonesian Archipelago and the Malay Peninsula. Singapore: Editions Didier Millet. p. 171. ISBN 981-4155-67-5. ^U.S. Department of State. Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs. (June 2009). Background Note: Brunei. Retrieved 2009-12-18.^ abcAgoncillo, Teodoro A. (1990). History of the Filipino People (8th ed.). Garotech Publishing. p. 22. ISBN 971-8711-06-6. ^Zaide, Gregorio F. and Sonia M. Zaide (2004). Philippine History and Government (6th ed.). All-Nations Publishing Company. ^Kurlansky, Mark. (1999). The Basque History of the World. New York: Walker & Company. p. 64. ISBN 0-8027-1349-1.^ abJoaquin, Nick. (1988). Culture and History: Occasional Notes on the Process of Philippine Becoming. Manila: Solar Publishing.^Dolan, Ronald E. (Ed.). (1991). "Education". Philippines: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress. Retrieved 2009-12-20 from Country Studies US Website.^Halili, Maria Christine N. (2004). Philippine History. Rex Bookstore. pp. 119''120. ISBN 971-23-3934-3. Retrieved 2010-01-08. ^De Borja, Marciano R. (2005). Basques in the Philippines. University of Nevada Press. pp. 81''83. ISBN 0-87417-590-9. Retrieved 2010-01-08. ^ abNuguid, Nati. (1972). "The Cavite Mutiny". in Mary R. Tagle. 12 Events that Have Influenced Philippine History. [Manila]: National Media Production Center. Retrieved 2009-12-20 from StuartXchange Website.^ abJoaquin, Nick. A Question of Heroes.^ abRichardson, Jim. (January 2006). "Andr(C)s Bonifacio Letter to Julio Nakpil, April 24, 1897". Documents of the Katipunan. Archived from the original on 2013-01-15. Retrieved 2009-12-19. ^Bautista, Veltisezar. (2002). "3. The Philippine Revolution (1896''1898)". The Filipino Americans (1763''present): Their History, Culture and Traditions (2nd ed.). Naperville, Illinois: Bookhaus Publishers. ISBN 0-931613-17-5. Retrieved 2009-05-14. ^Ocampo, Ambeth. (1999). Rizal Without the Overcoat (Expanded ed.). Pasig City: Anvil Publishing, Inc. ISBN 971-27-0920-5. ^Price, Michael G. (2002). Foreword. In A. B. Feuer, America at War: the Philippines, 1898''1913 (pp. xiii''xvi). Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood. ISBN 0-275-96821-9.^Gates, John M. (November 2002). "The Pacification of the Philippines". The U.S. Army and Irregular Warfare. Retrieved 2010-02-20. ^White, Matthew. "Death Tolls for the Man-made Megadeaths of the 20th Century". Retrieved 2007-08-01.^Rottman, Gordon L. (2002). World War 2 Pacific Island Guide '' A Geo-Military Study. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press. p. 318. ISBN 0-313-31395-4.^ abChandler, David P. and David Joel Steinberg (1987). In Search of Southeast Asia: A Modern History (Revised 2nd ed.). University of Hawaii Press. pp. 431''442. ISBN 0-8248-1110-0. Retrieved 2010-01-07. ^ abOsborne, Milton E. (2004). Southeast Asia: An Introductory History (9th ed.). Allen & Unwin. pp. 235''241. ISBN 1-74114-448-5. Retrieved 2010-01-07. ^Tarling, Nicholas (2000). The Cambridge History of Southeast Asia: From World War II to the Present, Volume 4. Cambridge University Press. p. 293. ISBN 0-521-66372-5. Retrieved 2010-01-07. ^Aquino, Corazon (1996-10-11). Corazon Aquino Speaks to Fulbrighters (Speech). Washington, D.C.. Archived from the original on 2008-06-26. http://web.archive.org/web/20080626025305/http://www.fulbrightalumni.org/olc/pub/FBA/fulbright_prize/aquino_address.html. Retrieved 2010-08-13.^ abGargan, Edward A. (December 11, 1997). "Last Laugh for the Philippines; Onetime Joke Economy Avoids Much of Asia's Turmoil". New York Times. Retrieved 2008-01-25. ^Tulfo, Ramon (23 September 2011). "Arroyo the most corrupt president". Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved 15 April 2012. ^Dizon, David. "Corruption was Gloria's biggest mistake: survey". ABS-CBN News and Current Affairs. Retrieved 15 April 2012. ^Press, Associated (18 November 2011). "Philippines charges Gloria Arroyo with corruption". The Guardian. Retrieved 15 April 2012. "Former president is formally accused of electoral fraud after government rushed to court as she tried to leave country" ^"Country description". US State Department Website. US State Department Website. January 2012. Retrieved 2012-01-24. "The Philippines is an emerging economy with a democratic system of government." ^Robles, Alan C. (July/August 2008). "Civil service reform: Whose service?". D+C (Internationale Weiterbildung und Entwicklung [InWEnt]) 49: 285''289. Retrieved 2008-11-30. ^Bigornia, Amante. (1997-09-17). "The 'consultations' on Charter change". The Manila Standard. Retrieved 2009-12-13. ^"Guide to the Philippines conflict". (2007-08-10). BBC News. Retrieved 2009-12-16.^World Bank. Conflict Prevention & Reconstruction Unit. (February 2005). The Mindanao Conflict in the Philippines: Roots, Costs, and Potential Peace Dividend by Salvatore Schiavo-Campo and Mary Judd. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. (Social Development Paper No. 24). Retrieved 2009-12-16.^Liefer, Michael. (2005). Michael Liefer '' Selected Works on Southeast Asia (Chin, Kin-Wah & Leo Suryadinata, Eds.). Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. ISBN 981-230-270-0.^The White House. (2003-03-27). "Coalition Members". Retrieved 2009-12-18. ^ abcdefgU.S. Department of State. Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs. (October 2009). "Background Note: Philippines". Retrieved 2009-12-18. ^Permanent Mission of the Republic of the Philippines to the United Nations. [c. 2008]. About Us. Retrieved 2010-08-13.^Permanent Mission of the Republic of the Philippines to the United Nations. [c. 2008]. The Philippines and the UN Security Council. Retrieved 2008-01-12.^United Nations Human Rights Council. [c. 2009]. Membership by regional groups from 19 June 2006''18 June 2007 (archived from the originnal on 2013-08-23) . Retrieved 2010-03-21.^United Nations Security Council. (1999-10-25). Resolution 1272 [S-RES-1272(1999)]. Retrieved 2010-03-21.^Bangkok Declaration. (1967-08-08). Retrieved 2009-12-20 from Wikisource.^"ASEAN Primer". (1999). 3rd ASEAN Informal Summit. Archived from the original on 2007-12-17. Retrieved 2009-12-13.^Chua, Yvonne T. and Ellen Tordesillas. (2008-03-09). "6 Philippine-occupied islands covered in Spratly agreements". GMA News. Retrieved 2009-12-13. ^Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. [c. 2009]. "Japan's ODA Data by Country '' Philippines". Retrieved 2010-06-02. ^ abDolan, Ronald E. (Ed.). (1991). "Relations with Asian Neighbors". Philippines: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress. Retrieved 2010-01-05 from Country Studies US Website.^"DFA: 'Technicalities' blocking RP bid for OIC observer status". (2009-05-26). GMA News. Retrieved 2009-07-10.^Balana, Cynthia. (May 26, 2009). "RP nears observer status in OIC '' DFA". The Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved 2009-07-10. ^Republic of the Philippines. National Statistical Coordination Board. "List of Regions". (March 2010). Retrieved 2010-05-21.^ abRONALD ECHALAS DIAZ, Office Manager (1968-09-18). "Republic Act No. 5446 '' An Act to Amend Section One of Republic Act Numbered Thirty Hundred and Forty-Six, Entitled "An Act to Define the Baselines of the Territorial Sea of the Philippines". Republic of the Philippines". Chan Robles Virtual Law Library. Retrieved 2013-05-04. ^"RDC chooses Zamboanga City as regional center of Region 9". Zambotimes.com. March 4, 2011. Retrieved June 18, 2012. ^"A Resolution Endorsing Zamboanga City as the location of Regional Center of Region IX". Regional Development Council IX. March 3, 2011. Retrieved June 18, 2012. ^Central Intelligence Agency. (2009). "Field Listing :: Coastline". Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved 2009-11-07.^Republic of the Philippines. Department of Tourism. [c. 2008]. Leyte is Famous For... (archived from the original on 2012-04-27). Retrieved 2010-03-21 from www.travelmart.net. Archived from the original.^"Submissions, through the Secretary-General of the United Nations, to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, pursuant to article 76, paragraph 8, of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982". United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. 28 May 2009. Retrieved 29 May 2009. ^La Putt, Juny P. [c. 2003]. The 1990 Baguio City Earthquake. Retrieved 2009-12-20 from The City of Baguio Website.^Newhall, Chris, James W. Hendley II, and Peter H. Stauffer. (2005-02-28). "The Cataclysmic 1991 Eruption of Mount Pinatubo, Philippines (U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 113-97)". U.S. Department of the Interior. U.S. Geological Survey. Retrieved 2007-04-09. ^"Puerto-Princesa Subterranean River National Park". UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Retrieved 2013-05-04. ^ abGreenlees, Donald. (May 14, 2008). "Miners shun mineral wealth of the Philippines". The New York Times. Retrieved 2009-12-11. ^Davies, Ed and Karen Lema. (2008-06-29). "Pricey oil makes geothermal projects more attractive for Indonesia and the Philippines". The New York Times. Retrieved 2009-12-18. ^ abc"Natural Resources and Environment in the Philippines". (n.d.). eTravel Pilipinas. Retrieved January 22, 2009.^Chanco, Boo. (1998-12-07). "The Philippines Environment: A Warning". The Philippine Star. Retrieved 2010-02-15 from gbgm-umc.org.^Williams, Jann, Cassia Read, Tony Norton, Steve Dovers, Mark Burgman, Wendy Proctor, and Heather Anderson. (2001). "The Meaning, Significance and Implications of Biodiversity (continued)". Biodiversity Theme Report. CSIRO on behalf of the Australian Government Department of the Environment and Heritage. ISBN 0-643-06749-3. Retrieved 2009-11-06. ^Carpenter, Kent E. and Victor G. Springer. (April 2005). "The center of the center of marine shore fish biodiversity: the Philippine Islands". Environmental Biology of Fishes (Springer Netherlands) 74 (2): 467''480. doi:10.1007/s10641-004-3154-4. ^ abcRowthorn, Chris and Greg Bloom. (2006). Philippines (9th ed.). Lonely Planet. p. 52. ISBN 1-74104-289-5. ^Regalado, Jacinto C. Jr. and Lawrence R. Heaney. (1998). "Vanishing Treasures". In Lawrence R. Heaney, Vanishing Treasures of the Philippine Rain Forest. Chicago: Field Museum. (archived from the original on 2009-03-18).^"Biological diversity in the Philippines". Eoearth.org. Retrieved 2013-05-04. ^[1][dead link]^BirdLife International. (2004). Pithecophaga jefferyi. 2006. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN 2006. www.iucnredlist.org. Retrieved on 2009-1-7.^Guinness says Philippine croc world's largest (archived from the original on 2012-07-11). AFP via News.yahoo.com (2012-07-02). Retrieved on 2012-07-04.^ abConservation International. Center for Applied Biodiversity Science. [c. 2007]. "Philippines". In Biodiversity Hotspots. Retrieved 2009-12-20.^Taguinod, Fioro. (2008-11-20). "Rare flower species found only in northern Philippines". GMA News. Retrieved 2009-12-14.^Bos A.R. and H.M. Smits (2013). "First Record of the dottyback Manonichthys alleni (Teleostei: Perciformes: Pseudochromidae) from the Philippines". Marine Biodiversity Records6 (e61). ^Arthur R. Bos and Girley S. Gumanao (2013). "Seven new records of fishes (Teleostei: Perciformes) from coral reefs and pelagic habitats in Southern Mindanao, the Philippines". Marine Biodiversity Records6 (e95): 1''6. ^Bos A.R., G.S. Gumanao and F.N. Salac (2008). "A newly discovered predator of the crown-of-thorns starfish". Coral Reefs27: 581. ^Oca±a O., J.C. den Hartog, A. Brito and A.R. Bos (2010). "On Pseudocorynactis species and another related genus from the Indo-Pacific (Anthozoa: Corallimorphidae)". Revista de la Academia Canaria de CienciasXXI (3-4): 9''34. ^WWF-Philippines. (2008-09-02). Apo Reef Set to Reclaim Old Glory: park opens for tourism, closes for fishing. Retrieved 2010-04-26 from the WWF-Philippines Website.^"About the Philippines". (2009-10-17). Retrieved 2009-12-20 from the Philippine History Website.^Peralta, Eleno O. (2005). "21. Forests for poverty alleviation: the response of academic institutions in the Philippines". In Sim, Appanah, and Hooda (Eds.). Proceedings of the workshop on forests for poverty reduction: changing role for research, development and training institutions (RAP Publication). Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Retrieved 2009-12-20.^Heaney, Lawrence R. [c. 2002]. "The Causes and Effects of Deforestation". Field Museum of Natural History. (archived from the original on 2009-03-17)^Kirby, Alex. (2003-07-23). SE Asia faces 'catastrophic' extinction rate. BBC News. Retrieved 2009-12-20.^ abcPhilippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration. (n.d.). "Climate of the Philippines". Retrieved 2010-04-24. ^Lonely Planet. (n.d.). Philippines: When to go & weather. Retrieved 2009-01-23.^ abcLibrary of Congress '' Federal Research Division. (March 2006). Country Profile: Philippines. Retrieved 2009-12-17.^Chong, Kee-Chai, Ian R. Smith, and Maura S. Lizarondo. (1982). "III. The transformation sub-system: cultivation to market size in fishponds". Economics of the Philippine Milkfish Resource System. The United Nations University. ISBN 92-808-0346-8. Archived from the original on 2011-07-19. Retrieved 2009-05-14. ^Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA). (January 2009). Member Report to the ESCAP/WMO Typhoon Committee, 41st Session. Retrieved 2009-12-17. ^Monthly Typhoon Tracking Charts. (2010). Retrieved 2010-04-24 from the National Institute of Informatics, Kitamoto Laboratory, Digital Typhoon Website.^ abGlossary of Meteorology. Baguio. Retrieved on 2008-06-11.^Republic of the Philippines. National Statistical Coordination Board. "Third Quarter 2009 Gross National Product and Gross Domestic Product by Industrial Origin". Retrieved 2009-12-11. ^ abcdeRepublic of the Philippines. National Statistics Office. (October 2009). "Quickstat" (PDF). Archived from the original on 2012-07-11. Retrieved 2009-12-11. ^Denis Somoso. (2013-09-30). "$83.201 Billion '' Philippines GIR now Rank 26th World's highest International Reserves". Philippines, ASIA and the Global Economy Site. Retrieved 2013-09-30.^The Filipina sisterhood. (2001-12-20). The Economist. Retrieved 2009-11-09.^ abcUre, John (2008). Telecommunications Development in Asia. Hong Kong University Press. pp. 301''302. ISBN 978-962-209-903-6. ^"Philippines". International Monetary Fund. Retrieved 2012-04-20. ^Felix, Rocel. (2008-01-25). 2007 GDP seen growing at fastest rate in 30 years. The Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved 2010-05-29.^Philippines Aims to Boost Growth by 2009. (2007-02-20). Forbes. Associated Press. Archived from the original on 2007-02-22. Retrieved 2008-01-09.^ abUnited Nations Development Programme. (2009). "Table G: Human development and index trends, Table I: Human and income poverty". Human Development Report 2009 '' Overcoming barriers: Human mobility and development (Palgrave Macmillan). ISBN 978-0-230-23904-3. ^Reddel, Paul (2009-05-27). Infrastructure & Public-Private Partnerships in East Asia and the Philippines [PowerPoint slides]. Presentation in Manila to the American Foreign Chambers of Commerce of the Philippines. Retrieved 2010-02-13 from the Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF) Website.^"Report for Selected Countries and Subjects". Imf.org. 2006-09-14. Retrieved 2011-10-23. ^Beyond 'Imperial Manila' (archived from the original on 2012-11-14). (2006-07-25). The Manila Standard Today. Archived from the original on unknown date. Retrieved 2009-12-16.^Llorito, David. (2006-05-10). "Help wanted for Philippines outsourcing". Asia Times. Retrieved 2009-12-11. ^Wilson, Dominic and Anna Stupnytska. (2007-03-28). "The N-11: More Than an Acronym" (Global Economics Paper No: 153). Goldman Sachs Economic Research. Retrieved 2009-11-07,^Olchondra, Riza T. (2006-10-02). As India gets too costly, BPOs turn to Philippines. The Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved 2009-12-16.^Kevin Voigt (2012-01-12). World's top economies in 2050 will be... CNN.^CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion Population 1971''2008 (pdf page 86); page 86 of the pdf, IEA (OECD/ World Bank) (original population ref OECD/ World Bank e.g. in IEA Key World Energy Statistics 2010 page 57)^Republic of the Philippines. National Statistical Coordination Board. Population of the Philippines Census Years 1799 to 2007. Retrieved 2009-12-11.^Republic of the Philippines. National Statistics Office. (2008). "Official population count reveals..". Archived from the original on 2012-09-10. Retrieved 2008-04-17. ^"Bishops threaten civil disobedience over RH bill". GMA News. 2010-09-29. Retrieved 2010-10-16. ^Central Intelligence Agency. "Field Listing :: Life expectancy at birth". Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved 2009-12-11. ^Collymore, Yvette. (June 2003). "Rapid Population Growth, Crowded Cities Present Challenges in the Philippines". Population Reference Bureau. Retrieved 2010-04-26. ^Asis, Maruja M.B. (January 2006). "The Philippines' Culture of Migration". Migration Information Source. Migration Policy Institute. Retrieved 2009-12-14.^"Selected Population Profile in the United States: Filipino alone or in any combination". United States Census Bureau. Archived from the original on 2012-01-07. Retrieved 2009-02-01. The U.S. Census Bureau 2007 American Community Survey counted 3,053,179 Filipinos; 2,445,126 native and naturalized citizens, 608,053 of whom were not U.S. citizens.^Castles, Stephen and Mark J. Miller. (July 2009). "Migration in the Asia-Pacific Region". Migration Information Source. Migration Policy Institute. Retrieved 2009-12-17.^Ciria-Cruz, Rene P. (2004-07-26). 2 million reasons for withdrawing 51 troops. San Francisco Chronicle.^Republic of the Philippines. National Statistics Office. (2009). The Philippines in Figures 2009. ISSN 1655-2539. Archived from the original on 2012-07-11. Retrieved 2009-12-23. ^"Philippines". (2009). In Encyclop...dia Britannica. Retrieved 2009-12-18 from Encyclop...dia Britannica Online.^ abcLewis, Paul M. (2009). Languages of Philippines. Ethnologue: Languages of the World (16th ed.). Dallas, Tex.: SIL International. Retrieved 2009-12-16.^Dolan, Ronald E. (Ed.). (1991). "Ethnicity, Regionalism, and Language". Philippines: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress. Retrieved 2010-04-08 from Country Studies US Website.^Capelli; Christian; James F. Wilson; Martin Richards; Michael P. H. Stumpf; Fiona Gratrix; Stephen Oppenheimer; Peter Underhill; Ko, Tsang-Ming (2001). "A Predominantly Indigenous Paternal Heritage for the Austronesian-Speaking Peoples of Insular South Asia and Oceania". American Journal of Human Genetics68 (2): 432''443. doi:10.1086/318205. PMC 1235276. PMID 11170891. Archived from the original on 2011-05-11. Retrieved 2009-12-18. ^Filipino Food and Culture. Food-links.com. Retrieved on 2012-07-04.^ abK. Kesavapany; A. Mani; Palanisamy Ramasamy (2008). Rising India and Indian Communities in East Asia. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. pp. 537''. ISBN 978-981-230-799-6. ^Going Banana | The Philippines. Thephilippines.ph. Retrieved on 2012-07-04.^"The Impact of Spanish Rule in the Philippines". (2009). Tagalog at NIU. Retrieved 2009-12-19 from the Northern Illinois University, Center for Southeast Asian Studies, SEAsite Project.^"Chinese lunar new year might become national holiday in Philippines too". Xinhua News (2009-08-23). Retrieved 2009-12-18.^Murray L Weidenbaum (1 January 1996). The Bamboo Network: How Expatriate Chinese Entrepreneurs are Creating a New Economic Superpower in Asia. Martin Kessler Books, Free Press. pp. 4''8. ISBN 978-0-684-82289-1. ^ abRepublic of the Philippines. National Statistics Office. (April 2008). "Total Population and Annual Population Growth Rates by Region: Population Censuses 1995, 2000, and 2007". Archived from the original on 2012-07-16. Retrieved 2010-04-04. ^Demographia. (July 2010). Demographia World Urban Areas (World Agglomerations) Population & Projections (Edition 6.1). Retrieved 2011-03-29.^Republic of the Philippines. National Statistical Coordination Board. (July 2009). 2008 Gross Regional Domestic Product '' Levels of GRDP. Retrieved 2010-04-04.^Hawksworth, John, Thomas Hoehn and Anmol Tiwari. "Global City GDP Rankings 2008''2025". UK Economic Outlook November 2009. PricewaterhouseCoopers. p. 20. Retrieved 2009-11-20. ^Philippine Census, 2010. Table 11. Household Population by Ethnicity, Sex, and Region: 2010.^"Ethnologue Report on Chavacano". Ethnologue.com. Retrieved 2013-05-04. ^ abPhilippines, CIA Factbook^Republic of the Philippines. National Statistics Office. (2003-02-18). "2000 Census: Additional Three Persons Per Minute". Archived from the original on 2012-06-10. Retrieved 2008-01-09. ^RP closer to becoming observer-state in Organization of Islamic Conference. (2009-05-29). The Philippine Star. Retrieved 2009-07-10, "Eight million Muslim Filipinos, representing 10 percent of the total Philippine population, ...".^ abU.S. Department of State. (2008). Philippines: International Religious Freedom Report 2010. Retrieved 2011-05-20, "Islam is the largest minority religion, and Muslims constitute between 5 and 9 percent of the total population."^The Largest Baha'i Communities. (2005-09-30). Retrieved 2010-04-26 from www.adherents.com.^Republic of the Philippines. Department of Education. (2010-09-23).Fact Sheet '' Basic Education Statistics (archived from the original on 2013-01-15). Retrieved 2010-04-17.^ abRepublic of the Philippines. Commission on Higher Education. (August 2010). Information on Higher Education System. Official Website of the Commission on Higher Education. Retrieved 2011-04-17.^Republic of the Philippines. (Approved: August 11, 2001). Republic Act No. 9155 '' Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001. Retrieved 2009-12-11 from the Chan Robles Virtual Law Library.^Republic of the Philippines. Department of Education. "Historical Perspective of the Philippine Educational System". Retrieved 2009-12-14.^Esplanada, Jerry E. (2009-07-20). Mainstreaming Madrasa. The Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved 2010-11-25.^Malipot, Ina H. (2010-11-26). Students stage walkouts against cut in SUC funding (archived from the original on 2011-05-11). The Manila Bulletin. Retrieved 2011-04-16.^Republic of the Philippines. (Approved: 2008-04-29). Republic Act 9500 '' An Act to Strengthen the University of the Philippines as the National University. Chan Robles Law Library.^ abWorld Health Organization. (2009). World Health Statistics 2009. Geneva. ISBN 978-92-4-156381-9. Retrieved 2009-12-23. ^Philippine News Agency. (2009-12-14). "Senate approves proposed 2010 national budget". Retrieved 2009-12-18 from the Official Government Portal of the Republic of the Philippines.^World Health Organization. (April 2006). Philippines. Country Cooperation Strategy at a Glance. Retrieved 2009-12-23.^United States Agency for International Development. (May 2008). USAID Country Health Statistical Report '' Philippines. Retrieved 2010-04-08.^ abWorld Bank. [c. 2010]. Transport in the Philippines '' Overview[dead link]. Retrieved 2010-03-18 from the World Bank Website.^Republic of the Philippines. Land Transportation Office. Number of Motor Vehicles Registered. (2008-01-29). Retrieved January 22, 2009.^The Philippine Transportation System. (2008-08-30). Asian Info. Retrieved January 22, 2009.^Strong Republic Nautical Highway. (n.d.). Official Website of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. Retrieved January 22, 2009.^Gov't revives Pasig River ferry service. (2007-02-14). GMA News. Retrieved 2009-12-18.^"About PAL". Philippineairlines.com. Retrieved 2013-05-04. ^State of Hawaii. Department of Transportation. Airports Division. [c. 2005]. "Philippine Air Lines". Hawaii Aviation. Retrieved 2010-01-09.^Oxford Business Group. (2009). The Report: Philippines 2009. p. 97. ISBN 1-902339-12-6. ^ ab"Asia's Fab 50 Companies: PLDT-Philippine Long Distance Telephone". Forbes. 3 September 2008. Retrieved 2009-13-14.^Wireless Federation. (2009-03-06). Mobile penetration rate reaches the mark of 75% at 2008-end (Philippines). Retrieved 2010-06-02 from the Wireless Federation Website.^Francisco, Rosemarie. (2008-03-04). Filipinos sent 1 billion text messages daily in 2007. The Philippine Daily Inquirer. Reuters. Retrieved 2009-12-18.^Teves, Oliver. (2007-10-29). Cell phones double as electronic wallets in Philippines. USA Today. Associated Press. Retrieved 2009-12-11.^Special Report: The Global 2000. (2008-04-02). Forbes. p.10. Retrieved 2009-12-14.^Republic of the Philippines. National Telecommunications Commission. [c. 2010]. "Broadcast(AM,FM,TV,CATV) '' Number of Broadcast and CATV Stations by Region". Archived from the original on 20-0-06-28. Retrieved 2010-01-16. ^Republic of the Philippines. National Telecommunications Commission. [c. 2010]. "Internet Service Providers '' Internet Service". Archived from the original on 2009-01-25. Retrieved 2010-01-16. ^Internet World Stats. (2009). Philippines: Internet Usage Stats and Marketing Report. Miniwatts Marketing Group. Retrieved January 22, 2009.^Universal McCann. Power To The People: Social Media Tracker, Wave3. (March 2008). Retrieved 2010-03-21.^Liao, Jerry. (2008-05-09). "The Philippines '' Social Networking Capital of the World". Cnet Asia. Archived from the original on 2008-05-16. Retrieved 2009-11-08. ^Baringer, Sally E. [c. 2006]. "The Philippines". In Countries and Their Cultures. Advameg Inc. Retrieved 2009-12-20 from www.everyculture.com.^ abRowthorn, Chris and Greg Bloom. (2006). Philippines (9th ed.). Lonely Planet. p. 44. ISBN 1-74104-289-5. ^Dumont, Jean-Paul. (1992). Visayan Vignettes: Ethnographic Traces of a Philippine Island. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 160''162. ISBN 0-226-16954-5. ^United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2010). "Baroque Churches of the Philippines". UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Retrieved 2010-01-12. ^Rowthorn, Chris and Greg Bloom. (2006). Philippines (9th ed.). Lonely Planet. p. 145. ISBN 1-74104-289-5. ^"The Jollibee Phenomenon". Jollibee Inc. Archived from the original on 2007-06-23. Retrieved 2008-01-09. ^ abConde, Carlos H. (2005-05-31). "Jollibee stings McDonald's in Philippines". The New York Times. Retrieved 2010-01-05. ^Zialcita, Fernando Nakpil. (2005). Authentic Though not Exotic: Essays on Filipino Identity. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press. p. 281. ISBN 971-550-479-5. ^Rowthorn, Chris and Greg Bloom. (2006). Philippines (9th ed.). Lonely Planet. p. 48. ISBN 1-74104-289-5. ^Zibart, Eve. (2001). The Ethnic Food Lover's Companion: Understanding the Cuisines of the World. Menasha Ridge Press. p. 277. ISBN 0-89732-372-6. ^Lopez, Mellie Leandicho. (2006). A Handbook of Philippine Folklore. University of the Philippines Press. ISBN 971-542-514-3. ^Republic of the Philippines. National Commission for Culture and the Arts. The National Artists of the Philippines. Retrieved 2009-12-26 from the National Commission for Culture and the Arts Website.^Country profile: The Philippines. (2009-12-08). BBC News. Retrieved 2009-12-20.^Santiago, Erwin (2010-04-12). AGB Mega Manila TV Ratings (April 7''11): Agua Bendita pulls away. Retrieved 2010-05-23 from the Philippine Entertainment Portal Website.^"The Philippines' celebrity-obsessed elections". (2007-04-26). The Economist. Retrieved 2010-01-15.^Viera, Odete Maria and Swarnalata Vemuri. [c. 2002]. Philippines: Sports and Recreation[dead link]. Cultural Profiles Project. Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC). Retrieved 2009-12-20. (archived from the original on 2013-08-23)^"The Games of the VIII Olympiad: Official Report (part 1, page 91)". la84foundation.org (in French). French Olympic Committee. 28 July 2012. Retrieved 28 July 2012. ^Mga Larong Kinagisnan [Games One Grows Up With]. Hagonoy.com. (archived from the original on 2007-11-06)^Mga Larong Pilipino [Philippine Games]. (2009). Tagalog at NIU. Retrieved 2009-12-19 from the Northern Illinois University, Center for Southeast Asian Studies, SEAsite Project.^Yo-yo. (2010). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Retrieved 2010-01-10.^Republic of the Philippines. (Approved: 2009-12-11). An Act Declaring Arnis as the National Martial Art and Sport of the Philippines. Retrieved 2010-02-18 from the Senate of the Philippines Website.^"Billiard Congress of America: Hall of Fame Inductees". (2009). Retrieved 2009-12-20 from the Billiard Congress of America Website.^"9 named to Philippine Sports Hall of Fame" (archived fromm the original on 2013-01-15). (2010-04-24). The Manila Bulletin. Retrieved 2010-04-24.^Mga Kilalang Pilipino [Known Filipinos]. (n.d.) (in Filipino). Tagalog at NIU. Retrieved 2010-04-25 from the Northern Illinois University, Center for Southeast Asian Studies, SEAsite Project.External linksGovernmentGeneral informationBooks and articlesWikimediaOther Articles Related to the Philippines

International membership

Last modified on 12 November 2013, at 00:59

Philippines, China oil firms eye deal in disputed sea | The Japan Times

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:18

MANILA '' A Filipino-British company has begun talks with China's state-owned offshore oil producer for a deal to jointly explore for oil and gas in the Reed Bank, a vast offshore area in dispute between China and the Philippines, a Filipino official said Wednesday.

Energy Secretary Jericho Petilla said the talks between London-based Forum Energy PLC and China National Offshore Oil Corporation, or CNOOC, were at a preliminary stage. He added a commercial agreement could hopefully be reached despite the long-raging disputes over the Reed Bank.

The talks were being held abroad, mostly recently in Hong Kong, he said.

The alternative to not entering into a business partnership ''is not to drill, probably forever.'' Petilla said.

President Benigno Aquino III said any such deal with China would have to conform to Philippine laws. The Reed Bank northwest of the Philippine province of Palawan lies clearly within his country's exclusive economic zone, Aquino said.

The territorial conflict has hampered oil exploration in the offshore area, Petilla said, but added the Philippines needed to find a way to tap its potentially huge oil and gas deposits to meet his country's growing energy demand. Natural gas deposits at a nearby offshore field called Malampaya are expected to run out in 2024, he said, adding it takes about a decade to develop such a gas field.

China and the Philippines, along with Brunei, Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam, have been contesting ownership of the clusters of mostly barren islands, islets, reefs and surrounding waters in the South China Sea for years. There have been fears that the disputes could spark Asia's next major armed conflict and block free passage in the busy sea lanes, where the bulk of the oil and cargo that fuel Asia's bustling economies is transported.

Chinese ships tried to drive away a Philippine exploration vessel at the Reed Bank in March 2011. A Philippine general deployed two air force planes but the Chinese patrol ships had left by the time the aircraft reached the contested area.

------------------------------------------------

US Caused Typhoon To Get Bases In Philippines?

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: WT news feed

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 12:04

On 5 November 2013, it was reported that the USA and the Philippines are in disagreement about the USA's wish for a much increased military presence in the Philippines.In October 2013, US Secretary of State John Kerry cancelled a visit to the Philippines.The USA wants access to Philippine military bases and wants to bring in aircraft, ships and other equipment to the Philippines.The Philippines Defense Secretary, Voltaire Gazmin, said there is a dispute about whether the Philippines or the USA will control these bases. Gamin said: "What will happen if we won't have access? Those bases will look like their bases."The Philippine Senate voted in 1991 to close down major U.S. bases.

US forces heading to the Philippines.As a result of the November typhoon, the USA is now sending in lots of its military.The Philippines may be pressured to let the US military have its way.

A weather-watcher known as 'Dutchsinse' has linked the typhoon in the Philippines to man-made microwave pulses coming from an American base in the Pacific.aangirfan: PHILIPPINES TYPHOON CAUSED BY US MILITARY

Dutchsinse - WordPress.com

------------------------------------------------

Maandag nationale tv-actie voor Filipijnen | nu.nl/media | Het laatste nieuws het eerst op nu.nl

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 12 Nov 2013 20:42

Dat is dinsdag bekendgemaakt. Vanaf 06.00 uur tot middernacht wordt er die dag aandacht besteed aan de ramp, zowel op televisie als op radio.

Mensen kunnen die dag bellen om een donatie te geven voor giro 555. Deze is maandag geopend voor giften aan de slachtoffers van de zware tyfoon Haiyan.

Het Nationaal Instituut voor Beeld en Geluid wordt daarvoor ingericht als actiecentrum. Hoe de programmering die dag eruit gaat zien, wordt later bekendgemaakt.

Geweldig"Het is geweldig dat de omroepen de inzameling van Giro555 voor de slachtoffers van de Filipijnen mogelijk willen maken door een nationale actie op radio en tv te organiseren", Henri van Eeghen, actievoorzitter van de SHO.

"We merken dat Nederlanders graag hun betrokkenheid met de slachtoffers laten zien en dat maken de omroepen op deze manier mogelijk."

SchakelenHet plan is om onder andere bestaande programma's zoals Vandaag de Dag (WNL), Koffietijd (RTL4) en Shownieuws (SBS6) te laten schakelen met het actiecentrum. Dat zegt televisiedirecteur van de NPO Gerard Timmer tegen de NOS.

"Bellende mensen in het actiecentrum is het plan, bekende en onbekende Nederlanders. Maar we willen ook informatie geven over de Filipijnen. Zo worden er bijvoorbeeld mensen aan het woord gelaten die er wonen om het goede verhaal te laten vertellen."

ShowWat er niet komt, is een grote afsluitende show aan het einde van de dag. Dat was bijvoorbeeld wel het geval bij eerdere tv-acties zoals bij de aardbeving van Ha¯ti. "Je wilt variren om de impact van de programma's zo groot mogelijk te maken", legt Timmer uit.

Er wordt wel gedacht aan een op zichzelfstaand kleinschalig programma dat over de actie gaat. "Maar is allemaal iets wat we later pas bekend kunnen maken."

DWDDDe Wereld Draait Door gaat komende maandag bingon om geld in te zamelen voor de slachtoffers van tyfoon Haiyan. Samen met kijkers wordt een uitzending gemaakt die geheel in het teken staat van de ramp op de Filipijnen, zo meldde de Vara.

Ge¯nteresseerden die kunnen ''dansen, zingen, dichten, goochelen, rappen of op een andere manier indruk kunnen maken'', kunnen voor minimaal 100 euro een bingonummer kopen, die goed is voor een plek in de studio.

Tijdens de uitzending draaien presentator Matthijs van Nieuwkerk en tafelheer Marc-Marie Huijbregts afwisselend aan het bingomolentje: wiens nummer valt, mag een halve minuut optreden in het programma.

VNDe Verenigde Naties lieten eerder weten 220 miljoen euro nodig te hebben om de slachtoffers van de tyfoon Haiyan in de Filipijnen te helpen. De VN heeft 193 lidstaten om financile bijdragen gevraagd.

Het bedrag komt bovenop de 25 miljoen dollar (18,7 miljoen euro) die de VN al beschikbaar heeft gesteld. ''Het is te vroeg om de omvang van de schade te becijferen, maar het is duidelijk dat de nood hoog is'', aldus noodhulpco¶rdinator Valerie Amos in de Filipijnse hoofdstad Manilla.

Volgens Amos zijn zo'n 10 miljoen mensen in de Filipijnen door de tyfoon getroffen. Ongeveer 660.000 mensen zijn hun huis kwijt. Volgens de VN is voedsel, water en opvang nodig. Het officile dodental van de ramp is bijna 1800, maar de verwachting is dat dit zal oplopen.

Bekijk een kaart van het rampgebied:

Overzicht: Filipijnen vaak getroffen door zware stormen

------------------------------------------------

SnowJob

------------------------------------------------

Edward Snowden's lover Lindsay Mills sends cryptic coded messages | News.com.au

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 14 Nov 2013 03:01

The father of Edward Snowden said on Wednesday that the former U.S. spy agency contractor is not a fugitive and should stay in Russia. Sarah Toms reports.

Edward Snowden's girlfriend ... Ballerina and pole-dancer Lindsay Mills. Picture: lsjourney.comSource: Supplied

THE girlfriend of whistleblower Edward Snowden has broken a four-month silence to post a series of enigmatic photos on her online blog in what might be a coded message to her exiled lover.

Ballerina and pole dancer Lindsay Mills, 28, who lived with Edward Snowden in Hawaii before he exposed US government spying secrets, has added cryptic titles to the pictures, made up of punctuation symbols, perhaps using visual clues only he would understand.

EDWARD SNOWDEN WARMS OF US GOVERNMENT SPYING

JULIAN ASSANGE ANGERS ECUADOR BY HELPING EDWARD SNOWDEN

Cryptic titles ... Edward Snowden's girlfriend, ballerina and pole dancer Lindsay Mills. Picture: lsjourney.comSource: Supplied

They are her first communication with the world since the spying scandal exploded in June, which led to Snowden fleeing to Russia and sent Ms Mills into hiding with friends in America.

One photo on her blog - lsjourney.com - shows Ms Mills reclining on a beach in a bikini, turning her back on the camera as she faces a glowing sunset. A second photo, in which she wears a T-shirt and black trousers, again shows her from behind, crouched in a wooded glade. In a third, only her right hand is seen above a yellow road sign with a large black arrow pointing to the left.

The latest photo, posted on Friday, shows her posing like Superwoman, held aloft in the arms of an unidentified man, silhouetted against a setting sun.

Her web page cover photo also shows only her hand, holding a paper aeroplane pointing skyward.

Snowden has been charged with espionage and theft of government property, and remains wanted by the US authorities.

Girlfriend has been in hiding ... Former National Security Agency systems analyst Edward Snowden in Moscow, Russia. (AP Photo)Source: AP

------------------------------------------------

'Stuxnet has infected Russian nuclear plant and International Space Station' | JPost | Israel News

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:27

An internet security specialist says that Stuxnet, the computer malware that targeted Iran's nuclear facilities in 2010 and widely attributed to Israel and the US, has spiraled out of control and attacked a Russian nuclear plant and the International Space Station.The virus "badly infected" the network of the Russian plant plant, Eugene Kaspersky, the head of the Kaspersky Lab internet security company, told reporters at a conference in Canberra, Australia last week.Kaspersky said he had been tipped off about the leak by a technician at the Russian plant.

"[T]heir nuclear plant network which was disconnected from the internet ... was badly infected by Stuxnet," Kaspersky was quoted as saying by Australia's SC Magazine.

Kaspersky also told his audience that the malware was later transported by Russian astronauts to the space station on a USB stick.

The sophisticated Stuxnet worm was estimated to have set Iran's nuclear program back by two years, after it was discovered in June 2010 to have attacked computers at the Islamic Republic's plant in Natanz.

Stay on top of the news - get the Jerusalem Post headlines direct to your inbox!

------------------------------------------------

After 30 Years of Silence, the Original NSA Whistleblower Looks Back

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 12 Nov 2013 22:13

The four-story brownstone at 141 East 37th Street in Manhattan has no remarkable features: a plain building on a quiet tree-lined street in the shadow of the Empire State Building. In the summer of 1920, Herbert O. Yardley, a government codebreaker, moved in with a gang of math geniuses and began deciphering intercepted Japanese diplomatic telegrams. This was the Black Chamber, America's first civilian code-breaking agency. From this was born the American surveillance state, and eventually the sprawling National Security Agency, which you may have heard about recently.

I was standing on the sidewalk outside the building, on a sweltering summer Friday afternoon, waiting to meet a man named Perry Fellwock, also once known as Winslow Peck. Four decades ago, Fellwock became the NSA's first whistleblower, going to the press to explain the spy agency's immense scope and mission to a public that had barely been allowed to know such an organization existed. His revelations in the radical magazine Ramparts were picked up by the front page of the New York Times. He went on to be a key player in the turbulent anti-surveillance movement of the 1970s, partnering with Norman Mailer and becoming the target of CIA propaganda. But today he's a semi-retired antiques dealer living in Long Island, as obscure as the Black Chamber once was.

The old Black Chamber site was my suggestion. It was my third attempt to meet Fellwock. He insisted on meeting on neutral ground, and kept canceling. Now I stood on the sidewalk, memorizing the pattern of splotches on the globe lantern above the brownstone's door, trying my best not to look like a spy. An elderly man walked by, and I watched him, half-expecting he'd circle back after scoping out the area. Fellwock had already demonstrated he'd be wary enough to do this.

He did not trust journalists. "If you go back to the Church Committee, you'll find that many, many of your colleagues worked for the intelligence agencies," he told me over the phone. He spoke deliberately, in a warm, authoritative-sounding Midwestern baritone, like a documentary narrator. "I believe that you're honest, but who knows about the people in your office? Who knows about your boss, what kind of deals he's doing?"

I first heard Perry Fellwock's name a few weeks after Edward Snowden, the 26-year-old former intelligence contractor, strode into history lugging laptops full of NSA secrets. After the Guardian began publishing stories based on Snowden's documents, the anti-secrecy website Cryptome re-posted the original 1972 Ramparts article, "Electronic Espionage: A Memoir," in which Fellwock had exposed the NSA.

Fellwock, under his Winslow Peck pseudonym, was introduced as

a senior NSA analyst in the Istanbul listening post for over two years. He was a participant in the deadly international fencing match that goes on daily with the Soviet Union, plotting their air and ground forces and penetrating their defenses.

At the time, only the broadest outlines of the NSA's activities had ever been reported in the press. Its headquarters were unmarked; its description in official government documents restricted to an absurdly vague, "Performs highly specialized technical and coordinating functions relating to the national security." The post-Snowden spectacle of the NSA chief testifying before Congress, and then being caught in falsehoods by further leaks, was unimaginable. No director would have spoken publicly about the agency's mission at all, let alone anything it might or might not have done.

"They never thought anybody would ever be able to write about them," said the journalist James Bamford, who has written three books on the NSA, including the first definitive account of the Agency, 1982's Puzzle Palace. "At the time it was an agency that sort of existed apart from the rest of the government, almost."

And there, in 1972, was a rogue analyst, some kid in his 20s, describing the NSA's business down to the colors of the badges worn at its headquarters. Winslow Peck claimed that the NSA had broken all of the Soviets' codes, that the government's official account of the Vietnam War was a lie, and that the agency was guilty of salacious corruption:

Quite a few people in NSA are into illegal activities of one kind or another. It's taken to be one of the fringe benefits of the job. You know, enhancing your pocketbook. Smuggling. People inside NSA got involved with the slave trade.

Here was the same self-assurance, bordering on arrogance, that was coming from Snowden'--the urgency of an oath broken in the name of some more essential principle. What had happened to Fellwock to make him turn to Ramparts, and what happened after? Amid the flashbulb urgency of the Snowden disclosures, one revelation after the next, Fellwock seemed to offer a chance to roll the clock forward 40 years, to see what Snowden's story might look like in retrospect.

I emailed the cypherpunk architect John Young, the enigmatic founder of Cryptome, to see if he might know how to reach Fellwock. The site functions as an online water cooler for a sometimes unsettlingly knowledgeable community of intelligence buffs, who trade emails full of dark but unverifiable rumors.

Young offered a few suggested leads and one characteristically cracked insight: "Fellwock is said to be reclusive, but as a fellow recluse, we harbor lust for vengeance, justification, triumph, will spill guts for final shot. So social engineer the fuck out of the Original Famous NSA Hero." In the end, it didn't take any social engineering. He lives in Oceanside, Long Island. The rogue agent's phone number turned up through Google.

Reaching Fellwock, though, was not the same as getting through to him. The first time I called him, the conversation only lasted four minutes. He offered a cryptic offhand comment about the Ramparts story: "Well, it wasn't really an interview with me." Mostly, he made it clear he was not eager for a return to the spotlight. "Right now, I don't have anything to add," he said.

A few days later, I tried again. This time he began unspooling like magnetic tape: holding forth on the NSA, recommending scores of articles and books. I'd need the material to comprehend the arcane back stories and dark conspiracies he was outlining, involving U.S. and British intelligence agencies. It all sounded outlandish, but given the source, maybe true? Overwhelmed, I suggested meeting in person, at a Manhattan coffee shop, and Fellwock reluctantly agreed.

The day before our scheduled rendezvous, however, I got a cryptic email from a throwaway Gmail account that Fellwock had set up to communicate with me: "On advise [sic] of counsel, I can not meet with you. Please do not attempt to contact me. I have no interest in the matters you mentioned."

A week later, I called anyway. ''What happened?'' I said.

''My attorneys have advised me not to speak more about this,'' Fellwock said. ''I spoke to them and we went over some things. The only thing I can say is that you really should look at what's happening to the other whistleblowers.''

I told him I was aware the Obama Administration has zealously cracked down on whistleblowers and leakers. ''But you haven't done anything for years,'' I said. ''What could they do to you now?''

''They can't do anything to me for what I did back then, but I don't want them to do anything to me for what I've done now. I've already spoken too much.'' He paused, lowering his voice dramatically: ''This is not a good time. This is not a good time for our country.''

But even as we haggled, Fellwock kept slipping into long digressions on the NSA and his own whistleblowing past. Finally, I pointed out how much he was already telling me. "Why don't you just meet me?" I said.

''OK,'' he said. ''I could meet with you somewhere, preferably outside. I want to be able to see the people that are around.''

We set a new date: Noon on a Friday, at a bench outside the train station in Oceanside. Just as I was about to hang up he stopped me.

''Wait, I don't think meeting at the train station is a good idea because that seems a little spookish," he said. "I'm not a spook, so I don't want to do anything spookish. Maybe you could meet me while I'm grocery shopping. What's a normal thing we can do?''

I tried to think of things a 67-year-old antiques dealer and a 28-year-old journalist might normally do together. Grocery shopping was not high on the list. Fellwock came up with another plan: We would go to a Chinese restaurant near the train station and grab lunch.

''I hope I don't regret this,'' he said. He wouldn't get a chance to. Once again, he called off the meeting abruptly. Apologetically, he told me he would be in Manhattan later on other business. Could we meet there?

So I stood outside the brownstone. The time for our appointment came and passed. Five minutes. Ten minutes. And then there was a white-haired man in a blue striped shirt and black pants, hair combed back in a pouf, walking right up to the building. Sweat beaded on his forehead from walking in the heat. He shook my hand and gazed up at the house.

"So this is where Yardley started the whole thing," he said.

In 1972, a 25-year-old Perry Fellwock sat in a Berkeley IHOP with the co-editors of Ramparts, Peter Collier and David Horowitz. He had no hesitations about talking then. He had mailed the leftist magazine an article he'd written under the name Winslow Peck, explaining that he was an Air Force veteran who had been attached to the NSA and now wanted to expose the agency.

The people at Ramparts at first didn't know what to make of the typewritten story they'd got in the mail. "It was full of unfamiliar terms like 'SIGINT' and 'ELINT,' which didn't mean a hell of a lot to us," said Peter Collier. But one staffer who happened to be ex-military intelligence read it and panicked. It was bristling with codes that only an authentic insider would have known. ''If we printed them, he said, we would go to jail,'' Horowitz later recalled in his memoir Radical Son.

So Collier and Horowitz had invited Fellwock to Berkeley. Collier recalls him as a "geeky sort of guy" with an unusually intense passion, even for the radical company Ramparts kept'--Black Panthers, Latin American revolutionaries. ''He was a very odd, odd person,'' Collier said. ''Just physically and stylistically odd.''

By then, Fellwock had given over his life to the anti-war movement, moving to San Diego to help plan demonstrations against the Republican National Convention scheduled to be held there. Up in Berkeley, he told the Ramparts editors about what he'd done before.

He would provide them with the first comprehensive and unvarnished report from inside a vast worldwide spying machine. Till then, the NSA had played a key role in nearly every major geopolitical and military event of the Cold War, with almost no public scrutiny. The only other comparable revelations had occurred more than a decade earlier when two NSA defectors to Russia sketched the Agency's activities during a 30-minute press conference in Moscow in 1960.

The dearth of unsanitized information about the NSA explains why, though the Ramparts story was based only on the word of one unknown analyst, the New York Times would report it on its front page. The Times coverage focused mainly on Fellwock's claim that the U.S. could "break every Soviet code with remarkable success":

The United States is reported to have refined its electronics intelligence techniques to the point where it can break Soviet codes, listen to and understand soviet communications and coding systems and keep track of virtually every sub jet plane or missile-carrying submarine around the world.

Ramparts' and Fellwock's goal in revealing the U.S.'s capability was to expose the justification for the military excesses of the Cold War as a farce, since the U.S. was so clearly dominant. The claim was almost certainly exaggerated. "We never cracked that many codes from Russia," Bamford said. But many of Fellwock's particulars were accurate, revealing, as the Times wrote at the time, "hitherto suspected but obscure details of electronic eavesdropping around the globe." More significant than any individual fact was the dramatic puncturing of the nearly absolute secrecy surrounding the NSA.

''I thought it was a big deal at the time because nobody had ever done that and it took a lot of courage to do stuff like that back then,'' said Bamford.

Fellwock knew breaking his oath of secrecy would put him on a collision course with the government. That spring, Rennie Davis'--his friend and an anti-war activist'--had declared, "If the government won't stop the war, the people will stop the government.''

"I was willing to do anything possible to stop the war. I was crazy."Fellwock took the message to heart. He had followed the fallout from the leak of the Pentagon Papers a year earlier with interest and hoped his disclosures might spark similar public outrage. If he was prosecuted for the article, all the better: It would just bring more attention to the government's misdeeds

''What I wanted to do was stop the war, and I was willing to do anything possible to stop the war,'' Fellwock told me. ''I was crazy.''

In person, Fellwock was nothing like the haunted paranoiac I'd argued with on the phone. He had a wide, friendly face. He immediately apologized for his previous skittishness. ''After my family and my attorneys heard what I told you about, they freaked,'' he said with a laugh.

We went to a nearby diner. Fellwock ordered chicken fried steak, folded his hands across his chest, and began to tell me how he'd gone from a normal childhood in Joplin, Missouri to the front page of the New York Times. There was no one decisive moment, he said, only a long process of disillusionment, mirroring many other young Americans' disillusionments in the '60s.

When the Vietnam War began in earnest, Fellwock was in college studying archaeology. ''I had no career goals," he said. "My main interest was in antiquities,'' he said. Convinced that military service was inevitable, he signed up for the Air Force in 1966, figuring it was his best chance of avoiding combat.

During his training, Fellwock was approached by three men who, he later learned, worked for the National Security Agency. He took a battery of tests and was selected to join the NSA as an analyst. ''Their main concern was our sex life,'' he told Ramparts in 1972. ''They wanted to know if we were homosexual.''

After his training, Fellwock plunged into the front lines of the Cold War. He volunteered for an assignment at the NSA's listening post in Turkey, in a small coastal village called Karamursel, just southeast of Istanbul. It would be a chance to see the world, he thought, and particularly the relics of the Ottoman Empire.

He was tasked with analyzing Soviet air force activities. Though the American public at home was terrified by the Soviet threat, Fellwock said his access to raw intelligence made him feel safer'--even if he had once anxiously tracked a flight of nuclear-armed Russian bombers heading straight toward Istanbul, pulling a U-turn just short of the line that would have set off a nuclear war.

''I thought we were keeping World War III from happening, I really thought that was what our job was,'' Fellwock said. ''Because we knew everything that was going on, and as long as we knew everything that was going on, there was a possibility of preventing everything.''

Fellwock's faith in his mission was shaken within a year. In 1967, the Six-Day War between Israel and a number of neighboring Arab countries erupted. Israeli forces attacked an NSA spy ship, the U.S.S. Liberty, while it was on an eavesdropping mission off the coast of Egypt. Thirty-five crew members were killed, and 171 wounded.

Israel claimed that in the fog of war it had misidentified the ship as Egyptian. But James Bamford, in his book Body of Secrets, has made a strong case that the IDF knowingly attacked the spy ship in order to cover up their massacring of hundreds of Egyptian POWs in a nearby town. Whatever the case, the incident sparked outrage within the NSA, especially after Lyndon Johnson's administration covered it up so as not to embarrass the U.S.'s strongest ally in the Middle East.

For Fellwock, the intrigue surrounding the Liberty incident opened up new, dark possibilities. ''It made begin to wonder what the heck is going on in the world,'' he said. ''This is not the way things are supposed to be.''

Having glimpsed the chaos of a war the U.S. wasn't even a party to, Fellwock began to wonder about the ongoing American war in Vietnam. In 1968, his curiosity overcame his aversion to combat and he volunteered for Vietnam. ''I had to find out why things were going this way,'' he said.

If there had ever been a good time to go to Vietnam, early 1968 was not it. A few weeks after Fellwock's arrival, the Viet Cong launched the Tet Offensive and crushed any hope of a quick American victory. While Fellwock's NSA colleagues in Turkey had been intelligent and friendly, he now found himself surrounded by battle-hardened men just trying to stay alive amid constant bombardment and firefights. He was scared of Viet Cong rocket attacks but even more terrified by U.S. Marines, many of whom despised the Air Force and wouldn't hesitate to beat the shit out of an airman like him when they were drunk.

''Everyone was suspicious of everyone,'' Fellwock said. ''Everyone hated everyone.''

His main assignment was to fly out of Pleiku Airbase in central Vietnam aboard an Air Force C-47 prop plane bristling with antennae. These were Airborne Radio Direction Finding missions, a cutting-edge military technology that used computers to locate Viet Cong radio transmitters in real-time. As an analyst, Fellwock sat at a console onboard, using the intercepted signals to fix Vietcong troop coordinates.

One of Fellwock's main targets in Vietnam was a particularly threatening North Vietnamese Army brigade. Using the NSA radio data, he helped prepare a map of the brigade's travel patterns. That map guided an enormous B-52 bombing raid: One sortie per hour for 36 hours, lacing the area with 30 tons of explosives each time, according to Fellwock.

A few weeks later, he flew to the area and inspected first-hand the devastation he'd helped inflict. ''I'd never seen so many bodies,'' he said. ''The really gruesome thing about them was that they weren't killed by shrapnel. They were killed from concussions. They bled from every pore, so the bodies were black from the dried blood, and of course they smelled awful. It was a horrible sight and I knew I'd participated in it. And the feelings of guilt started at that point.''

The guilt and stress made Fellwock realize he had to get out of Vietnam. He managed to wrangle an early end to his Vietnam tour and in mid-1969, 13 months after he'd arrived, he returned to the States, transferred to the Air Force reserves, and went back to college, hoping to put the war behind him.

He made it one semester. Then, on May 4th, 1970, National Guardsmen opened fire on unarmed student antiwar protestors at Kent State, killing four and wounding nine. Kent State made it impossible for Fellwock to fade back into a normal life.

''That was one of the final straws because it was very clear that U.S. troops should not be killing students," he said. He had left one theater of war and found another. Once again, he would throw himself into the front lines.

Beatles songs played on the jukebox in the diner, and John Kerry, a onetime leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, was on the television, threatening Syria with missiles. ''He was always trying to weaken the movement," Fellwock said, recalling Kerry's antiwar days, "and have everything focused on him. He was a real son of a bitch in my opinion, and I think you can talk to any Vietnam vet who would say that. ''

Today Fellwock doesn't follow politics or the news. The last time he voted for president was in 1972, for George McGovern.

''Basically I just live a quiet ordinary life now," he said. "I'm retired, and my hobby and my business to supplement my income is to buy and sell antiques. That's all I do.''

When I first called him, he had been only vaguely aware of Snowden's disclosures. But as he read more, he said, he'd learned how little had changed since 1976.

''I think Snowden is a patriot,'' he said. ''I admire Snowden and some of these other whistleblowers because they've come out in a time when there's not a lot of political support.''

However, as someone who stayed in the United States after his own whistleblowing, he believes Snowden made a miscalculation by fleeing the country. ''I think he should have stayed here and faced the consequences," he said. "I understand his fear, but I really think it was a mistake on his part.''

Now that Fellwock was coming forward again, even hesitantly, he wanted to do it right. He squinted at a small piece of paper on which he'd written the key points about the NSA he had wanted to get across with his Ramparts article.

"Most people in those days thought that the NSA and CIA worked for the U.S. government. But they don't. They're an entity unto itself."''Most people in those days thought that the NSA and CIA worked for the U.S. government,'' he said. ''But they don't. They're an entity unto itself, a global entity that is comprised of the Five Eyes." The Five Eyes is the informal name for the intelligence-sharing agreement between the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. "This community operates outside of the Constitution," Fellwock said, "and from everything I've seen, it still does.''

Fellwock was taking care to spell out these points now because he doesn't believe they came across in his original Ramparts article. He is ambivalent about the published product of his whistleblowing: He says he never meant for his NSA expose to be a first-person "memoir.'' He had intended to publish a straightforward critique of the NSA under his own byline, laying out his points like an op-ed.

Fellwock said he had believed Collier and Horowitz were gathering facts for such an article when they put him up at a San Francisco hotel in the weeks after their IHOP meeting and grilled him for hours in taped interviews. Instead, those interviews appeared in Ramparts verbatim. This is what he meant when he said it wasn't ''really an interview."

"They published this rambling interview that said some things that were true and some other things that weren't true,'' he said. ''They just turned it into a sensational piece of gossip as far as I was concerned.''

Casual asides he thought were just between him and the Ramparts editors were laid indelibly in print. The most riveting passage of the Winslow Peck Ramparts interview was the story of how a Russian cosmonaut's final, doomed mission was picked up by the NSA's Turkey listening post. The spacecraft malfunctioned, and Peck explained that analysts had eavesdropped as the cosmonaut plummeted to Earth and was incinerated. They recorded his pitiful cries to his handlers: ''I don't want to die, you've got to do something.''

This anecdote has become established in space exploration lore. Most recently it was repeated by authors of the book Starman, a biography of Yuri Gagerin. They identified the unlucky cosmonaut as Vladimir Komarov, writing that "the radio outposts in Turkey picked up his cries of rage as he plunged to his death, cursing the people who had put him inside a botched spaceship." This was a myth. Komarov did burn up upon reentry and the NSA did intercept his communications, but later analyses have debunked the most dramatic details of Fellwock's account, including the "cries of rage."

That the anecdote was inaccurate isn't surprising considering its provenance: Fellwock told me the story he told Ramparts of the dying cosmonaut was a bit of workplace gossip that circulated during his time as a young analyst in Turkey. ''It was abuzz all over the station that this had happened, and it was basically me picking up the buzz."

In 1972, when Fellwock saw the proofs of his Ramparts article, with a transcript of his words staring back at him, he was shocked but he buried his concerns. Today, he's not so sanguine. His opinion has been colored by the fact that not long after the Ramparts article, both Peter Collier and David Horowitz turned away from the left to become prominent conservatives. Collier founded the conservative publisher Encounter Books; Horowitz wrote a memoir, Radical Son, renouncing his '60s allegiances, and now travels the country as an apocalyptic right-wing pundit, warning people that colleges are being taken over by ''Islamofascists.''

Fellwock told me he believes Collier and Horowitz were never truly part of the left, and that they misused his words purposefully to cause maximum chaos in a demented quest to hurt America.

''There was an element within our movement that was fundamentally anti-American and wanted to create chaos in America and really disrupt and destroy American society,'' he said.

When I spoke to Collier, he disputed Fellwock's claim that he and Horowitz had misled him about the interview. He said that Fellwock had spoken into a tape recorder for hours, knowing he was being interviewed for an article: ''I can't imagine why he would think'' his words would not be in the article, Collier said.

At the least, there must have been a misunderstanding between source and journalists. Fellwock approached Ramparts' editors as colleagues who would help him refine his own story; they saw him as a source, from which to extract a juicy scoop.

Today, Collier echoes Fellwock's disdain for the article, with his own motivations. His doubts about the article, he said, beginning before it was even published, helped spur his first steps away from the left. About a month before the NSA story came out, Collier said, his father, a conservative who had argued heatedly with him about his radical politics, died of cancer.

''Towards the end, he was dying of cancer and here I was preparing to do this thing,'' Collier said. ''And he loved his country. After I did it, when I was still grieving for him, the thought came into my mind: I said, Oh, God, I betrayed my father's country. This was really my first move out of the left, to understand what my intentions were: To hurt this country, to make it vulnerable, to make it less strong.''

Soon after the Snowden story broke this past summer, Wikileaks tweeted out a link to a copy of the 1972 Ramparts interview. ''The first big NSA whistleblower, Perry Fellwock, was so far ahead of his time, no-one believed him,'' they wrote. Forty years later, neither Fellwock nor Collier wholly believe in the landmark interview themselves.

On July 18, 1972, two days after the front page New York Times story, Fellwock appeared at a press conference in Ramparts' cramped Berkeley office. Despite his reservations, Fellwock decided to make the most out of the attention the article had brought. He could set the facts straight later.

The office was packed with reporters. Sporting big wire-framed glasses, his long hair swept out of his face, Fellwock read a prepared statement while flanked by Collier and Horowitz. A poster of Che Guevara hung on the wall.

''We must take steps to insure there are no more Vietnams,'' Fellwock told the assembled crowd. ''I believe I have taken such a step. I have done it for neither money nor glory, but to bring to the American people knowledge which they have a 'need to know.'''

There would be no official prosecution for his breach of secrecy. Before publishing, Ramparts had consulted with the lawyer for Daniel Ellsberg, the leaker of the Pentagon Papers. Ellsberg's lawyer told them that the government wouldn't risk exposing more secrets by publicly going after them for the article. He was right.

But Ramparts staff noticed that there was one unknown reporter at the press conference who seemed a bit too eager to learn if Fellwock was in possession of any classified documents. This was the first of many encounters Fellwock would have with people he suspected to be CIA operatives.

Fellwock didn't stop to take a breath after the media frenzy. The GOP convention had been relocated from San Diego to Miami, after a site-selection scandal, and he followed it there. Between tear gas-drenched protests with the Vietnam Veterans Against the War that August, Fellwock discussed the future of the movement with Rennie Davis.

Davis had been impressed with the Ramparts article and suggested that Fellwock dedicate himself to exposing spying-related abuses. The Pentagon Papers had shown the dangers of excessive secrecy, as had the 1971 revelation of FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover's COINTELPRO program targeting United States activists and radicals. It was clear, especially to liberals, that covert operations had spiraled horribly out of control, both home and abroad.

So, in the fall of 1972, Fellwock and Tim Butz, a former Air Force intelligence officer and fellow antiwar activist, founded a new group, under the rather clunky name of the Committee for Action/Research on the Intelligence Community, or CARIC. Their goal was strikingly similar to what Wikileaks would propose decades later: to watch the watchers by acting as a clearinghouse for information about surveillance and covert operations.

Butz and Fellwock reached out to whistleblowers and Vietnam vets, focusing on other intelligence officers who had grown disillusioned and wanted to use the skills they learned in the service against their former employers. CARIC's main endeavor was a quarterly magazine, Counter-Spy, which was the vehicle for its research and polemics.

CARIC also anticipated Wikileaks' intensive approach to uncovering information, treating journalism as a matter of data analysis. Where Julian Assange has advanced the idea of ''scientific journalism,'' based on dumping primary sources and documents to back up claims, CARIC developed what it referred to as the ''New Intelligence,'' which aimed to be a beneficent mirror held up to the dark arts of the CIA and the FBI.

''The New Intelligence,'' explained an issue of Counter-Spy, ''is the product resulting from the scientific collection, evaluation, analysis, integration and interpretation of all information concerning experiments in technofascism and eventually the conditions which produce it.''

In practice, this meant exhaustively documenting and exposing covert action wherever it occurred. One of CARIC's earliest coups was tipping off the Washington Post that Nixon's Committee for the Reelection of the President had hired George Washington University students to spy on anti-war protests. Another early focus was the CIA's Operation Phoenix, a secret assassination program in Vietnam.

''Only a full and undisguised look into this hidden world can displace unwarranted fears, and guide the public effort to end this illegal and unjustified espionage,'' read an early CARIC handout. ''The secrecy with which the government surrounds itself must end.''

As Fellwock and Butz organized their efforts in Washington, D.C., a similar idea was taking shape in New York, thanks to Norman Mailer. In February of 1973, the brawling novelist-journalist-activist held a lavish party at the Four Seasons, partly to celebrate his 50th birthday and partly to announce and raise funds for a new venture, something he called the Fifth Estate.

Mailer got blind drunk but managed to spit out his idea of the Fifth Estate as a ''people's CIA and a people's FBI to investigate the CIA and the FBI.''

''If we have a democratic secret police to keep tabs on Washington's secret police, we will see how far paranoia is justified,'' he said.

The press slammed Mailer's slurred, self-aggrandizing performance, but the weeks that followed brought new Watergate revelations, showing the extent to which Richard Nixon, with his ''enemies list,'' had used the machinery of the state to screw with his political opponents.

In July, Village Voice writer Nat Hentoff made the connection between CARIC and the Fifth Estate in a column. By then, Fellwock and Butz had been joined by a third partner, Barton Osborne, another disillusioned ex-military intelligence officer. Hentoff urged Mailer to help them out: ''Norman, these three ex-intelligence agents are legitimate. I mean really legitimate.''

Mailer invited Butz and Fellwock up his sprawling Brooklyn Heights home. By that time, Fellwock was used to hanging around high-profile activists and political figures but he was left deeply impressed with Mailer's intelligence and vision. ''Norman could see on levels that I think most normal people can't see,'' Fellwock said.

Fellwock's own view of the world at the time was simplistic: Capitalism was the ultimate evil, and the sole explanation for why the U.S. kept doing evil things. But Mailer divined from the nation's misdeeds a psychological torment.

"What [Norman] Mailer told me is that the CIA is basically a white Christian Protestant organization. And white Christian Protestants have to find a devil in order to justify what they do."''What Mailer told me is that the CIA is basically a white Christian Protestant organization," Fellwock said. "And white Christian Protestants have to find a devil in order to justify what they do. Their Christian values say they should help the poor, like the Communists were. But they were not helping the poor. They were helping the very rich. And this created a conflict inside of the white Christian Protestant mind that could only be resolved by them seeking out a devil and making that devil into an exaggerated thing. Thus, they exaggerated the threat of communism just like they're exaggerating the threat of Islam today.''

The meeting led, in 1974, to CARIC's joining with Mailer's Organizing Committee for a Fifth Estate. OC-5, as it was abbreviated, was the fundraising arm, while Butz and Fellwock focused on running Counter-Spy. Mailer didn't just bring a better name to Fellwock and Butz's efforts. His celebrity was invaluable for fundraising and publicity.

A Senate hearing on the Organizing Committee for a Fifth Estate offered an amusing portrait of the Mailer-CARIC alliance in describing a fundraiser held in D.C. :

Norman Mailer made a rambling 30-minute speech; the OC-5 staffers, Timothy Charles Butz, Perry Fellwock, also known as Winslow Peck, K. Barton Osborn and Douglas Porter spoke of their counterintelligence activities and the somewhat besotted liberals in attendance poured two bottles of Portuguese wine into a planter in support of African liberation.

But Counter-Spy was mostly deadly serious. Its tiny offices just off Dupont Circle hummed with staffers and journalists who came by to sift through file cabinets filled with documents about covert operations. Sometimes Counter-Spy staff would plant a story in a visitor's ear. The Fifth Estate staff launched campus tours and local branches and sent representatives to radio shows to debate former members of the intelligence community; one goal was to seed libraries of intelligence files at universities throughout the country, to make them more resilient to government pressure, a peer-to-peer file-sharing network before the internet.

Fellwock, whom everyone knew as Winslow Peck, was usually too busy researching the CIA's infiltration of the South American labor movement or some other arcane conspiracy to be very social. He had a gift for divining hidden meaning from mountains of data.

''There was a mad scientist quality to him,'' said Harvey Kahn, a Counter-Spy staffer from 1974 to 1976 who is today a movie producer in Vancouver, Canada. Kahn remembers that staffers would seek out Fellwock's counsel, oracle-like, about their own research. ''You felt if Winslow thinks that's what's going on, that's what's going on. He had such an ability to absorb material and recall.''

Fellwock's absorption could cross the line into unhealthy obsession. He worked so feverishly that he wore his body down, Kahn said: ''He seemed to be working all the time, he always seemed to be getting a cold. He didn't really eat right. You just thought, this is not a person who is going to live a long and happy life.''

''None of us who were in the movement back then enjoyed what was going on,'' Fellwock said. ''This wasn't a good time for anybody. We were not thrill-seekers. There was no joy. There was, will we survive to the next day? Can we do something to stop these bastards?''

But remembering the days from a distance at the diner, Fellwock paused and smiled. "This is fun," he said. Still, the darkness hadn't lifted completely. Whenever I brought the conversation to his personal life, I was met with uncomfortable silence. Was he married? ''I don't want to get into that,'' Did he have kids? ''I'd rather not talk about that.'' He insisted I not mention the name of the antiques business he's a partner in, so that his colleagues wouldn't be ''dragged into this.''

''It's just my life is in a different world now and I don't want my life now disrupted,'' Fellwock said. ''I only have a few years left. I want to enjoy those years. I want my family to be safe and enjoy life''

It turns out that constant brooding over the machinations of the surveillance state is not conducive to a sound state of mind. Counter-Spy staff worked in a haze of mistrust. ''You'd be sitting with people and you knew that somebody was wondering about somebody else at that table,'' said Harvey Kahn, ''were they being controlled by somebody else? Or unconsciously being manipulated?''

It was not a fantasy: The COINTELPRO papers had revealed security agencies kept close tabs on radical publications. In the late '60s, the CIA dedicated a 12-man team to undermining Ramparts, according to Angus Mackenzie's book Secrets: The CIA's War at Home.

''It was intense,'' said Fellwock. ''Clearly it really upset the security agencies, what we were doing. They were all over us. I just generally accepted that the next person in the next booth would be some security person following me."

''It seems like that is still kind of implanted in your thinking,'' I said.

''Yeah, that's why I got paranoid when you called me, you really evoked a lot of old memories and feelings that I haven't had in 30 years.'' He sighed. ''But if I could live with it back then, I guess I could live with it now.''

In late 1975, Counter-Spy pushed the government farther than it ever had before, and the government pushed back. Frustrated by the lack of reform in the surveillance state, even after Nixon's resignation in 1974, Counter-Spy decided in its Winter 1975 issue to take another step: the magazine would name names, blowing agents' cover, with the explicit purpose of damaging the spy agency's ability to work abroad.

The idea, Fellwock said, was inspired by Philip Agee, a former CIA agent who had earlier than year published his memoir, Inside the Company, a scathing critique of the agency. In the book, Agee had outed the identities of 250 CIA officers.

''Agee had the idea of escalating by us naming names of CIA people all around the world,'' Fellwock said, ''which is really easy to do, it turned out.''

A November 1974 Washington Monthly article by John Marks called ''How to Spot a Spook'' showed how it was done. All you needed to do was scour lists of foreign embassy staff, then crosscheck those names with the State Department's Biographic Register for telltale signs of spook-dom, such as odd gaps in career histories or inexplicable job titles.

Counter-Spy staff used the technique to create a list of 225 CIA station chiefs around world under diplomatic cover. The list was published accompanied by an Agee editorial declaring, ''The most effective and important systematic efforts to combat CIA that can be undertaken right now are, I think, the identification, exposure, and neutralization of its people working abroad.''

On December 23, 1975, a few days after the issue was published, the phone rang in the Counter-Spy office. Harvey Kahn, working alone during D.C.'s Christmastime lull, answered. It was a New York Times reporter. Had Counter-Spy's list of station chiefs, the Times reporter asked, included the name Richard Welch?

Welch was on the list, Kahn found'--listed as the CIA station chief in Lima, Peru. It turned out to be the wrong station, but that inaccuracy wouldn't change how events were about to unfold. Welch's real post was Athens, and, the Times reporter said, he had just been murdered there.

A Greek Marxist organization called Revolutionary Organization 17 November claimed credit for the assassination, but the covert community charged Counter-Spy with being an accessory. Former and current intelligence officers rushed to pin the blame for the killing on the tiny magazine. President Gerald Ford himself said through a spokesperson that Counter-Spy ''had been at least partially responsible for his death.''

''It was the most incredible thing,'' said Harvey Kahn. "Imagine your little office full of reporters literally from everywhere, cameras, big celebrity reporters.''

Under the pressure, Counter-Spy reaffirmed its mission. The Fifth Estate issued a statement declaring that ''if anyone is to blame for Mr. Welch's death, it is the CIA that sent him to Greece to spy and intervene in the affairs of the Greek people.''

But a remarkable CIA smear campaign was already underway. After the Welch story broke, a CIA press director had started calling reporters and insisting Counter-Spy was to blame.

There was no evidence that Welch's killers had learned Welch's identity from the magazine or even read it. They wouldn't have needed to. The CIA neglected to mention that an Athens newspaper had already blown Welch's cover weeks before Counter-Spy published his name. Moreover Welch, upon transferring to Athens, had moved into the previous chief's house, despite warnings from his superiors that the location was widely known to house the CIA station chief.

But the CIA was under intense pressure amid a stream of embarrassing revelations from the Church Committee, convened in 1975 to investigate CIA lawbreaking. Counter-Spy and OC-5 occupied the radical edge of ''a broader anxiety about how intelligence fit into the United States government,'' said Steven Aftergood, an expert on government secrecy with the Federation of American Scientists.

The CIA saw the Welch murder as a way to swing the pendulum of popular opinion back to its side. Morton Halperin, then a researcher with the Center for National Security Studies, wrote three years after the assassination:

The Welch Assassination case is the only one that I am aware of where there is evidence of manipulation of the American press for the purpose of influencing events in the United States. CIA successfully exploited the murder of one of its station chiefs to set back efforts to bring the CIA under constitutional control.

The pressure alienated Counter-Spy from some of their closest allies on the left, including Mailer, who was horrified by his name being linked to the killing, according to his biographer Mary Dearborn.

"We had the president of the United States lying about us."''We had the president of the United States lying about us,'' Fellwock said. Counter-Spy received death threats from right-wing Cuban immigrants and former intelligence officers. Tim Butz started carrying a gun.

''The days after the Welch thing blew up in the press were intense,'' Doug Porter, a longtime Counter-Spy staffer, wrote in an email. ''We operated under the assumption that every phone conversation was being bugged and there were several instances where we saw unmarked cars observing our activities'--even stuff like shopping for groceries was cause for paranoia.''

Even before the Welch affair, Counter-Spy's funding had been drying up as the left broke up into squabbling factions in the post-Nixon years. The Welch murder ''gave the liberals all the excuses they needed to peel away from the movement,'' Fellwock said. ''That was the final nail in the coffin for us.''

A few months after Welch was buried in Arlington Cemetery in a state funeral, Counter-Spy dissolved.

The Washington Post marked the demise of Counter-Spy with a brief article on July 8, 1976, which began ''Political and personal bickering has split the staff of Counter-Spy, a magazine the Central Intelligence Agency partially blamed for the murder of an Athens agency official last December.'' The Post hinted at drama behind the scenes, writing that the split came amidst accusations that members were ''police agents, anticommunists, sexists and liberals.''

One of the Counter-Spy associates accused of being a police plant was Doug Porter. In the early '70s, Porter was the editor of a San Diego underground paper when he met Butz and Fellwock on a trip to the East Coast to work on a story about a Southern California right-wing paramilitary group. He joined Counter-Spy in 1973 and moved in with Fellwock and other Fifth Estate staffers in a house in Maryland.

Today, Porter runs the San Diego Free Press, a local progressive news website. He lost his vocal cords to cancer, so he couldn't talk on the phone. But the bitterness over how things ended at Counter-Spy bled out of his words in an email.

''I've moved on, had a whole lot of interesting experiences and yet the one thing I cannot bring myself to do is to forgive Peck/Fellwock,'' he wrote.

Things fell apart during an intense meeting in the aftermath of the Welch affair, Porter wrote. The group had gathered for a clandestine meeting at a nearby office building for what Porter thought would be a discussion of policy. But it abruptly turned into an inquisition of Porter, with Fellwock leading the charge.

''It was like a scene out of a bad novel,'' Porter wrote. ''I was accused of being either a Trotskyist or a police agent; some kind of spy sent in to disrupt and ruin his life's work. Nothing I said could dissuade him.''

''I left that room in tears, and I'm not a weepy kinda guy. It didn't take long for word to get out about the accusations; most of the people I knew in DC stopped speaking to me. The woman I was seeing said 'no mas'. I've spent thousands upon thousands for therapy since that time. Getting shunned is no small thing. And I'm in a pretty good place these days. But I'll never get over Winslow. Fucker.''

Fellwock looked concerned when I told him about Porter's anger. ''I'm sorry to hear that,'' he said. Fellwock said that Porter had been kicked out over concerns from a group of Counter-Spy associates in Chicago, who'd become convinced that he was some sort of agent provocateur because of controversial statements he made in the press. The pressure from the Welch assassination was also a factor, he said.

''I don't even remember, but I think it had something to do with resorting to violence,'' Fellwock said. ''Perhaps this was just a stupid statement, but there were a lot of conflicts going on. Eventually I sided with the Chicago group. But I don't know, OK?'' (Porter denies he'd ever advocated violence.)

Fellwock's gaze dropped to his plate. When he looked up his expression was plaintive.

''All I have to say about all my colleagues back then,'' he said, ''no matter what disputes I had with them personal or ideological, is that to my dying day I'll think they were the bravest people I've ever met.'' Now Fellwock was crying. He put his hands to his face. ''I'm sorry,'' he said, and got up to go to the bathroom.

It's nearly impossible to imagine Edward Snowden being a quietly retired antiques dealer on Long Island 40 years from now. Snowden will never come back to the U.S., charged as he is with espionage, unless it is in chains.

Whatever cracks in the surveillance state's armor of secrecy were pried open by Counter-Spy and the Church Committee have been sealed over with titanium and Dobermans on either side to guard them. The most concrete legacy of Counter-Spy might be the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. Passed in 1982 as a direct response to the Welch assassination, the Act makes it a crime to disclose the identities of covert agents abroad with the intent to harm U.S. intelligence activities. Today, even those in government who distrust the surveillance state are in agreement that Snowden is a criminal who must be brought to justice. It's unthinkable that any congressional aide would praise Snowden today as one praised OC-5 in a 1976 Washington Post article: ''They're a darn good organization; their information has been accurate without exception.''

But Fellwock's story also reflects a shift in today's anti-surveillance crusaders. The networks of the left have been replaced by social networks of cyber-libertarians: hackers, silicon valley entrepreneurs, freedom-of-information crusaders. There has been much tweeting and even a sparsely-attended anti-surveillance protest in D.C., but encoded in the fury has been a sense that the real extent of dissent to the surveillance state consists of simply spreading the news of Snowden's disclosures.

''A planetary host of actively concerned and politically connected people,'' marveled the sci-fi writer Bruce Sterling earlier this year. But ''among this buzzing horde of eager online activists from a swarm of nations, what did any of them actually do for Snowden? Nothing.''

Snowden's biggest ally through his saga has been Wikileaks. By now the whistleblowing organization is essentially crippled. Its head, Julian Assange, has been reduced to an avatar beaming into various panels and tweeting his disdain for the movies made about him'--the most recent one, coincidentally, is The Fifth Estate.

Norman Mailer, the patron saint of OC-5, was the absurd living embodiment of self-promotion, but he espoused something larger: a radical civic-mindedness, in which information was just the starting point for creating new institutions built on shared sacrifice and a devotion to democracy and transparency.

Today, Glenn Greenwald, the Guardian columnist who broke the Snowden story, is launching a new media company on the back of the Snowden leaks. Backing him is billionaire eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, who believes that the social change is best brought about by ever more innovative configurations of capitalism. Counter-Spy would exist today to the extent it was an inspiring enough brand.

We got the check and a cab. We were looking for an antiques store, so Fellwock could provide a glimpse of his life now. There was one in Midtown he'd been meaning to check out.

"I realized there was nothing more I could do politically and all'--I should just forget the whole thing. So I came to New York and I started working for the banks."For a few years after Counter-Spy disbanded, Fellwock agonized over whether he should continue his activism. ''Some days I would be political, other days I wouldn't," he said. He tried to balance his undiminished concern over covert action with a growing sense that his activism was a pointless and dangerous provocation of the security agencies. "I'm sure a lot of my friends thought I was crazy. I was conflicted. But by 1980 I realized there was nothing more I could do politically and all'--I should just forget the whole thing. So I came to New York and I started working for the banks.''

He worked in IT in big banks throughout the '80s and '90s, a perverse coda to a career fighting the evils of global capitalism. He'd left his office at the World Financial Center just hours before the planes hit on 9/11. He watched markets crash after September 11 from inside a multinational investment bank. Through it all, few of those close to him knew of his double life as Winslow Peck, the first NSA whistleblower. He rarely thought of those days.

''It didn't matter. It was a job I could do. I've worked here and London'''--here he laughs, because he'd once been very publicly deported from Britain, in 1976, after helping an investigative journalist expose GCHQ, the UK's equivalent of NSA'--"I've had a good life. I can't complain. I've survived all that shit that went on, I know a lot of people who didn't survive.''

Along the way, he applied himself more and more to the antiques market. Antique-picking resembles Fellwock's Counter-Spy work in that it is all about collecting and analyzing data. You have to have a picture of what stores are selling and buying at any given time so you can keep an eye out for the most lucrative wares. Fellwock keeps an extensive spreadsheet at home, tracking inventories of various stores.

When African art got big in the '80s, he would pick up pieces as they came into the docks on the Westside and sell them in Soho at 1,000 percent markups. He regularly takes reconnaissance missions to Chinatown, to see what imitation junk is coming in from Chinese factories so he doesn't buy fakes. His speciality is ancient coins. He's about to self-publish a definitive guide to buying and selling antiques. ''I've seen what's out there already and it's not good,'' he said.

''It's all about information, you need to know what's selling,'' he said. Fellwock pointed to random pedestrians as we walked down the sidewalk. ''Everyone around us right now is a potential customer, or a potential source. The trick is to find out what the thing is that will convince them to buy or sell.''

His information on this particular antique store was not good; it was closed when we arrived. We headed to Grand Central Terminal, where Fellwock needed to catch a train. On the way, he regaled me with half-remembered tales of Norman Mailer from the '70s, like Mailer and the writer Lucian Truscott IV at the White Horse tavern: ''They would get drunk and slam their heads together like bulls. Boom. I thought they were going to give themselves concussions. It was the craziest thing I've ever seen at the bar."

At Grand Central, Fellwock continued to reminisce as we stood, buffeted by the rush-hour crowd, under an arch in the main concourse from which an enormous American flag hung. The conversation turned again to regrets, and Doug Porter.

''If you talk to him, please tell him that whatever differences we had were due to the pressures we were under, and offer my apologies,'' Fellwock said. ''If he was for real in what he was doing, I have nothing but respect for him. Everyone who joined up with me and Tim Butz were incredibly brave.'' Now he was choking up again, face red, underneath the flag.

''That was the highlight of my life, I'm sorry to say.'' Fellwock threw his hands up in an act of exaggerated helplessness. ''But this is the best time of my life.''

[Photo of Fellwock by Adrian Chen; images by Jim Cooke and Ramparts magazine]

RelatedRelatedA Discussion With CryptomeWhen the Guardian and Washington Post published their blockbuster NSA reports based on Ed Snowden's leaks, journalists lined up conga-style to'... Read'...

RelatedRelated

U.S. Electronic Espionage: A Memoir

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 12 Nov 2013 22:13

10 June 1998: Link to dissent

14 April 1998: Add Duncan Campbell message

13 April 1998Source: Columbia University Library, Microfilm

Thanks to Peter Sommer for the reference.

Additional information on NSA electronic interception

Note: The article begins with commentary on information provided by an anonymous former analyst of the National Security Agency followed by the full interview. The analyst was later named as Perry Fellwock, at the time using the pseudonym Winslow Peck.

Ramparts, Vol. 11, No. 2, August, 1972, pp. 35-50

About thirty miles northeast of CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, right off the Baltimore-Washington expressway overlooking the flat Maryland countryside, stands a large three story building known informally as the "cookie factory." It's officially known as Ft. George G. Meade, headquarters of the National Security Agency.

Three fences surround the headquarters. The inner and outer barriers are topped with barbed wire, the middle one is a five-strand electrified wire. Four gatehouses spanning the complex at regular intervals house specially-trained marine guards. Those allowed access all wear iridescent I.D. badges -- green for "top secret crypto," red for "secret crypto." Even the janitors are cleared for secret codeword material. Once inside, you enter the world's longest "corridor" -- 980 feet long by 560 feet wide. And all along the corridor are more marine guards, protecting the doors of key NSA offices. At 1,400,000 square feet, it is larger than CIA headquarters, 1,135,000 square feet. Only the State Department and the Pentagon, and the new headquarters planned for the FBI are more spacious. But the DIRNSA (Director, National Security Agency) can be further distinguished from the headquarters buildings of these three other giant bureaucracies -- it has no windows. Another palace of paranoia? No. For DIRNSA is the command center for the largest, most sensitive and far-flung intelligence gathering apparatus in the world's history. Here, and in the nine-story Operations Building Annex, upwards of 15,000 employees work to break the military, diplomatic and commercial codes of every nation in the world, analyze the de-crypted messages, and send the results to the rest of the U.S. intelligence community.

Far less widely known than the CIA, whose Director Richard Helms will occasionally grant public interviews, NSA silently provides an estimated 80 percent of all valid U.S. intelligence. So secret, so sensitive is the NSA mission and so highly indoctrinated are its personnel, that the Agency, twenty years after its creation, remains virtually unknown to those employees outside the intelligence community. The few times its men have been involved in international incidents, NSA's name has been kept out of the papers.

Nevertheless, the first American killed in Vietnam, near what became the main NSA base at Phu Bai, was an NSA operative. And the fact that Phu Bai remains the most heavily guarded of all U.S. bases suggests that an NSA man may well be the last.

The scope of the NSA's global mission has been shrouded in secrecy since the inception of the Agency. Only the haziest outlines have been known, and then only on the basis of surmise. However, Ramparts has recently been able to conduct a series of lengthy interviews with a former NSA analyst willing to talk about his experiences. He worked for the Agency for three and a half years -- in the cold war of Europe and the hot one in Southeast Asia. The story he tells of NSA's structure and history is not the whole story, but it is a significant and often chilling portion of it.

Our informant served as a senior NSA analyst in the Istanbul listening post for over two years. He was a participant in the deadly international fencing match that goes on daily with the Soviet Union, plotting their air and ground forces and penetrating their defenses. He watched the Six Day War unfold and learned of the intentions of the major powers -- Israel, the Soviet Union, the United States, France, Egypt -- by reading their military and diplomatic radio traffic, all of it duly intercepted, de-coded and translated by NSA on the spot. As an expert on NSA missions directed against the Soviet Union and the so-called "Forward Countries" -- Bulgaria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Rumania and Yugoslavia -- he briefed such visiting dignitaries as Vice President Humphrey. In Indochina he was a senior analyst, military consultant and U.S. Air Force intelligence operations director for North Vietnam, Laos, the northern-most provinces of South Vietnam and China. He is a veteran of over one hundred Airborne Radio Direction Finding missions in Indochina -- making him thoroughly familiar with the "enemy" military structure and its order of battle.

With the benefit of the testimony he provides, we can see that the reason for the relative obscurity of NSA of less to do with its importance within the intelligence community than with the limits of its mission and the way it gets its results. Unlike the CIA, whose basic functions are clearly outlined in the 1947 law that created it, NSA, created in 1952, simply gathers intelligence. It does not formulate policy or carry out operations. Most of the people working for NSA are not "agents," but ordinary servicemen attached to one of three semi-autonomous military cryptologic agencies -- the Air Force Security Service, the largest; the Naval Security Group; and the Army Security Agency, the oldest. But while it is true that the Agency runs no spies as in the popular myth, its systematic Signal Intelligence intercept mission is clearly prohibited by the Geneva Code. What we are dealing with is a highly bureaucratized, highly technological intelligence mission whose breadth and technological sophistication appear remarkable even in an age of imperial responsibilities and electronic wizardry.

So that not a sparrow or a government falls without NSA's instantaneous knowledge, over two thousand Agency field stations dot the five continents and the seven seas. In Vietnam, NSA's airborne flying platforms carrying out top-secret Radar Detection Finding missions, supply U.S. commanders with their most reliable information on the location of communist radio transmitters, and thus on the location of NLF units themselves. Other methods, the use of sensors and seismic detectors, either don't work or are used merely to supplement NSA's results. But the Agency's tactical mission in Indochina, intelligence support for U.S. commanders in the field, however vital to the U.S. war effort, is subsidiary in terms of men, time and material to its main strategic mission.

The following interview tells us a great deal about both sides of the NSA mission -- everything from how Agency people feel about themselves and the communist "enemy" to the NSA electronic breakthroughs that threaten the Soviet-American balance of terror. We learn for example that NSA knows the call signs for every Soviet airplane, the numbers on the side of each plane, the name of the pilot in command; the precise longitude and latitude of every nuclear submarine; the whereabouts of nearly every Soviet VIP; the location of every Soviet missile base; every army division, battalion and company -- its weaponry, commander and deployment. Routinely the NSA monitors all Soviet military, diplomatic and commercial radio traffic, including Soviet Air Defense, Tactical Air and KGB forces. (It was the NSA that found Che Guevara in Bolivia through radio communications intercept and analysis.) NSA cryptologic experts seek to break every Soviet code and do so with remarkable success, Soviet scrambler and computer-generated signals being nearly as vulnerable as ordinary voice and manual morse radio transmissions. Interception of Soviet radar signals enables NSA to gauge quite precisely the effectiveness of Soviet Air Defense units. Methods have even been devised to "fingerprint" every human voice used in radio transmissions and distinguish them from the voice of every other operator. The Agency's Electronic Intelligence Teams (ELINT) are capable of intercepting any electronic signal transmitted anywhere in the world and, from an analysis of the intercepted signal, identify the transmitter and physically reconstruct it. Finally, after having shown the size and sensitivity of the Agency's big ears, it is almost superfluous to point out that NSA monitors and records every trans-Atlantic telephone call.

Somehow, it is understandable, given the size of the stakes in the Cold War, that an agency like NSA would monitor U.S. citizens' trans-Atlantic phone calls. And we are hardly surprised that the U.S. violates the Geneva Code to intercept communist radio transmissions. What is surprising is that the U.S. systematically violates a treaty of its own making, the UKUSA Agreements of 1947. Under this treaty, the U.S., Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia erected a white-anglo-saxon-protestant nation communications intelligence dictatorship over the "Free World." The agreement distinguishes between three categories of intelligence consumers, First, Second, and Third Party consumers. The First Party is the U.S. intelligence community. The Second party refers to the other white anglo-saxon nations' communications intelligence agencies; i.e. Great Britain's GCHQ, Canada's CBNRC, etc. These agencies exchange information routinely. Non-WASP nations, the so-called Third Party nations, are placed on short intelligence rations. This category includes all NATO allies -- West Germany, France, Italy, as well as South Vietnam, Japan, Thailand and the non-WASP allies in SEATO. But the idea of a closed club of gentlemanly white men gets quickly dispelled when we learn that the U.S. even intercepts the radio communications of its Second Party UKUSA "allies." From the U.S. military base at Chicksands, for example, and from the U.S. Embassy in London, NSA operatives busily intercept and transcribe British diplomatic traffic and send it off for further analysis to DIRNSA.

We feel that the information in this interview -- while not of a "sensitive" nature -- is of critical importance to America for the light it casts on the cold war and the anti-communist myths that perpetuate it. These myths about the aggressive intentions of the Soviet Union and China and about North Vietnam's "invasion of a democratic South Vietnam," can only be sustained by keeping the American people as ignorant as possible about the actual nature of these regimes and the great power relationships that exist in the world. The peace of the world, we are told, revolves shakily on a "balance of terror" between the armed might of the Soviet Union and the United States. So tenuous is this balance that if the U.S. were to let down its guard ever so slightly, if it were, for example, to reduce the ever-escalating billions allocated for "defense," we would immediately face the threat of destruction from the aggressive Soviets, who are relentless in their pursuit of military superiority. Our informant's testimony, based on years of dealing with the hard information about the Soviet military and its highly defensive-oriented deployment, is a powerful and authoritative rebuttal to this mythology.

But perhaps even an more compelling reason requires that this story be told. As we write, the devastating stepped-up bombing of North Vietnam continues. No one can say with certainty what the ultimate consequences of this desperate act are likely to be. Millions of Americans, perhaps a majority, deplore this escalation. But it would be a mistake to ignore the other millions, those who have grown up in fear of an entity known as "world communism." For them Nixon's latest measures have a clear rationale and a plausible purpose. It is precisely this political rationale and this strategic purpose that the testimony of our informant destroys.

We are told by Nixon that South Vietnam has been "invaded" by the North which is trying to impose its will on the people of the South. This latest version of why we continue to fight in Indochina -- the first version stressed the threat of China which allegedly controlled Hanoi, even as Moscow at one time was thought to control Peking -- emphasizes Hanoi's control over the NLF. Our evidence shows that the intelligence community, including NSA, has long determined that the NLF and the DRV are autonomous, independent entities. Even in Military Region I, the northern-most province of South Vietnam, and the key region in the "North Vietnamese" offensive, the command center has always been located not in Hanoi but in somewhere in the Ia Drang valley. This command center, the originating point for all military operations in the region, is politically and militarily under the control of the PRG. Known as Military Region Tri Tin Hue (MRTTH) it integrates both DRV and NLF units under the command. Hanoi has never simply "called the shots," although the DRV and PRG obviously have common reasons for fighting and share common objectives. All of this information NSA has passed on systematically to the political authorities who, equally systematically, have ignored it.

Nixon's military objective -- halting supplies to the South through bombing and mining of North Vietnamese ports -- turns out to be as bogus as his political rationale. Military supplies for the DRV and the NLF are stored along the Ho Chi Minh trail in gigantic underground staging areas know as bamtrams. These are capable of storing supplies for as long as twelve months, at normal levels of hostilities, according to NSA estimates.Even at the highly accelerated pace of the recent offensive, it would take several months (assuming 100 percent effectiveness) before our bombing and mining wold have any impact on the fighting.

Taken together, teh experience of our informant in Europe, in the Middle East, and in Indochina bears witness to the aggressive posture of the United States in the late 1960s. It is hard to see anything defensive about it. Our policy makers are well-informed by the intelligence community of the defensive nature of our antagonists' military operations. The NSA operations here described reflect the drive of a nation to control as much of the world as possible, whose leaders trust no one and are forced to spy on their closet allies in violation of the treaties they initiated themselves; leaders, moreover, for whom all nations are, in teh intelligence idiom, "targets," and who maintain the U.S. imperium around the world in large part through threat of actual physical annihilation.

At home, however, the favored weapon employed is ignorance rather than fear. Like NSA headquarters itself, the United States is surrounded by barriers -- barriers of ignorance that keep its citizens prisoners of the cold war. The first obstacle is formed by the myths propagated about communism and about its aggressive designs on America. The second, and dependent for its rationale on the first, is the incredible barrier of governmental secrecy that keeps most of the questionable U.S. aggressive activities hidden nor from our "enemies," who are the knowledgeable victims, but from the American people themselves. The final barrier is perhaps the highest and is barbe with the sharpest obstacles of all. It is nothing less than our reluctance as Americans to confront what we are doing to the peoples of the world, ourselves included, by organizations like the National Security Agency.

Q. Let's begin by getting a sense of the National Security Agency and the scope of its operations.

A. O.K. At the broadest level, NSA is a part of the United States intelligence community and a member of the USIB, the United States Intelligence Board. It sits on the Board with the CIA, the FBI, the State Department's RCI, and various military intelligence bureaus. Other agencies also have minor intelligence-gathering units, even the Department of the Interior.

All intelligence agencies are tasked with producing a particular product. NSA produces -- that is, collects, analyzes, and disseminates to its consumers -- Signals Intelligence, called SIGINT. It comes from communications or other types of signals intercepted from what we called "targeted entities," and it amounts to about 80 percent of the viable intelligence the U.S. government receives. There is COMSEC, a secondary mission. This is to produce all the communications security equipment, codes and enciphering equipment for the United States and its allies. This function of the NSA involves the monitoring of our own communications to make sure they are secure. But SIGINT is the main responsibility.

As far as NSA's personnel is concerned, they are divided into two groups: those that are totally civilian, and those like me who derived from the military. As far as the collection of data is concerned, the military provides almost all the people. They are recruited through one of the service cryptologic agencies. The three agencies are the U.S. Air Force Security Service (USAFSS), the Army Security Agency (ASA), and the Navy Security Group (NSG). These agencies may control a few intelligence functions that are primarily tactical in nature and directly related to ongoing military operations. But generally, DIRNSA, the Director of the National Security Agency, is completely in control over all NSA's tasks, missions and people.

The NSA, through its sites all over the world, copies -- that is, collects -- intelligence from almost every conceivable source. That means every radio transmission that is of a strategic or tactical nature, or is related to some government, or has some political significance. NSA is powerful, and it has grown since its beginning back in 1947. The only problem it has had has come over the last few years. Originally it had equal power with the CIA on the USIB and the National Security Council. But recently the CIA has gained more of a hegemony in intelligence operations, especially since Richard Helms became director of the entire intelligence community.

Q. Does the NSA have agents in the field?

A. Yes, but probably not in the way you mean. It is different from other intelligence agencies in that it's not a consumer of its own intelligence. That is, it doesn't act on the data it gathers. It just passes it on. Generally, there's a misconception all Americans have about spying. They think it's all cloak and dagger, with hundreds of james Bonds wandering around the world in Aston-Martins, shooting people. It just doesn't happen. It's all either routine or electronic. I got to know a lot of CIA people in my three and a half years with NSA, and it became pretty clear to me that most of them sit around doing mundane stuff. You know, reading magazines, newspapers, technical journals. Like some people say, they do a lot of translating of foreign phone books. Of course I did meet a few who were out in the jungles with guns in their hands too.

But as far as the NSA is concerned, it is completely technological. Like I said, at least 80 percent of all viable intelligence that this country receives and acts on comes from the NSA, and it is all from signals intelligence, strategic and tactical. I saw it from both angles -- first strategic in working against the Soviet Union in Turkey and then tactical flying missions against the VC in Nam. Information gathering by NSA is complete. It covers what foreign governments are doing, planning to do, have done in the past: what armies are moving where and against whom; what air forces are moving where, and what heir capabilities are. There really aren't any limits on NSA. Its mission goes all the way from calling in the B-52s in Vietnam to monitoring every aspect of the Soviet space program.

Q. In practical terms, what sort of data are collected by NSA?

A. Before going into that, I should get into the types of signals NSA collects. There are three basic area. First is what we called ELINT, electronics intelligence. This involves the interception and analysis of any electronics signal. There isn't necessarily any message on that signal. It's just the signal, and it's mainly used by technicians. The only time I ever remember using ELINT was when we were tracking a Russian fighter. Some of them has a particular type of radar system. As I remember, we called this system MANDRAKE. Anyhow, every time this system signalled, a particular type of electronic emission would occur. Our ELINT people would be looking for it, and whenever it came up, it would let them positively identify this type of fighter.

The second type of signal is related to this. It is intelligence from radar, called RADINT. This also involves the technicians. Let me give you an example. There is a particular type of Soviet radar system known in NSA by a code name which we'll call SWAMP. SWAMP is used by the Soviet technical air forces, by their air defense, by the KGB and some civilian forces. It is their way of locating any flying entity while it is in the air. It had a visual read-out display, so that, whenever a radar technician in the Soviet Union wanted to plot something on his map, he could do it by shooting a beam of light on a scope and then send it to whoever wanted to find out information about that airplane. Our RADINT people intercepted SWAMP signals in our European listening posts. From the data they got, NSA analysts were able to go back to the headquarters at Fort meade and in less than eight weeks completely reconstruct SWAMP. We duplicated it. This meant that we were able to see exactly what the Soviet operators were seeing when they used SWAMP. So, as far as this radar was concerned, the upshot was that they were doing our tracking for us. We knew everything they knew, and we knew what they were able to track over their airspace, and what they weren't.

Q. Does this mean that we can jam their radar?

A. Yes, part of the function of ELINT and RADINT is to develop electronic counter measures. There's a counter measure for every type of Soviet radar.

Q. You said there were three areas. You've gone over ELINT and RADINT. What's the third?

A. This is by far the most important. It's communications intelligence. COMINT. It involves the collection of radio communications of a targeted entity. NSA intercepts them, reproduces them in its equipment and breaks down any code used to encipher the signal. I should say that what I call a "targeted entity" could mean any country -- NSA gathers data on them all -- but in practical terms it's almost synonymous with the Soviet Union.

COMINT is the important function. It's what I was in, and it represents probably 95 percent of relevant SIGINT intelligence. As a matter of fact, the entire intelligence community is also known as the COMINT community.

Q. It would probably be good to backpedal for a moment before we go into your experiences in NSA and get into the way you joined the organization.

A. Well, I'd been in college, was bored, and wanted to do something different. I come from the Midwest, and we still believed those ads about joining the military and seeing the world. I enlisted in the Air Force. Like everybody else, I was shocked by basic training, but after that, when it came time to choose what I'd be doing for the rest of my time, it wasn't too bad. I tried for linguist's training, but there weren't any openings in the schools. I was then approached by three people I later found were a part of the National Security Agency. They interviewed me along with four other guys and asked us if we'd like to do intelligence work. We took a battery of tests, I.Q. and achievement tests, and had some interviews to determine our political and emotional stability. They really didn't go into our politics very much, I guess because were all so obviously apathetic. Their main concern was our sex life. They wanted to know if we were homosexual.

At this point, it was 1966, I suppose I had what you would call an analysis of the world situation. But it was primarily based on a belief in maintaining the balance of power. I really didn't see anything wrong with what our government was doing. Also, the few hints about what we might be doing in NSA were pretty exciting: world-wide travel working in the glamorous field of intelligence, being able to wear civilian clothes.

After getting admitted, I was bussed to Goodfellow Air Force Base at San Angelo, Texas. Originally, it was a WAC base or something like that, but now it's entirely an intelligence school for NSA. The whole basis of the training was their attempt to make us feel we were the absolute cream of the military. For most GIs, the first days in the military are awful, but as soon as we arrived at the school we were given a pass to go anywhere we wanted, just as long as were were back in school each morning. We could live off base; there was no hierarchical thing inside the classroom.

Q. What sort of things did you focus on in school?

A. At first it was basic stuff. For about two months we just learned primary analysis techniques, intelligence terms, and a rough schematic of the intelligence community. We learned a few rudimentary things about breaking codes and intercepting messages. A lot of people were dropped out of the program at this time because of inadequate school performance, poor attitude, or because of something in their backgrounds didn't prove out. Actually, of fifteen people with me in this class, only four made it through. We had been given access only to information rated "confidential" all the time, but then we got clearance and a Top Secret cryptologic rating.

The first day of the second phase of school began when we walked into the classroom and saw this giant map on the wall. It was marked "Top Secret," and it was of the Soviet Union. For the next three months, we learned about types of communications in operations throughout the world and also in-depth things about the political and administrative makeup of various countries. The Soviet Union, of course, was our primary focus. And we learned every one of its military functions: the entire bureaucratic structure, including who's who and where departments and headquarters are located; and a long history of its military and political involvements, especially with countries like China and the East European bloc, which we called "the forward area."

We learned in-depth analysis -- how to perform different types of traffic analysis, cryptic analysis, strategic analysis. A lot of the texts we used were from the Soviet Union, and had been translated by the CIA.

I'm not especially proud of it now, but I should tell you that I graduated at the head of the class. We had a little ceremony inside a local movie theater. I was called up with two guys from other classes and given special achievement certificates. We were given our choice of assignments anywhere in the world. I chose Istanbul. It seemed like the most far-out and exotic place available. After that I left San Angelo and went to Monterey to the Army's language school for a month and a half. I learned a bit of very technical Russian -- basically how to recognize the language -- and then to Fort Meade NSA headquarters for a couple of weeks indoctrination about Istanbul, our operation there at Karmasel, and the whole European intelligence community.

Q. When did you get to Istanbul?

A. That was January 1967.

Q. What did you do there?

A. I was assigned to be one of the flight analysts working primarily against the Soviet tactical Air Forces and Soviet long range Air Forces. I had about twenty-five morse operators who were listening to morse signals for me, and about five non-morse and voice operators. It was a pretty boring job for them. A morse operator, for instance, just sits there in front of a radio receiver with headphones, and a typewriter for copying morse signals. They would "roll onto" their target, which means that they would go to the frequency that their target was using. The list of likely frequencies and locations and the call signals that would be used -- all this information was made available by the analyst as technical support to the operator. In return the operator would feed the copy to me: I'd perform analysis on it and correlate with other intelligence collected there in Istanbul, and at the NSA installations in the rest of Europe.

Q. Where were the other NSA installations in Europe?

A. The major ones aside from Karmasel are in Berlinhof and Darmstadt, West Germany; Chicksands, England; Brindisi, Italy; and also at Trabesan and Crete. Some of these sites have gigantic Feranine antennas. This is a circular antenna array, several football fields in diameter, and it's capable of picking up signals from 360 degrees. They're very sensitive. We can pick up hundreds of signals simultaneously. We pick up voices speaking over short-range radio communications thousands of miles away.

The whole Air Force part of NSA, the USAFSS units, is known as the European Security region. It is headquartered at the I.G. Farben building in Berlin. The Army ASA has units attached to every Army installation in Europe. The Naval NSG has its sites aboard carriers in the 6th Fleet. But mainly it was us.

Q. What does this apparatus actually try to do?

A. Like I said, it copies -- that is, intercepts for decoding and analysis -- communications from every targeted country. As far as the Soviet Union is concerned, we know the whereabouts at any given time of all its aircraft, exclusive of small private planes, and its naval forces, including its missile-firing submarines. The fact is that we're able to break every code they've got, understand every type of communications equipment and enciphering device they've got. We know where their submarines are, what every one of their VIPs is doing, and generally their capabilities and the dispositions of all their forces. This information is constantly computer correlated, updated, and the operations go on twenty-four hours a day.

Q. Let's break it down a little. How about starting with the aircraft. How does NSA keep track of the Soviet air forces?

A. First, by copying Soviet Navair, which is their equivalent of the system our military has for keeping track of its own planes. And their Civair, like our civilian airports: we copy all of their air controllers' messages. So we have their planes under control. Then we copy their radar plotting of their own air defense radar, which is concerned with flights that come near their airspace and violate it. By this I mean the U.S. planes that are constantly overflying their territory. Anyhow, all this data would be correlated with our own radar and with the air-to-ground traffic these planes transmitted and our operators picked up. We were able to locate them exactly even if they weren't on our radar through RDF -- radio direction finding. We did this by instantaneously triangulating reception coming through these gigantic antennas I mentioned. As far as Soviet aircraft are concerned, we not only know where they are: we know what their call signs are, what numbers are on the side of every one of their planes, and, most of the time, even which pilots are flying which plane.

Q. You said that we overfly Soviet territory?

A. Routinely as a matter of fact -- over the Black Sea, down to the Baltic. Our Strategic Air Force flies the planes, and we support them. By that I mean that we watch them penetrate the Soviet airspace and then analyze the Soviet reaction -- how everything from their air defense and tactical air force to the KGB reacts. It used to be that SAC flew B-52s. As a matter of fact one of them crashed in the Trans-Caucasus area in 1968 and all the Americans on board were lost.

Q. Was it shot down?

A. That was never clear, but I don't believe so. The Soviets know what the missions of the SAC planes are. A lot of times they scramble up in their jets and fly wing-to-wing with our planes. I've seen pictures of that. Their pilots even communicate with ours. We've copied that.

Q. Do we still use U-2s for reconnaissance?

A. No, and SAC doesn't fly the B-52s anymore either. Now the plane they use is the SR-71. It has unbelievable speed and it can climb high enough to reach the edge of outer space. The first time I came across the SR-71 was when I was reading a report of Chinese reaction to its penetration of their airspace. The report said their air defense tracking had located the SR-71 flying at a fairly constant pattern at a fairly reasonable altitude. They scrambled MIG-21s on it, and when they approached it, the radar pattern indicated that the SR-71 had just accelerated with incredible speed and rose to such a height that the MIG-21s just flew around looking at each other. Their air-to-ground communications indicated that the plane just disappeared in front of their eyes.

I might tell you this as a sort of footnote to your mentioning of the U-2. The intelligence community is filled with rumor. When I got to Turkey, I immediately ran into rumors that Gary Powers' plane had been sabotaged, not shot down. Once I asked someone who'd been in Istanbul for quite a while and he told me that it was reported in a unit history that this had happened. The history said it had been three Turks working for the Soviets and that they'd put a bomb on the plane. I didn't read this history myself, however.

Q. You have explained how we are able to monitor Soviet air traffic to the extent indicated, but it's hard to believe that we could know where all their missile submarines are at any given moment.

A. Maybe so, but that's the way it is. There are some basic ways in which we can keep track of them, for example through the interpretation of their sub-to-base signals which they encode and transmit in bursts that last a fraction of a second. First we record it on giant tape drops several feet apart, where it is played back slowly so that we get the signal clearly. Then the signal will be modulated -- that is, broken down so we can understand it. Then the codes are broken and we get the message, which often turns out to contain information allowing us to tell where they are.

Another way in which we keep track of these subs is much simpler. Often they'll surface someplace and send a weather message.

Q. But don't submarines go for long periods without communicating, maneuvering according to some pre-arranged schedule?

A. Actually, not very often. There are times during a war exercise or communications exercise when they might not transmit for a week or even longer. But we still keep track of them. We've discovered that they're like all Soviet ships in that they travel in patterns. By performing a very complicated, computerized pattern analysis, we are able to know where to look for a particular ship if it doesn't turn up for a while. The idea is that they revert from that pattern only in extreme emergency situation: but during such a situation they'll have to be in communication at least once. We know how many subs they have. And in practical terms, when one of them is not located, NSA units tasked with submarine detection concentrate all their energies on finding it.

Q. How do you know this? Did you ever have responsibility for submarine detection?

A. No. My information comes from two sources. First, the fact that there were analysts sitting right next to me in Karmasel who were tasked on subs. Second, I read what we called TEXTA. TEXTA means "technical extracts of traffic." It is a computer-generated digest of intelligence collected from every communications facility in the world -- how they communicate, what they transmit, and who to. It is the Bible of the SIGINT community. It is constantly updated, and one of an analyst's duties is reading it. You've got to understand that even though each analyst had his own area to handle, he also had to be familiar with other problems. Quite often I would get through my operators base-to-base submarine traffic and I'd have to be able to identify it.

Q. The implications of what you're saying are very serious. In effect, it means that based on your knowledge there is no real "balance of terror" in the world. Theoretically, if we know where every Soviet missile installation, military aircraft and missile submarine is at every moment, we are much closer than anyone realized to a first-strike capacity that would cripple their ability to respond.

A. Check.

Q. How many NSA people were there at Istanbul and in the rest of the installations in Europe?

A. About three thousand in our operation. It would be hard to even guess how many in the rest of Europe.

Q. What were the priorities for gathering information on Soviet operations?

A. First of all, NSA is interested in their long-range bombing forces. This includes their rocket forces, but mainly targets on their long-range bombers. This is because the feeling is that, if there is conflict between us and them, the bombers will be used first, as a way of taking a step short of all-out war. Second, and very close to the bombing capabilities, is the location of their missile submarines. Next would be tasking generated against the Soviet scrambler, which is their way of communicating for all of their services and facilities. After this would be their Cosmos program. After that things like tasking their KGB, their air controllers, their shipping, and all the rest of the things tend to be on the same priority.

Q. All this time, the Soviets must be doing intelligence against us too. What is its scope?

A. Actually, they don't get that much. They aren't able to break our advanced computer generated scrambler system, which accounts for most of the information we transmit. They do a lot of work to determine what our radar is like, and they try to find out things by working on some of the lower level codes used by countries like Germany and the Scandinavian countries we deal with. Their SIGINT operation is run by the KGB.

The key to it is that we have a ring of bases around them. They try to make up for the lack of bases by using trawlers for gathering data, but it's not the same. They're on the defensive.

Q. What do you mean by that?