Quote:
Originally Posted by sirbruce
If anyone who opposes it is villified, then even discussing it can be a negative if you oppose it. I thought I was clear on that point.
|
They're
not being vilified because they oppose it, or because they oppose specific exceptions.
They're being vilified because they were attempting to block any discussion of it and their reasoning for doing so was pretty much read verbatim straight from corporate lobbyists.
If some countries don't like the wording or think that specific exceptions in the proposed treaty go too far, then fine. That's what the discussion is for. They can recommend alternatives or propose removing certain elements. But completely refusing to even discuss the idea of an international treaty to put forth common exceptions (that many countries already have existing versions of) can certainly be interpreted as "opposing protection for...". This isn't about refusing to negotiate on certain clauses, this is about refusing to even entertain the idea of a treaty.
Your theory that they didn't want to discuss a treaty at a UN WIPO meeting because they were worried about bad publicity is laughable. I'm sure if you looked at who was behind their attempt to block the discussion, you can come up with a more intelligent reason for why they did so.