4 Terrible Things About the Intellectual Property Section of the Leaked Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

Yesterday, Wikileaks published a draft of the
intellectual property chapter of the secretive and controversial
Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP).

This document is the first full chapter to be leaked. The TPP is
billed as a free-trade
agreement that will prepare the US and 11 other Pacific-rim
nations. This leak gives clearer insight
about how far-reaching and potentially damaging this agreement,
which the Obama Administration hopes to hammer out by the of the
year, could be. Here are some of the worst features discovered
in the Intellectual Property chapter.

1. Loose Language Means Worse
Laws: 
Earlier this week, Reason contacted
Simon Lester, a trade policy analyst with Cato, regarding the TPP.
Having read prior leaks, he cautioned that “the problem is, a lot
of [TPP] rules are very vague.”

The newly released document shows the same trend. Addressing how
this group of nations will deal with everything from copyrights, to
domain names, to Internet service provider liability, and even
border enforcement,
the language throughout this 95-page chapter is dangerously broad.
Governments have enough trouble reconciling technology and the law
in a productive way, and allowing a centralized body of authority
to make sweeping, international decisions is a poor foundation to
remedy that issue.

2. You Don’t Really Own Your Phone…Or Any Electronic
Device: 
Although
unlocking your phone
has been illegal for nearly two decades in
the US, legislators have been working this year to do away with the
outdated, innovation-stifling
Digital Millenium Copyright Act
. The TPP would
crush these efforts and extend the same bad legislation abroad.

The draft states
that the 12 nations would “provide adequate legal protection and
effective legal remedies against the circumvention of effective
technological measures.” This means that despite having paid for an
iPhone or Xbox One, you would not legally be allowed to tinker with
the device, because the TPP would make it illegal to tamper with
manufacturers’ digital locks that prevent you from from changing
carriers or share copies of your video games.

3. Copyrights and Cronyist Collusion: It’s
no secret that CEOs from the Recording Industry Association of
America (RIAA), Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of
America (PhRMA), International Trademark Association (INTA), and
many others
voiced their support
for the TPP in an open letter to Obama.
Luckily for these large copyright holders, the agreement would
extend copyright terms up to 100 years after an author’s death and
as much as 120 years for unpublished corporate works.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
explains
that “such bloated term lengths benefit only a
vanishingly small portion of available works, and impoverish
the public domain
 of our collective history,” and points
out that “the U.S. will see no new published works enter the public
domain until 2019.”

Compounding this problem, the TPP intends to make service providers liable for
copyright-infringing material that they host. This would
essentially force Comcast, Time Warner Cable, others to become
private Internet police not just for the U.S. government, but for
all 12 countries in the agreement.

4. The U.S. Government is the Leading the
Charge: 
The draft lets readers see where nations
disagreed about terms of the agreement. Thus, we know that the US
pushed for 120-year copyrights, Chile opposed the idea, and
Australia and others proposed 70-year terms. This is consistent
throughout. More than any other, it is the US government that
pushed in favor of stricter rules and regulations. Peter Peter
Maybarduk, a director at the advocacy group Public Citizen,

said
it’s “the Obama administration’s shameful bullying” that
dominates the TPP negotiations. The EFF lauds the “numerous heroic
proposals for fixes, most notably from Canada and Chile” to strike
down the US’s “dangerous provisions.”

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/14/tpp-five-worst-things-found-in-the-wikil
via IFTTT

"The Terminator" Explains Janet Yellen's Confirmation To The Middle Class

Submitted by Simon Black of Sovereign Man blog,

“It’s a big club…. and you ain’t in it.”

 

– George Carlin

Irony: The woman who is set to become one of the most powerful people in the world begins her confirmation hearing today. And few people have ever even heard of her.

It must be a byproduct of the government-controlled education system; people still think they live in a free country with a representative democracy. It’s anything but.

Voting, elections, etc. are all just illusions to make people think that they have some influence in society.

A tiny elite orchestrates the whole system. And one of the most influential conductors is the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, a post about to be taken over by Janet Yellen.

Since most people have no idea how central banking really works, her confirmation hearing today is just a footnote.

Even people who are otherwise financially sophisticated simply trust that the men behind the curtain know what they’re doing.

This is quite strange when you consider that central bankers have nearly total control over the economy.

In their sole discretion, they are able to set interest rates, conjure money out of thin air, finance trillion-dollar government deficits, bail out commercial banks, etc.

And through these tools, they have the power to manipulate the prices of just about anything, from the Google stock to real estate in Thailand to turnips in Sri Lanka.

For the last several years, the US central bank has set the example for the rest of the world in aggressively using their policy tools.

Most significantly, they have unabashedly printed money in unprecedented quantities. And this has not been without consequence.

For some, the effects have been beneficial.

Rapid expansion of the money supply has pushed asset prices up all over the world. Stocks. Bonds. Many commodities. US Farmland. Artwork. Fine wines. Just about every asset class imaginable is near its all-time high.

People who are already wealthy have the available funds to invest in these markets. So their wealth has grown even more– exponentially.

The middle class, on the other hand, is experiencing an entirely different effect of money printing– retail price inflation.

And anyone who has been to a gas station, airport, university, doctor’s office, grocery store, etc. over the last few years understands this phenomenon very well.

A typical middle class family has little excess cash to invest after paying for rapidly increasing living expenses. Food. Fuel. Mortgage. Insurance. Etc.

And whatever wages or savings they have are being eaten away by inflation. So while the wealthy are getting wealthier exponentially, the middle class is actually getting poorer.

This explains why the wealth gap in the Land of the Free is the largest since 1929 at the start of the Great Depression.

Central bankers are responsible for much of this. In conjuring money out of thin air, they are benefitting one segment of society at the expense of another.

And with Janet Yellen at the head of the Fed, you can be sure that nothing is going to change.

Yellen has made it clear that she will continue to print unlimited quantities of money despite overwhelming data that such actions are ineffective and destructive for the the majority of the population.

Kyle Reese from the first Terminator movie sums this up rather succinctly here:

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/IbfuKyaELzc/story01.htm Tyler Durden

“The Terminator” Explains Janet Yellen’s Confirmation To The Middle Class

Submitted by Simon Black of Sovereign Man blog,

“It’s a big club…. and you ain’t in it.”

 

– George Carlin

Irony: The woman who is set to become one of the most powerful people in the world begins her confirmation hearing today. And few people have ever even heard of her.

It must be a byproduct of the government-controlled education system; people still think they live in a free country with a representative democracy. It’s anything but.

Voting, elections, etc. are all just illusions to make people think that they have some influence in society.

A tiny elite orchestrates the whole system. And one of the most influential conductors is the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, a post about to be taken over by Janet Yellen.

Since most people have no idea how central banking really works, her confirmation hearing today is just a footnote.

Even people who are otherwise financially sophisticated simply trust that the men behind the curtain know what they’re doing.

This is quite strange when you consider that central bankers have nearly total control over the economy.

In their sole discretion, they are able to set interest rates, conjure money out of thin air, finance trillion-dollar government deficits, bail out commercial banks, etc.

And through these tools, they have the power to manipulate the prices of just about anything, from the Google stock to real estate in Thailand to turnips in Sri Lanka.

For the last several years, the US central bank has set the example for the rest of the world in aggressively using their policy tools.

Most significantly, they have unabashedly printed money in unprecedented quantities. And this has not been without consequence.

For some, the effects have been beneficial.

Rapid expansion of the money supply has pushed asset prices up all over the world. Stocks. Bonds. Many commodities. US Farmland. Artwork. Fine wines. Just about every asset class imaginable is near its all-time high.

People who are already wealthy have the available funds to invest in these markets. So their wealth has grown even more– exponentially.

The middle class, on the other hand, is experiencing an entirely different effect of money printing– retail price inflation.

And anyone who has been to a gas station, airport, university, doctor’s office, grocery store, etc. over the last few years understands this phenomenon very well.

A typical middle class family has little excess cash to invest after paying for rapidly increasing living expenses. Food. Fuel. Mortgage. Insurance. Etc.

And whatever wages or savings they have are being eaten away by inflation. So while the wealthy are getting wealthier exponentially, the middle class is actually getting poorer.

This explains why the wealth gap in the Land of the Free is the largest since 1929 at the start of the Great Depression.

Central bankers are responsible for much of this. In conjuring money out of thin air, they are benefitting one segment of society at the expense of another.

And with Janet Yellen at the head of the Fed, you can be sure that nothing is going to change.

Yellen has made it clear that she will continue to print unlimited quantities of money despite overwhelming data that such actions are ineffective and destructive for the the majority of the population.

Kyle Reese from the first Terminator movie sums this up rather succinctly here:

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/IbfuKyaELzc/story01.htm Tyler Durden

US Treasury 30yr Auction Post-Mortem

Today the treasury auctioned off 16bln 30yr bonds at 1pm (ET).  This occurred during a fairly volatile backdrop.  Janet Yellen was answering questions from the Senate for much of the “setup” period.  Her testimony was fairly QE – supportive, and so the bond market rallied during her entire testimony.  Then we had a 3.5bln 10yr POMO @ 11am (ET) 2 hours before the auction.  This was the pre-auction crescendo that many day traders are familiar with.

Bonds rallied right into the 20minute period after the 10yr POMO in a crescendo of volume….and then fell back down to the overnight VWAP after the 1pm 30yr auction tailed 1.5 basis points.

(pictured are 30yr UB futures vs inverse DX futures)

I suggested selling bonds at 11:20am this morning into the crescendo of volume, and covering after the auction.  As a trader, i couldn’t really think of anything else to do.

Up until the 10yr POMO, the 10/30 curve was stable at 108 basis points.   This indicated that a concentrated short setup had not taken place.  However, after 11:20am, 30yr bonds started to underperform (both outright price and on the curve), indicating that the setup (selling bonds pre-auction) had begun.  I thought the timing of this setup selling very coincidental.

While the treasury market is still generally strong post-auction (the belly inparticular), the fact that the 30yr auction tailed indicates that the large short base pre-Yellen speech release has mostly covered and the market should be fairly stable in the current price range.

 (UST yield change on day)

Typically, the treasury market builds a concession pre-auction, and actual investors of US Treasury paper buy these auctions to get long.  Today that is a scary trade (getting long) because the market has repriced higher after Yellen’s early-release speech last night.

As a day trader, i won’t participate in that trade…but as a portfolio manager, i’m sure that many are.
 With Janet Yellen at the helm, its clear that the economy will need to clearly demonstrate deep economic strength before she will consider reducing QE…and that may be a long time away.

If you are interested in this type of bond market commentary intraday, in addition to following along with the trades that i am doing in the market, then i suggest trying out my paypal subscription twitter feed.

-GovtTrader

 

http://govttrader.blogspot.com/

https://twitter.com/GovtTrader


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/hGIJyK_2q8o/story01.htm govttrader

What Those Youth-Oriented Obamacare Ads Leave Out: It's Generational Theft!

I’ve got a
column up at Time.com (and in the next print edition) talking about
those
awful “Got Insurance?”
ads aimed at get Millennials to sign up
for Obamacare.

Here’s the start of
the piece
:

Is massive stupidity covered under Obamacare? What about sexual
promiscuity and heavy drinking? Those are some of the questions
raised by a controversial ad campaign that aims to encourage
younger Americans to sign up for health-insurance plans created by
the Affordable Care Act.

But there’s a deeper issue that the new “Got Insurance?”
campaign ignores completely: Why should young and relatively poor
people be forced to sign up for insurance that charges them
above-market rates to subsidize rates for old and relatively
wealthy people?

I trust that I’m not overly optimistic when I conclude:

Younger Americans may indeed be reckless enough to do keg stands
and have unprotected sex on a regular basis, but they’re not so
dumb as the “Got Insurance?” ads–or the architects of
Obamacare–seem to think.


Read the whole thing
.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/14/what-those-youth-oriented-obamacare-ads
via IFTTT

What Those Youth-Oriented Obamacare Ads Leave Out: It’s Generational Theft!

I’ve got a
column up at Time.com (and in the next print edition) talking about
those
awful “Got Insurance?”
ads aimed at get Millennials to sign up
for Obamacare.

Here’s the start of
the piece
:

Is massive stupidity covered under Obamacare? What about sexual
promiscuity and heavy drinking? Those are some of the questions
raised by a controversial ad campaign that aims to encourage
younger Americans to sign up for health-insurance plans created by
the Affordable Care Act.

But there’s a deeper issue that the new “Got Insurance?”
campaign ignores completely: Why should young and relatively poor
people be forced to sign up for insurance that charges them
above-market rates to subsidize rates for old and relatively
wealthy people?

I trust that I’m not overly optimistic when I conclude:

Younger Americans may indeed be reckless enough to do keg stands
and have unprotected sex on a regular basis, but they’re not so
dumb as the “Got Insurance?” ads–or the architects of
Obamacare–seem to think.


Read the whole thing
.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/14/what-those-youth-oriented-obamacare-ads
via IFTTT

Unfractional Repo Banking: When Leverage Is "Limited" By Infinity

Today’s release of the 2013 edition of the Global Shadow Banking Monitoring Report by the Financial Stability Board doesn’t contain anything that frequent readers of this site don’t know already on a topic we have covered since 2009. It does however have a notable sidebar which explains the magic of “fractional repo banking” – a topic made popular in late 2011 following the collapse of MF Global – when it was revealed that as part of the Primary Dealer’s operating model, a core part of the business was participating in UK-based repo chains in which the collateral could be recycled effectively without limit and without a haircut, affording Jon Corzine’s organization virtually unlimited leverage starting with a modest initial margin.

Naturally, any product that can allow participants infinite leverage is something that all “sophisticated” market participants not only know about, but abuse on a regular basis. The fact that this “unfractional repo banking” is at the heart of the unregulated $71.2 trillion shadow banking system, the less the general public knows about it the better.

Which is why we were happy that the FSB was kind enough to explain in two short paragraphs and one even simpler chart, just how the aggregate leverage for the participants in even the simplest repo chain promptly becomes exponential, far above the “sum of the parts”, and approaches infinity in virtually no time.

From the FSB:

As a simple illustration of the way in which repo transactions can combine to produce adverse effects on the system that can be larger than the sum of their parts, suppose that investor A borrows cash for a short period of time from investor B and posts securities as collateral. Investor A could use some of that cash to purchase additional securities, post those as further collateral with investor B to receive more cash, and so on multiple times. The result of this series of ‘leveraging transactions’ is that investor A ends up posting more collateral in total with investor B than they initially owned outright. Consequently, small changes in the value of those securities have a larger effect on the resilience of both counterparties. In turn, investor B could undertake a similar series of financing transactions with investor C, re-using the collateral it has taken from investor A, and so on.

 

Exhibit A2-5 mechanically traces out the aggregate leverage that can arise in this example. Even with relatively conservative assumptions, some configurations of repo transactions boost aggregate leverage alongside the stock of money-like liabilities and interconnectedness in ways that might materially increase systemic risk. For example, even with a relatively high collateral haircut of 10%, a three-investor chain can achieve a leverage multiplier of roughly 2-4, which is in the same ball park as the financial leverage of the hedge fund sector globally. It is therefore imperative from a risk assessment perspective that adequate data are available. Trade repositories, as proposed by FSB Workstream 5, could be very helpful in this regard.

 

So… three participants result in 4x leverage; four: in roughly 6x, and so on. Of course, these are conservative estimates: in the real, collateral-strapped world, the amount of collateral reuse, and thus the number of participants is orders of magnitude higher. Which means that after just a few turns of rehypothecation, leverage approaches infinity. Needless to say, with infinite leverage, even the tiniest decline in asset values would result in a full wipe out of one collateral chain member, which then spreads like contagion, and destroys everyone else who has reused that particular collateral.

All of this, incidentally, explains why down days are now prohibited. Because with every risk increase, there is an additional turn of collateral re-use, and even more participants for whom the Mutual Assured Destruction of complete obliteration should the weakest link implode, becomes all too real.

That, in a nutshell, are the mechanics. As to the common sense implications of having an unregulated funding market which explicitly allows infinite leverage, we doubt we have to explain those to the non-Econ PhD readers out there.

Source


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/lEw8JkuqXPA/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Unfractional Repo Banking: When Leverage Is “Limited” By Infinity

Today’s release of the 2013 edition of the Global Shadow Banking Monitoring Report by the Financial Stability Board doesn’t contain anything that frequent readers of this site don’t know already on a topic we have covered since 2009. It does however have a notable sidebar which explains the magic of “fractional repo banking” – a topic made popular in late 2011 following the collapse of MF Global – when it was revealed that as part of the Primary Dealer’s operating model, a core part of the business was participating in UK-based repo chains in which the collateral could be recycled effectively without limit and without a haircut, affording Jon Corzine’s organization virtually unlimited leverage starting with a modest initial margin.

Naturally, any product that can allow participants infinite leverage is something that all “sophisticated” market participants not only know about, but abuse on a regular basis. The fact that this “unfractional repo banking” is at the heart of the unregulated $71.2 trillion shadow banking system, the less the general public knows about it the better.

Which is why we were happy that the FSB was kind enough to explain in two short paragraphs and one even simpler chart, just how the aggregate leverage for the participants in even the simplest repo chain promptly becomes exponential, far above the “sum of the parts”, and approaches infinity in virtually no time.

From the FSB:

As a simple illustration of the way in which repo transactions can combine to produce adverse effects on the system that can be larger than the sum of their parts, suppose that investor A borrows cash for a short period of time from investor B and posts securities as collateral. Investor A could use some of that cash to purchase additional securities, post those as further collateral with investor B to receive more cash, and so on multiple times. The result of this series of ‘leveraging transactions’ is that investor A ends up posting more collateral in total with investor B than they initially owned outright. Consequently, small changes in the value of those securities have a larger effect on the resilience of both counterparties. In turn, investor B could undertake a similar series of financing transactions with investor C, re-using the collateral it has taken from investor A, and so on.

 

Exhibit A2-5 mechanically traces out the aggregate leverage that can arise in this example. Even with relatively conservative assumptions, some configurations of repo transactions boost aggregate leverage alongside the stock of money-like liabilities and interconnectedness in ways that might materially increase systemic risk. For example, even with a relatively high collateral haircut of 10%, a three-investor chain can achieve a leverage multiplier of roughly 2-4, which is in the same ball park as the financial leverage of the hedge fund sector globally. It is therefore imperative from a risk assessment perspective that adequate data are available. Trade repositories, as proposed by FSB Workstream 5, could be very helpful in this regard.

 

So… three participants result in 4x leverage; four: in roughly 6x, and so on. Of course, these are conservative estimates: in the real, collateral-strapped world, the amount of collateral reuse, and thus the number of participants is orders of magnitude higher. Which means that after just a few turns of rehypothecation, leverage approaches infinity. Needless to say, with infinite leverage, even the tiniest decline in asset values would result in a full wipe out of one collateral chain member, which then spreads like contagion, and destroys everyone else who has reused that particular collateral.

All of this, incidentally, explains why down days are now prohibited. Because with every risk increase, there is an additional turn of collateral re-use, and even more participants for whom the Mutual Assured Destruction of complete obliteration should the weakest link implode, becomes all too real.

That, in a nutshell, are the mechanics. As to the common sense implications of having an unregulated funding market which explicitly allows infinite leverage, we doubt we have to explain those to the non-Econ PhD readers out there.

Source


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/lEw8JkuqXPA/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Russian Officials Come To Egypt, Reportedly To Negotiate Arms Deal

Egyptian tankRussian officials are
reportedly in Egypt
to negotiate an arms deal in what the BBC
is describing as “the highest level visit to Egypt by a Russian
delegation in years.”

Last month, the U.S.
suspended some of its military aid
to Egypt following the
military-backed government’s crackdown on supporters of ousted
President Morsi, who was removed from power by the military, a move
which the Obama administration has resisted
calling a coup
.

The suspension of aid was a significant change in U.S policy
towards Egypt. According to the Congressional
Research Service
, “Between 1948 and 2011, the United States
provided Egypt with a total of $71.6 billion in bilateral foreign
aid, including $1.3 billion a year in military aid from 1987 to the
present.”

The meeting between Russian and Egyptian officials is an
indication that the military-backed Egyptian government may be able
to enjoy a huge amount of foreign military aid without the U.S.
Despite the fact that the meeting comes after some American
military aid to Egypt was suspended, Russian foreign
minister Sergei
Lavrov
has claimed that Russia is not looking to replace “any
country.”

However, political analyst Samir Ghattas told
Euronews
that the Obama administration’s changing relationship
with Egypt has prompted Egyptian officials to revive relations with
Russia:

Samir Ghattas: “The policies of the United States have caused
serious unease and confusion in the Middle East and in Egypt in
particular, especially after the overthrow of the Muslim
Brotherhood regime. That led to new policies from the US towards
Egypt like pressure on the army and reducing economic and military
aid after a while.

“As a result, Egypt has sought out new relations or to be more
precise, revived its old relations with different regions of the
world, especially with the Russian Federation and maybe later with
China, India and other rising powers.

“I suspect that there is also a need to develop economic
relations between the two countries, given that Russia is a big
exporter of wheat, which Egypt desperately needs.

If Russia and Egypt do agree to an arms deal, which could be
worth up to $2 billion, it would be the latest example of Russia
extending its influence in the Middle East and being a nuisance for
American policy-makers.

Russia has been one of the Assad regime’s strongest allies
throughout the civil war in Syria and has, along with China,
prevented the United Nations Security Council from imposing

sanctions
on Syria while also providing the Assad regime with

financial support
.

Last year, Russia sealed an arms deal with Iraq worth
more than $4.2 billion
, a move Bloomberg described as “a
challenge to the Middle Eastern country’s military ties with the
U.S.”

Outside of the Middle East, Russia has granted
temporary asylum
to NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden, a
decision that contributed to Obama canceling
a meeting
with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

According to
Bloomberg
, Egypt is looking to an unnamed country in the
Persian Gulf to help finance a deal to purchase Russian
weapons:

Egyptian officials are seeking financing from an unidentified
Persian Gulf country to buy as much as $4 billion of Russian arms,
Palestinian newspaper Dunia al-Watan reported Nov. 6, citing
unidentified people familiar with the matter. Saudi Arabia, United
Arab Emirates and Kuwait have pledged at least $12 billion to
Egypt’s new government.

The news of the meeting between Russian and Egyptian officials
comes soon after
it was reported
that the U.S. would no longer be buying Mi-17
helicopters from Moscow-based exporter Rosoboronexport.  

Egypt may have enjoyed significant American military support in
the past, but recent events suggest that Russia is ready and
willing to take America’s place and become a significant arms donor
to the military-backed government, a move that would contribute to
more frustration at the State Department.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/14/russian-officials-come-to-egypt-reported
via IFTTT

Quote Of The Day From Gary "Batman" Gensler

There was a lot of competition for Quote of the Day today. Between President Obama’s double-speak, a rationally exuberant Janet Yellen, and overnight idiocy from Suga and Abe, choices were numerous. But the following from Gary Gensler – still chair of the CFTC – took the provberial biscuit:

  • *GENSLER: ‘I THINK MARKETS WORK BEST WHEN THEY’RE TRANSPARENT’ (but)
  • *GENSLER SAYS HE ‘BENFITED FROM DARKNESS’ IN WALL STREET CAREER

Well that sums it all up.. The question is – will Massad have a CFTC-shaped floodlight fixed to the roof of the agencies’ building?

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/QEdD54zSElY/story01.htm Tyler Durden