September 2012 - lac-discuss-es

Re: FW: Actualizaci�n sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga
by carlton.samuels＠gmail.com Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: FW: Actualización sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga De: carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com Hola Holly: Por supuesto, los problemas de privacidad que usted destacó atraen a un animado debate y las respuestas muy emocionales. El ALAC ha replanteado su posición y, al al menos durante los últimos 3 años, esa posición se ha reiterado: el reconocimiento de que en cumplimiento de los derechos de libertad de expresión, algunos grupos, especialmente los que podrían ser políticamente inconveniente, de hecho merecen algún tipo de protección, un abrazo comunidad formal de servicios de privacidad definidas y sus proveedores, las condiciones en que un proveedor de la privacidad sería autorizado. Best, - Carlton ============================== Carlton Samuels A Móvil: 876-818-1799 * Estrategia, Planificación, Gobierno, Evaluación y Turnaround * ============================= En Sun, Sep 9, 2012 a las 8:47 pm, acebo Raiche <h.raiche(a)internode.on.net> escribió: > Hi Carlton > > Privacy was one of the really hard issues that the Whois Review had to > grapple with. If you look at the initial report (as opposed to the Final > and Final Final reports) two privacy issues are there. The first is how to > determine registrant eligibility for the privacy server. Should it be > confined to individuals, or include organisations (clear candidates would > be human rights groups in many countries, womens' refuges etc) Trying to > define eligibility will be a challenge. The other challenge is to define > who has legitimate access to the contact information held by the privacy > server. 'Law enforcement agencies' was the initial thought. But in some > countries, private organisations also perform law enforcement tasks under > contract to the agency. They are performing legitimate law enforcement > tasks but aren't themselves, agencies. Should they have access. Even more > difficult are the countries where the state itself is the oppressor - and > its 'law enforcement' agencies are the very reason for the need for > privacy. > > I'm sure that is the reason the Final Final report backed away from any > details on the proposal - and probably why discussion is being fostered now. > > I suspect there will be many varied and divergent views within ALAC - all > of them legitimate. Providing input on what is a complex, vexed issue will > be a challenge for GAC - and for ALAC. > > Holly > > On 08/09/2012, at 12:46 AM, Carlton Samuels wrote: > > > FYI. Note the specific request for advice via GAC on data protection. > > - Carlton > > > > ============================== > > Carlton A Samuels > > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > > *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* > > ============================= > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Kurt Pritz <kurt.pritz(a)icann.org> > > Date: Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:26 PM > > Subject: [soac-discussion] FW: Update on the RAA Negotiations Since > Prague > > To: "soac-discussion(a)icann.org" <soac-discussion(a)icann.org> > > Cc: Matt Serlin <matt.serlin(a)markmonitor.com> > > > > > > Dear SO/AC Chairs, > > > > **** > > > > Recognizing the broad interest in the ICANN community on the RAA > > negotiations, we wanted to provide you with a brief update on the work > > conducted since the Prague Meeting for you to share with your members. > > > > **** > > > > Since Prague, the negotiation teams have reviewed the input received from > > the Community in order to identify possible path forwards on the complex > > issues that have been put on the table in these negotiations. Several > > meetings have taken place and are scheduled prior to Toronto, including > > plans to invite the GAC to provide input from data protection experts on > > several specific issues. There is also an agreement among the > negotiation > > teams to begin analysis of a potential framework for a privacy/proxy > > accreditation program to be explored with the broader ICANN community. > > > > **** > > > > For more information on these important negotiations, please visit the > > ICANN wiki at: > > > https://community.icann.org/display/RAA/Negotiations+Between+ICANN+and+Regi… > > > > **** > > > > Sincerely, > > > > **** > > > > Kurt Pritz (ICANN) and Matt Serlin (MarkMonitor) > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > ** ** > > <smime.p7s>_______________________________________________ > > At-Large mailing list > > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/5c8fc6bec4.html --]]

1 0

Re: FW: Actualizaci�n sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga
by h.raiche＠internode.on.net Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: FW: Actualización sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga De: h.raiche(a)internode.on.net Hola Carlton Privacidad fue uno de los temas realmente difíciles que la Revisión de Whois tenido que lidiar. Si nos fijamos en el informe inicial (a diferencia de los informes finales y la final) dos ediciones de la aislamiento están ahí. El primero es cómo determinar la elegibilidad solicitante de registro para el servidor de privacidad. En caso de que se limite a los individuos, organizaciones o incluir (candidatos claros serían los grupos de derechos humanos en muchos países, los refugios de mujeres ', etc) tratando de definir la elegibilidad será un reto. El otro reto es definir quién tiene acceso legítimo a la información de contacto en poder del servidor de privacidad. "Agencias de aplicación de la ley" era la idea inicial. Pero en algunos países, las organizaciones privadas también realizan tareas de aplicación de la ley en virtud de un contrato con la agencia. Están llevando a cabo tareas legítimas de la ley, pero no son ellos mismos, agencias. En caso de que tengan ac! ceso. Aún más difícil son los países en los que el propio Estado es el opresor - y las agencias de su 'orden público' a! volver a la razón misma de la necesidad de privacidad. Estoy seguro de que esa es la razón del informe Final se apartó de todos los detalles sobre la propuesta - y probablemente por eso la discusión se está fomentando ahora. Yo sospecho que habrá muchos puntos de vista diversos y divergentes dentro de ALAC - todos ellos legítimos. Aportando conocimientos sobre lo que es una cuestión compleja, controvertida será un reto para los GAC - y por ALAC. Acebo El 08/09/2012, a las 12:46 AM, Carlton Samuels escribiÃ³: > FYI. Note the specific request for advice via GAC on data protection. > - Carlton > > ============================== > Carlton A Samuels > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* > ============================= > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Kurt Pritz <kurt.pritz(a)icann.org> > Date: Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:26 PM > Subject: [soac-discussion] FW: Update on the RAA Negotiations Since Prague > To: "soac-discussion(a)icann.org" <soac-discussion(a)icann.org> > Cc: Matt Serlin <matt.serlin(a)markmonitor.com> > > > Dear SO/AC Chairs, > > **** > > Recognizing the broad interest in the ICANN community on the RAA > negotiations, we wanted to provide you with a brief update on the work > conducted since the Prague Meeting for you to share with your members. > > **** > > Since Prague, the negotiation teams have reviewed the input received from > the Community in order to identify possible path forwards on the complex > issues that have been put on the table in these negotiations. Several > meetings have taken place and are scheduled prior to Toronto, including > plans to invite the GAC to provide input from data protection experts on > several specific issues. There is also an agreement among the negotiation > teams to begin analysis of a potential framework for a privacy/proxy > accreditation program to be explored with the broader ICANN community. > > **** > > For more information on these important negotiations, please visit the > ICANN wiki at: > https://community.icann.org/display/RAA/Negotiations+Between+ICANN+and+Regi… > > **** > > Sincerely, > > **** > > Kurt Pritz (ICANN) and Matt Serlin (MarkMonitor) > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > ** ** > <smime.p7s>_______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/52cca644c4.html --]]

1 0

Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociaci�n Trans Pac�fico sobre IP
by hongxueipr＠gmail.com Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociación Trans Pacífico sobre IP De: hongxueipr(a)gmail.com > Hmmm, helluva thing.....wonder what the fellas in South Korea, China and > India are thinking? > negociación tal vez después de la participación formal de Japón. India no es un país del Pacífico geográficamente, sino que todo depende de interpretación. China se ha sentido fuertemente que está siendo rodeado por esta "Asociación" net por su larga costa del Pacífico. Aunque China tiene expresó su interés en por lo menos observar la negociación por fin Cumbre APEC en noviembre de 2011, se rechazó. Es poco probable que China sería bienvenido en la cumbre de la APEC en estos momentos en Rusia. Hong > > On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < > salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> The TPP will be worse than the SOPA. >> >> Add this to the EFF link:- >> >> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/27/pacific-free-trade-deal >> **** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** >> http://www.alternet.org/story/156059/trans-pacific_partnership%3A_under_cov… >> >> >> This was sent to me by one of the members of the ALS that I am a part of. >> Pay particular attention to the "NAFTA" on steroids bit. What is also >> interesting is the news that Russia has just signed an MoU with the US >> strengthening greater partnership, notwithstanding the support that it got >> from the US in joining the WTO, You can imagine that if Russia is persuaded >> to join the TPP then the likelihood that they will receive the relevant >> traction to widen the circle of the TPP Party/Parade will definitely cause >> the concerns that was raised by the EFF that was shared to us by Carlton, >> see: >> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/tpp-creates-liabilities-isps-and-put-… to >> be a reality in the not too distant future. This means ISP liabilities >> amongst a host of other things. >> >> >> On another note, Mr Wu Hongbo is the new Under Secretary General for the >> United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA), see: >> http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/usg/index.shtml >> >> >> For developing countries, the concept of "free trade" may sound lucrative >> but the reality is that it only disadvantages one (the loser). There is no >> such thing as a free lunch. To see why this is relevant to our discussions, >> I recommend visiting the link that Carlton shared earlier. >> >> >> I find the US position on this to be schizophrenic because on one end they >> are proclaiming an open and free internet and taking extraordinary measures >> to run miles away from any Treaty negotiations (please note that I am not >> for nor against Treaties, merely thinking critically about the issues) and >> yet they are going to extraordinary lengths to go around the world by >> sending their highest political officer to gain momentum for the TPP. >> >> >> It brings to mind that nations at the end of the day are about interests >> and "as long as it suits them". I will also hasten to add that there are >> many citizens in the US who are also wanting greater transparency around >> the TPP negotiations as it is likely to impact the architecture of the >> Internet and the rules of the game. >> >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> Sala >> >> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Carlton Samuels < >> carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Here's a development you might wish to follow. Some analysts say it is >>> even more dangerous than pernicious ACTA to the public interest. Those >>> countries in the L & CA region with a Pacific littoral may be party to it. >>> >>> >>> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/tpp-creates-liabilities-isps-and-put-… >>> >>> >>> - Carlton >>> >>> ============================== >>> Carlton A Samuels >>> Mobile: 876-818-1799 >>> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* >>> ============================= >>> _______________________________________________ >>> APAC-Discuss mailing list >>> APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss >>> >>> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > APAC-Discuss mailing list > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org Profesor Dr.Hong Xue Director del Instituto para la Política de Internet y derecho (IIPL) Universidad Normal de Beijing http://www.iipl.org.cn/ 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China, _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/12396f817e.html --]]

1 0

Re: FW: Actualizaci�n sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga
by salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro＠gmail.com Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: FW: Actualización sobre las Negociaciones RAA desde Praga De: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro(a)gmail.com El lunes, 10 de septiembre 2012 a las 1:47 PM, acebo Raiche <h.raiche(a)internode.on.net> escribió: > Hi Carlton > > Privacy was one of the really hard issues that the Whois Review had to > grapple with. If you look at the initial report (as opposed to the Final > and Final Final reports) two privacy issues are there. The first is how to > determine registrant eligibility for the privacy server. Should it be > confined to individuals, or include organisations (clear candidates would > be human rights groups in many countries, womens' refuges etc) Trying to > define eligibility will be a challenge. The other challenge is to define > who has legitimate access to the contact information held by the privacy > server. 'Law enforcement agencies' was the initial thought. But in some > countries, private organisations also perform law enforcement tasks under > contract to the agency. They are performing legitimate law enforcement > tasks but aren't themselves, agencies. Should they have access. Even more > difficult are the countries where the state itself is the oppressor - and > its 'law enforcement' agencies a! > re the very reason for the need for privacy. > el proxy Whois y el Estudio de privacidad y proxy Whois Relé y Privacidad Revela estudio que se informó a la comunidad mundial a la conclusión en 2012 pero no ha habido un cambio en la que el resultado de este estudio se entregado, que es ahora de 2013, se desprende que el proceso de la política o PDP sin duda, tienen que tener los resultados en la mezcla. Sin embargo, esto no es decir que las discusiones deberían esperar los resultados de los estudios, creo que un poco de trabajo se debe hacer ahora y un buen punto de partida posible para crear un referencia temporal modelada en torno a las conclusiones del Consejo Europeo de Nacional de Registros de TLD. > > I'm sure that is the reason the Final Final report backed away from any > details on the proposal - and probably why discussion is being fostered now. > > I suspect there will be many varied and divergent views within ALAC - all > of them legitimate. Providing input on what is a complex, vexed issue will > be a challenge for GAC - and for ALAC. > > Holly > > On 08/09/2012, at 12:46 AM, Carlton Samuels wrote: > > > FYI. Note the specific request for advice via GAC on data protection. > > - Carlton > > > > ============================== > > Carlton A Samuels > > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > > *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* > > ============================= > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Kurt Pritz <kurt.pritz(a)icann.org> > > Date: Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:26 PM > > Subject: [soac-discussion] FW: Update on the RAA Negotiations Since > Prague > > To: "soac-discussion(a)icann.org" <soac-discussion(a)icann.org> > > Cc: Matt Serlin <matt.serlin(a)markmonitor.com> > > > > > > Dear SO/AC Chairs, > > > > **** > > > > Recognizing the broad interest in the ICANN community on the RAA > > negotiations, we wanted to provide you with a brief update on the work > > conducted since the Prague Meeting for you to share with your members. > > > > **** > > > > Since Prague, the negotiation teams have reviewed the input received from > > the Community in order to identify possible path forwards on the complex > > issues that have been put on the table in these negotiations. Several > > meetings have taken place and are scheduled prior to Toronto, including > > plans to invite the GAC to provide input from data protection experts on > > several specific issues. There is also an agreement among the > negotiation > > teams to begin analysis of a potential framework for a privacy/proxy > > accreditation program to be explored with the broader ICANN community. > > > > **** > > > > For more information on these important negotiations, please visit the > > ICANN wiki at: > > > https://community.icann.org/display/RAA/Negotiations+Between+ICANN+and+Regi… > > > > **** > > > > Sincerely, > > > > **** > > > > Kurt Pritz (ICANN) and Matt Serlin (MarkMonitor) > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > **** > > > > ** ** > > <smime.p7s>_______________________________________________ > > At-Large mailing list > > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > > _______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro alias Sala PO Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @ SalanietaT Skype: Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Celular Fiji: +679 998 2851 _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/d4e1e33778.html --]]

1 0

Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociaci�n Trans Pac�fico sobre IP
by salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro＠gmail.com Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociación Trans Pacífico sobre IP De: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro(a)gmail.com Queridos todos, Actualmente, las negociaciones del TPP, la 14 ª vuelta se llevará a cabo en Leesburg, Virginia de 6 hasta 15 septiembre 2012. Hoy es el día asignado para los que se han inscrito para participar en las conversaciones las partes interesadas. Había que registrarse para participar. Usted puede visite: http://www.ustr.gov/tpp acceder a aspectos más destacados y resúmenes y TLC reales. Se ha informado de otras fuentes de noticias que Su Excelencia B. Obama quiere concluir el TPP a finales de este año. Hay un interesante artículo de Gordon Campbell, ver: Saludos cordiales, Sala _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/a65d5c82f6.html --]]

1 0

Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociaci�n Trans Pac�fico sobre IP
by salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro＠gmail.com Sept. 9, 2012

Sept. 9, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociación Trans Pacífico sobre IP De: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro(a)gmail.com Queridos todos, > Desde discutiendo de política regional, ahora me permito sugerir que acercará al las opciones técnicas para la protección del contenido digital de otro modo conocido como Sistemas de Gestión de Derechos Digitales (DRM). Sabemos que Internet tiene trajo el acceso al conocimiento, los mercados, la cultura de una manera que ha trascendido lo que se arquitectos originales nunca imaginaron. Sabemos que la música, los productos que se comercializan en la red son digitales productos / contenidos y muchos sostienen que se clasifican como servicios (pero lo haré No vaya a la politización de las terminologías y semántica). Me gusta cómo lo expresa a través de CISCO "* La proliferación de tecnologías que permitir el mercado de masas copia digital y la conversión analógico / digital, combinado con software de intercambio de archivos y peer-to-peer que son fácilmente accesible a través de conexiones de Internet de alta velocidad, han dado lugar a un aumento de preocupación con la distribución de copias no autorizadas de los medios con derechos de autor. En particular, las industrias del cine y la música continúan la búsqueda de técnico y soluciones normativas para combatir la piratería digital "* Sede.: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/gov/issues/ip_rights.html El análisis realizado por el FEP https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/tpp-creates-liabilities-isps-and-put-… como primero compartió en esta lista por Carlton destaca unos pocos puntos críticos: (1) Tres Strikes Políticas y Leyes exigen la cancelación del acceso; (2) Coloca el requisito de que los intermediarios de Internet (ISP, Red Proveedores) para supervisar su contenido y filtrar todas las infracciones de derechos de autor; (3) Los intermediarios Fuerzas de Internet a revelar las identidades de sus clientes a las partes interesadas derechos de propiedad intelectual sobre una alegaciÃ³n de infracciÃ³n de derechos de autor [en Speak normal, amplÃa las capacidades de aplicaciÃ³n de la ley a casi todo el mundo reclamar derechos de propiedad intelectual] Hay muchas otras amenazas, pero por el bien de continuar la discusiÃ³n, Voy a decir esto. Hay todo tipo de implicaciones sobre la privacidad y proxy Servidores etc y me temo que alguien acaba de abrir la caja de Pandora. Para el mundo en desarrollo, si considera que el costo de la filtraciÃ³n por su ISP o Proveedor de la red ya es alta, va a llegar aÃºn mÃ¡s alto, porque como va a costar a los ISPs y por supuesto que el costo serÃ¡ transmitido a nosotros los consumidores, los usuarios comunes de Internet. Ha habido mucho apoyo y comunicados de prensa sobre la regulaciÃ³n de Internet. El TPP es un Tratado y es un Tratado que amenaza directamente el acceso ..... _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/843ef889fe.html --]]

1 0

Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociaci�n Trans Pac�fico sobre IP
by salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro＠gmail.com Sept. 9, 2012

Sept. 9, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociación Trans Pacífico sobre IP De: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro(a)gmail.com Es por eso que China nunca será invitado a la Parte TPP: Asuntos Económicos, Energía, Agricultura y Comercio: Fomento de una Rules-Based Sistema en el Consejo Económico EEUU-China Relación <http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/rm/2012/197015.htm> 29/08/2012 15:23 EDT Fomento de un sistema basado en reglas en la relación Estados Unidos-China Economic Observaciones José W. Fernández Subsecretario de la Oficina de Asuntos Económicos y de Negocios Cámara Americana de Comercio Hong Kong 03 de agosto 2012 ------------------------------ * I. Introducción y plan de trabajo * Muchas gracias. Es genial estar aquí hoy. Hace mucho tiempo, escribí un artículo acerca de los viajes a Hong Kong en un viaje revista que usted será feliz de saber ya no existe.Dos estaban las cosas a mí entonces, la yuxtaposición de culturas occidentales y asiáticos en Hong Kong, y la energía que hace que mi ciudad natal de Nueva York se siente como un ciudad país. Aunque muchas cosas han cambiado dramáticamente desde aquí mi primera visitar, estas dos cosas se han mantenido constantes a lo largo de las décadas. Hong Kong es realmente City Asias Mundial y se sienta como un símbolo de prosperidad en un región rica en el comercio, la innovación y las ideas. Como Secretario de Estado, Hillary Clinton, dijo aquí en Hong Kong casi exactamente hace un año, cada vez más, el progreso económico depende de una estrecha diplomática los lazos y el progreso diplomÃ¡tico depende de fuertes lazos econÃ³micos. Esta es la razÃ³n por Hong Kong es tan vital. * Su historia y geografÃa hacen inevitablemente un puente entre Oriente y Occidente, y su importancia diplomÃ¡tica y econÃ³mica para Estados Unidos no puede ser exagerada. * Se inspira cÃ³mo las compaÃ±Ãas aquÃ de todo el mundo compiten en un sistema transparente, sujeto a la buena gobernabilidad, estado de derecho, la libertad de prensa, la independencia del poder judicial, y una sociedad civil dinÃ¡mica. Este sistema abierto y competitivo ha servido a los Estados Unidos-econÃ³mico de Hong Kong relaciÃ³n bien.Hay mÃ¡s de 1.300 Unidos y compaÃ±Ãas afiliadas en Hong Kong, Hong Kong y AmCham es una de las cÃ¡maras mÃ¡s activos en Asia. Estamos muy agradecidos por todo el trabajo energÃ©tico de los miembros de la AmCham aquÃ. Nosotros Valoramos mucho su liderazgo, experiencia y contribuciones al mundial el crecimiento econÃ³mico, asÃ como el papel que desempeÃ±ar en la AmÃ©rica negocios a Hong Kong y Asia. En gran parte gracias a sus esfuerzos, Hong Kong hoy es Estados Unidos 10 Âº mayor mercado de exportaciÃ³n de mercancÃas. TambiÃ©n es nuestro mayor mercado para los productos agrÃcolas sÃ©ptimo. De hecho, en los Ãºltimos dos aÃ±os, las exportaciones de Estados Unidos a Hong Kong crecieron el 73 fastestat percentamong todos nuestros principales mercados de exportaciÃ³n 20. * II. Estados Unidos y Hong Kong relaciÃ³n econÃ³mica y la dinÃ¡mica de Asia * Clinton Secretaria visitar aquÃ el aÃ±o pasado y mi visita ahora son parte de un relaciÃ³n mÃ¡s amplia y mÃ¡s intensa entre los Estados Unidos y la paÃses de la regiÃ³n Asia-PacÃfico, una relaciÃ³n que es clave, ya que en el Los Estados Unidos estÃ¡n llevando a cabo nuestra propia recuperaciÃ³n econÃ³mica y el crecimiento.Y a medida que mirar para promover la recuperaciÃ³n y el crecimiento como en casa en los Estados Unidos, tambiÃ©n darse cuenta de que dependemos de nuestras relaciones econÃ³micas con el exterior. En esta parte del mundo, nuestro compromiso no es nada nuevo. Los Estados Unidos Estados tiene hace mucho ha estado involucrado en la evoluciÃ³n de la regiÃ³n Asia-PacÃfico. Nuestro contribuciones a la seguridad regional han desempeÃ±ado un papel en la creaciÃ³n del condiciones que llevaron a que mÃ¡s personas salgan de la pobreza mÃ¡s rÃ¡pido que en cualquier otro en la historia. Este compromiso continÃºa hasta hoy. Sabemos que los futuros de los Estados Unidos y Asia-PacÃfico estÃ¡n inextricablemente ligados. Y como La secretaria Clinton destacÃ³, no somos sÃ³lo un diplomÃ¡tico o militar alimentaciÃ³n aquÃ. TambiÃ©n somos una fuerza econÃ³mica. SÃ³lo en 2010, nuestras exportaciones a la Cuenca del PacÃfico fueron $ 320 mil millones, el apoyo a 850.000 empleos en Estados Unidos. * III. Estados Unidos y China * RelaciÃ³n EconÃ³mica Ahora no podemos hablar de las relaciones econÃ³micas de Estados Unidos con Asia sin discutir nuestra relaciÃ³n econÃ³mica con China.Chinas econÃ³micos logros en los Ãºltimos aÃ±os es notable y es justamente una fuente de orgullo, ya que ha sacado a cientos de millones de personas de la pobreza, urbanizado y modernizado.China se estÃ¡ volviendo a la escena mundial en un gran AsÃ, con miles de aÃ±os de experiencia como lÃder mundial detrÃ¡s de Ã©l. La relaciÃ³n econÃ³mica entre Estados Unidos y China ofrece importantes beneficios para ambas naciones, asÃ como a Hong Kong. China se ha beneficiado en gran medida de su integraciÃ³n en la economÃa mundial, basado en las normas del sistema de comercio que Estados Unidos defendÃa a raÃz de la final de la Segunda Guerra Mundial. A medida que los mundos segundo mÃ¡s grande y de mÃ¡s rÃ¡pido crecimiento las principales economÃas, China tambiÃ©n ofrece grandes oportunidades para las empresas estadounidenses, trabajadores, agricultores y ganaderos. Pero a medida que trabajamos hacia un sistema que nuestros dos paÃses pueden competir en y prosperar, ya que nuestro futuro estÃ¡ cada vez mÃ¡s vinculado, tenemos que abordar desafÃos para nuestras metas comunes de prosperidad y crecimiento econÃ³mico. Necesitamos ponerse de acuerdo sobre las reglas bÃ¡sicas que se aplican a todos los paÃses del internacional comercial arena. Por nuestra parte, nos comprometemos a ampliar oportunidades para las empresas estadounidenses a exportar y hacer negocios en China. Y Esto significa que nuestras polÃticas persiguen cuatro objetivos bÃ¡sicos que Id gusta hablar con usted acerca de la actualidad.Estos son (1) un fuerte compromiso con la protecciÃ³n y la observancia de los derechos de propiedad intelectual, (2) la adhesiÃ³n a la plena conjunto de normas que rigen el comercio y las finanzas internacionales, (3) la creaciÃ³n de un campo de juego nivelado en el que todas las empresas puedan competir en las mismas reglas, y (4) la inversiÃ³n en expansiÃ³n mutua. Me gustarÃa tocar en cada uno de estos cuatro principios individualmente antes de cerrar con las herramientas que tenemos a nuestra disposiciÃ³n para estimular el progreso. (1) Derechos de propiedad intelectual La mejora de la protecciÃ³n y la observancia de la propiedad intelectual rightsor IPRin China sigue siendo una prioridad para los Estados Unidos. De hecho, yo dirÃa ningÃºn problema es mÃ¡s fundamental para el mantenimiento de un comercio mutuamente beneficioso relaciÃ³n entre nuestros dos paÃses, no sÃ³lo los estadounidenses poseen Chinas innovadores y las industrias creativas buscan, y se beneficiarÃa enormemente de, fuerte protecciÃ³n de los DPI y su aplicaciÃ³n. AdemÃ¡s, una fuerte intelectual rÃ©gimen de propiedad es fundamental para garantizar que los productos de seguros tanto de los EE.UU. alcanzar Chino y ciudadanos.Y, por supuesto, las fuertes normas de protecciÃ³n de los DPI y mecanismos de aplicaciÃ³n, similares a los que hemos adoptado en el marco del Mundial OrganizaciÃ³n Mundial del Comercio, son vitales para el comercio bilateral y la inversiÃ³n. Pero dejando a un lado su importancia para el comercio internacional en general, derechos de propiedad intelectual observancia tambiÃ©n es fundamental para la economÃa de EE.UU. y nuestra recuperaciÃ³n. Y es por eso que estamos tan firme en que este es un tema que necesita ser abordados. De acuerdo con un informe de 2010 sobre el comercio, intelectual chino infracciÃ³n de derechos de propiedad y las polÃticas de innovaciÃ³n en gran parte indÃgenas bloque empresas estadounidenses desde la adquisiciÃ³n Chinas gobierno enorme oportunidades, que hablarÃ© en breve. En 2009, estas polÃticas costar la economÃa de los EE.UU. cerca de $ 50 mil millones en ventas, regalÃas o derechos de licencia. El informe tambiÃ©n encontrÃ³ que si Chinaraised sus derechos de propiedad intelectual normas a las de los Estados Unidos, que se podrÃa traducir en mÃ¡s de 900.000 nuevos puestos de trabajo en las empresas estadounidenses de propiedad intelectual intensivos. Como se puede ver, estÃ¡ en juego para los Estados Unidos en el mantenimiento de un sistema basado en normas por derechos de propiedad intelectual son extremadamente altos. Pero en vez nos enfrentamos a un problema que los colores de nuestra relaciÃ³n econÃ³mica y que tenemos que superar. Espionaje corporativo o robo de secretos comerciales ha llevado a una gran nÃºmero de pÃ©rdidas para las empresas estadounidenses que operan en China en los Ãºltimos aÃ±os aÃ±os. Las empresas que hacen negocios en biotecnologÃa, telecomunicaciones y nanotecnologÃa han tenido miles de millones de dÃ³lares en tecnologÃa robada de servidores y canalizados a las empresas chinas que utilizan esa tecnologÃa sin derechos legales. Una empresa de EE.UU. fue vÃctima de los hackers chinos que robaron tecnologÃa que cuesta $ 1 mil millones y 20 aÃ±os desarrollar. Otra empresa perdido el 40 por ciento de su valor en un solo dÃa y 84 por ciento dentro de los cinco meses, despuÃ©s del robo de su tecnologÃa saliÃ³ a la luz. Este patrÃ³n no se sÃ³lo daÃ±a a las empresas individuales, sino que desalienta a otras empresas hacer negocios en China. En Ãºltima instancia, impide Chinas capacidad de atraer inversiÃ³n tecnolÃ³gica valiosa. Otra preocupaciÃ³n para nosotros es la alta tasa de piraterÃa en lÃnea de negocios, robo de software, y el mercado de las barreras de acceso que dificultan las compras de los consumidores de los bienes legÃtimos.Por ejemplo, un informe reciente de la Business Software Alliance mostrÃ³ que la tasa de piraterÃa de software en China fue del 77%, en un costo para los productores de casi $ 9 mil millones, mientras que en Hong Kong el Ãndice fue 43%, que era sÃ³lo un poco por encima de la media mundial del 42%. TambiÃ©n estamos muy preocupado por la continua tendencia de las polÃticas que indican Chinas voluntad de fomentar la innovaciÃ³n nacional o indÃgena, a expensas de la innovaciÃ³n y las tecnologÃas extranjeras. Seamos claros: la piraterÃa es un eufemismo para el robo, asÃ de simple. Sin embargo, tambiÃ©n acogemos con satisfacciÃ³n las medidas positivas que ha tomado China en los Ãºltimos aÃ±os aÃ±os. En diÃ¡logo Ãºltimos aÃ±os EstratÃ©gico y EconÃ³mico, por ejemplo, China acordÃ³ a redoblar sus esfuerzos para proteger los derechos de propiedad intelectual en varias Ã¡reas. Uno de estos fue por intensificar los esfuerzos para asegurar que las agencias del gobierno chino en absoluto los niveles de uso de software legÃtimo. TambiÃ©n estamos muy contentos de unirnos a China y Otros 45 paÃses en la firma de la OrganizaciÃ³n Mundial de Organizaciones Audiovisual Ejecutantes Tratado, tambiÃ©n conocido como el PekÃn Tratado. Este tratado se ampliarÃ¡ la protecciÃ³n a ambos EE.UU. y China ejecutantes. (2) Normas y Compras del Sector PÃºblico Un segundo objetivo bÃ¡sico de nuestra polÃtica es insistir en que China se adhieren a toda la gama de normas y reglas que rigen el comercio internacional y financiaciÃ³n. Esto incluye el cumplimiento de su compromiso de unirse al Gobierno de la OMC Acuerdo de Adquisiciones, o GPA. La contrataciÃ³n pÃºblica representa una de las mÃ¡s rÃ¡pida expansiÃ³n de las Ã¡reas de oportunidad para los comerciantes de bienes y servicios. En todo el mundo, los gobiernos estÃ¡n anunciando programas para gastar decenas o incluso cientos de miles de millones de dÃ³lares en nuevas infraestructuras inversiones. De hecho, en muchos paÃses, el gobierno es el tÃpicamente el mayor comprador de bienes y servicios, con el valor de estos valor de las compras gubernamentales, en promedio, 10 a 15 por ciento de un paÃs PIB. AsÃ las licitaciones pÃºblicas son un gran negocio en todo el mundo, incluyendo los Estados Unidos. China se comprometiÃ³ a adherirse al ACP en su adhesiÃ³n a la OMC en 2001. Lo iniciÃ³ formalmente las negociaciones en 2007 y presentÃ³ su mÃ¡s reciente mercado de Acceso en noviembre de 2011.En este Mays EstratÃ©gico Estados Unidos-China y el DiÃ¡logo EconÃ³mico, China se comprometiÃ³ a presentar una nueva y amplia oferta revisada que responde a las peticiones de todas las partes en el ACP Ã©l, antes de el final del aÃ±o. Los Estados Unidos y otras partes en el ACP se centran en garantizar que los Chinas oferta estÃ¡ en lÃnea con la cobertura ofrecida por las demÃ¡s partes en este acuerdo. Abrir uno de los mercados de contrataciÃ³n mÃ¡s grandes y de mayor crecimiento se proporcionar importantes oportunidades para los proveedores internacionales, incluyendo los de Hong Kong, que tambiÃ©n es parte del PAM. En resumen, 11 aÃ±os despuÃ©s China se comprometiÃ³ a unirse a la GPA, ha llegado el momento de cumplir esa compromiso. (3) La insistencia en la neutralidad de la competencia y la igualdad de condiciones En tercer lugar, seguimos presionando Chinas empresas estatales a actuar mÃ¡s como empresas comerciales. Si China quiere tener estatal las empresas, que es puramente Chinas elecciÃ³n propia. Pero si esas empresas recibir los beneficios que les dan una ventaja competitiva artificial, a continuaciÃ³n, nos preocupa, porque creemos que las reglas del juego econÃ³mico deben aplicarse por igual a todas las empresas, privadas o pÃºblicas.Ninguna empresa se debe dar beneficios especiales, tales como los crÃ©ditos a la exportaciÃ³n subvencionados, insumos reducidos fÃ¡brica como energÃa mÃ¡s barata o la tierra, por debajo del mercado de prÃ©stamos tarifas o la exenciÃ³n de las leyes antimonopolio, a menos que todas las empresas tienen acceso a esos beneficios. Estos beneficios y trato preferencial distorsionar la igualdad de condiciones para otras empresas. Â¿Y por quÃ© nos importa si el campo de juego estÃ¡ distorsionado? Porque queremos a las empresas a ganar sobre la base de mejores prÃ¡cticas de negocio de desempeÃ±o, y la innovaciÃ³n, no se basa en el apoyo del gobierno. La historia demuestra que cuando empresas basadas en la ayuda externa y no por sus propios mÃ©ritos, se a menudo han ganados ventajas competitivas y en Ãºltima instancia, esto lleva a empresas ineficientes, abultados y poco competitivo. Como secretaria Clinton declarÃ³ Recientemente, las empresas estadounidenses tienen hoy mejores, los trabajadores mÃ¡s productivos en el mundo. Tienen la mejor tecnologÃa, los innovadores mÃ¡s talentosos. Y muchos de ellos estÃ¡n sentados sobre grandes reservas de efectivo. Juegan en la mayorÃa mercados competitivos y ganar.Sin embargo, estÃ¡n todavÃa en desventaja con respecto a ciertos extranjeros de las empresas estatales, ya que tienen que pagar los impuestos, dividendos, alquileres, obtener prÃ©stamos a tasas de mercado, y seguir siendo competitivos en los mercados globales. Nuestra estrategia para afrontar el reto del capitalismo de Estado implica un despliegue de un sÃ³lido conjunto de herramientas de polÃtica que nivelar el campo de juego y abrir mercados de competencia leal. Estamos trabajando para poner en prÃ¡ctica el libre comercio acuerdos, tratados bilaterales de inversiÃ³n y compromisos de la OMC a la adhesiÃ³n. Estas polÃticas se opondrÃ¡n a las medidas que los mercados en el extranjero distorsionan y limitan acceso al mercado y la competencia. (4) InversiÃ³n Por Ãºltimo, la inversiÃ³n mutua en ambos paÃses nos permitirÃ¡ equilibrar los intereses econÃ³micos de areand lo serÃ¡ para el prÃ³ximo futurethe dos economÃas mÃ¡s grandes del mundo. Queremos que las empresas estadounidenses expandir sus negocios a China y queremos que la inversiÃ³n china en el Estados Unidos. Hemos hecho buenos progresos durante el Foro de InversiÃ³n Estados Unidos-China en Washington, DC, en abril, y esperamos que continÃºe esta tendencia. Los Estados Unidos, consistentemente se clasifica en la parte superior de la mayorÃa de los principales indicadores para su negocio atractivo y clima de inversiÃ³n. El flujo de inversiÃ³n extranjera directa en el Estados Unidos en 2010 fue mÃ¡s del doble que el flujo en cualquier otro paÃs en cerca de $ 230 mil millones. Esta cifra era de casi 50 por ciento mayor que la IED flujo en el 2009. Con el fin de continuar esta tendencia prometedora, el presidente Obama lanzÃ³ SelectUSA en enero de 2011. SelectUSA coordenadas gobierno actividades a fin de complementar las actividades de los 50 estados, que son los principales motores del desarrollo econÃ³mico, para atraer la inversiÃ³n a los Estados Unidos. Si usted estÃ¡ interesado en invertir en los Estados Unidos, nosotros y SelectUSA puede dirigir sus consultas a los estados econÃ³micos diferentes agencias de desarrollo, asegurÃ¡ndose de que se conectan a los socios adecuados para su proceso de selecciÃ³n de inversiones. Vemos una gran oportunidad para una mayor inversiÃ³n de China y Hong Kong, por lo que el Gobierno de EE.UU. designÃ³ ambos lugares como mercados principales para SelectUSA alcance. Por ejemplo, de 2005 a 2010, China era AmÃ©ricas fuente de mÃ¡s rÃ¡pido crecimiento de la IED en el crecimiento promedio mÃ¡s del 50 por ciento anual. Mientras tanto, Hong Kongs 4,3 mil millones dÃ³lares de inversiÃ³n extranjera directa en los Estados Unidos es el Ãºnico un poco menos de Chinas continental $ 6 mil millones en inversiÃ³n extranjera directa. Un ejemplo positivo de Chineseinvestment continental era Dalian Wangda decisiÃ³n Grupos mayo este aÃ±o para comprar AmÃ©ricas segunda mayor compaÃ±Ãa de cine AMC teatros por $ 2,6 mil millones. Queremos continuar con esta tendencia, y en ese sentido, quiero destacar la importante Cumbre de Inversiones Extranjeras de China en Hong Kong el 22 de agosto y 23. En particular, en la tarde del 23 de agosto de AmCham y los proveedores estadounidenses de servicios tendrÃ¡n sesiones especÃficas para discutir los aspectos prÃ¡cticos de la inversiÃ³n en los Estados Unidos. Desde que he estado en Hong Kong He oÃdo mucho sobre el Ãºltimo punto que Quisiera hablar sobre. Es el ComitÃ© de Inversiones Extranjeras en el Estados Unidos, o CFIUS. A menudo escucho a la idea errÃ³nea de que CFIUS es cierto todopoderosa organizaciÃ³n decidida a impedir cualquier inversiÃ³n extranjera. Esta obviamente no es cierto sobre la base de los nÃºmeros que acabamos de citar. CFIUS es simplemente un comitÃ© interinstitucional de los EE.UU.gobierno del cual soy miembro autorizado para examinar las fusiones, adquisiciones y absorciones de exterior empresas que puedan afectar a la seguridad nacional de los Estados Unidos. Lo no cubre las nuevas inversiones greenfield o en los Estados Unidos. Y por CFIUS ley sÃ³lo puede mirar a la seguridad nacional, no econÃ³mica o de otro tipo polÃticas, y debe aplicar las mismas reglas y normas de liquidaciÃ³n para todos inversionistas, sin importar el paÃs. Repito, sÃ³lo considera CFIUS la seguridad nacional y no tiene en cuenta las polÃticas econÃ³micas o de otra Ãndole, y debe aplicar las mismas reglas y normas de liquidaciÃ³n para todos los inversores, independientemente del paÃs. CFIUS regularmente borra de inversiones tanto privadas y las empresas estatales chinas, a menudo dentro de un mes. Todos sus normas son pÃºblicos y se explica en detalle. PermÃtanme dar algunos hechos. Cuando un negocio potencial es sometido a CFIUS la comisiÃ³n tiene 30 dÃas para revisar el caso, y se puede pedir a 45 extensiÃ³n dÃas si es necesario. De los miles de inversiones extranjeras en el Estados Unidos desde 2008 a 2010, sÃ³lo 313 ofertas requieren revisiÃ³n CFIUS. De los que sÃ³lo 16 se requiere ningÃºn tipo de mitigaciÃ³n o adaptaciÃ³n para ser aprobado. CFIUS es transparente, de alcance limitado, y aplicarse por igual a todos los extranjeros inversiones. Me gustarÃa que todos los paÃses tenÃan un centrado y racionalizado proceso de inversiÃ³n extranjera directa. * IV. * Herramientas para el Progreso Esta no es la primera vez que me estoy planteando estas cuatro teclas derechos de propiedad issuesintellectual, la contrataciÃ³n pÃºblica, un nivel igualdad de condiciones, y la inversiÃ³n mutua. Afortunadamente, tenemos buenos vehÃculos para el progreso a travÃ©s del compromiso firme y constructiva en todos estos Ã¡reas. Uno de ellos es el DiÃ¡logo EstratÃ©gico y EconÃ³mico aludÃ anterior. Nuestros paÃses recientemente ocupÃ³ el cuarto EstratÃ©gico y EconÃ³mico DiÃ¡logo en Beijing a principios de mayo. Los EE.UU. mantiene su compromiso a largo plazo inversiÃ³n en la construcciÃ³n de la confianza mutua y el entendimiento entre China y la Estados Unidos, y vemos que el S & ED como una herramienta importante para lograr resultados. Y necesitamos progreso, porque si bien estos problemas enviaban nuevo, ellos no pueden continuar para siempre.En mayo de China hizo compromisos clave para (1) mejorar el mercado el acceso y la igualdad de condiciones, (2) mejorar la propiedad intelectual cumplimiento de los derechos y protecciÃ³n, (3) la reducciÃ³n de secreto comercial apropiaciÃ³n indebida, y (4) la comisiÃ³n para el tratamiento de derechos de propiedad intelectual o de propiedad desarrollado en los Estados Unidos de la misma propiedad como derechos de propiedad intelectual o desarrollado en China. China tambiÃ©n de acuerdo a un intenso debate sobre la aplicaciÃ³n de su compromiso que la transferencia de tecnologÃa tiene que ser decidido por las empresas de manera independiente y no ser utilizado por el gobierno chino como una pre-condiciÃ³n para el acceso al mercado. Nosotros la bienvenida a estos compromisos y esperamos medidas concretas en el derecho direcciÃ³n en el futuro cercano. Van a ir un largo camino para hacer frente a la Ive tema que acabamos de discutir. * V. ConclusiÃ³n * Con vehÃculos como el DiÃ¡logo EstratÃ©gico y EconÃ³mico, podemos trabajar a travÃ©s de nuestras diferencias para fortalecer nuestras coincidencias. Ni el Reino Estados ni China pueden alcanzar su potencial econÃ³mico sin la cooperaciÃ³n de la otra. Somos socios globales, y en esa asociaciÃ³n, todos ustedes aquÃ en Hong Kong son actores indispensables. Gracias. _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/b210614b3a.html --]]

1 0

Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociaci�n Trans Pac�fico sobre IP
by salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro＠gmail.com Sept. 9, 2012

Sept. 9, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociación Trans Pacífico sobre IP De: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro(a)gmail.com > > Snip > > China has strongly felt that it is being surrounded by this > "partnership" net by its long Pacific coast. Although China has > expressed its interested in at least observing the negotiation at last > APEC summit in November 2011, it was turned down. It is unlikely that > China would be welcome in at the APEC summit right now in Russia. > > Hong > > Here was what happened pre-APEC between US and China > > Remarks With Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi > > Remarks > Hillary Rodham Clinton > Secretary of State > Great Hall of the People > Beijing, China > September 5, 2012 > > ------------------------------ > > *MODERATOR: *(Via interpreter.) Ladies and gentlemen, the joint press > conference of Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi and Secretary of State Hillary > Clinton will now begin. Now Foreign Minister Yang will make an opening > statement. > > *FOREIGN MINISTER YANG: *(In Chinese.) > > *MODERATOR: *(Via interpreter.) Now Secretary Clinton will make an > opening statement. > > *SECRETARY CLINTON:* Let me begin by thanking Foreign Minister Yang for > his long commitment to strengthening the bonds between China and the > United States. And we have had constructive and productive in-depth > discussions last night for a number of hours and then again this morning > with President Hu Jintao. I conveyed to President Hu Jintao the warm > regards from President Obama. > > I am pleased to return to China for my fifth visit, I think, although > Ive lost track, as U.S. Secretary of State. I came on my very first trip > in early 2009, and this has been part of our overarching engagement in > Asia. And as Minister Yang just said, we have institutionalized a number of > mechanisms for ongoing dialogue. Our Strategic and Economic Dialogue, our > consultation on People-to-People Exchange, our Strategic Security Dialogue, > our Asia Pacific Consultation, our new Middle East Dialogue, and all the > rest of our engagement really exemplifies how hard we are working at every > level of our government to build habits of cooperation and to open channels > of communication. We literally consult with each other almost on a daily > basis about every consequential issue facing our nations and the world > today. > > As I have said before, our two nations are trying to do something that has > never been done in history, which is to write a new answer to the question > of what happens when an established power and a rising power meet. Both > President Obama and I have said frequently that the United States welcomes > the rise of a strong, prosperous, and peaceful China. We wantChina to > continue to succeed in delivering economic opportunity to the Chinese people. > That will, in turn, have a positive impact on the global economy. We want > China to play a greater role in world affairs. That strengthens global > stability, helps solve urgent challenges. And we are convinced that our two > countries gain far more when we cooperate with one another than when we > descend into an unhealthy competition. So we are committed to managing our > differences effectively and expanding our cooperation wherever and whenever > possible. > > We see this moment as a historic opportunity for our two countries, and > indeed, for others as well. To make the most of it, the United States and > China must strive to achieve practical outcomes that benefit each of us > as well as the broader region and world. That has been the theme of my > meetings in Beijing today, and it started with our extensive conversations > with the Foreign Minister and his colleagues, which went well past midnight > and then continued this morning. Later today, I will be meeting with other > Chinese officials, as the Foreign Minister has just outlined. And let me > say how pleased I am to have this chance to exchange views in advance of > APEC, where I will be representing President Obama. > > One issue we discussed at length is the evolving situation in Syria. The > United States strongly believes the simplest and best solution to end the > violence is for there to be a peaceful political transition that respects > the dignity, aspirations, and rights of the Syrian people. The United > States wants to work with China and other international partners to take > effective steps to end the violence and bring about that political > transition, because doing so, we believe, serves our common interest as > well as the interest of Syrians and others in the region. > > We discussed our shared commitment in preventing Iran from acquiring > nuclear weapons and our work together in the P-5+1 as well as at the > upcoming IAEA Board of Governors meeting. China recently reduced its > purchase of Iranian oil; and while it took this step for its own commercial > and energy security reasons, it aligns with our shared interest regarding > Iran and our hope that Iran will live up to its international obligations. > > We had a productive conversation about how China can use its unique > influence with respect to North Korea. There is an opportunity for the new > leadership in North Korea to improve the lives of the North Korean people. > At the same time, we wish to continue our joint efforts to bring about the > denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. > > I also raised the growing threat of cyber attacks that are occurring on an > increasing basis. Both the United States andChina are victims of cyber > attacks. Intellectual property, commercial data, national security > information is being targeted. This is an issue of increasing concern to > the business community and the Government of the United States, as well > as many other countries, and it is vital that we work together to curb this > behavior. > > Another issue, as the Minister mentioned, was the South China Sea. I > reiterated, as I have on many occasions, the United States does not take > a position on competing territorial claims. Our interest is in the > maintenance of peace and stability, respect for international law, freedom > of navigation, and unimpeded lawful commerce. And as a friend to the > countries involved, we do believe its in everyones interest that China and > ASEAN engage in a diplomatic process toward the shared goal of a code of > conduct. > > On some of these issues, China and the United States have much to agree > on, and we are engaged in very cooperative behavior to try to reach our > common goal. On others, such as human rights, we do not always see eye to > eye, but we continue to talk together. And we will never agree on all > matters. No two countries do. But we are learning how to manage our > differences, deal openly with misunderstandings when they do occur, and > remain in communication as transparently and clearly as possible. We have > taken to heart the vision set by our two presidents to build a relationship > that is positive, cooperative, and comprehensive and that delivers benefits > to both our nations, and that, in turn, helps to drive peace, stability, > progress, and prosperity throughout the region and the world. > > So let me again thank the Foreign Minister and President Hu Jintao for > this friendship, for this very important set of consultations. I look > forward to the rest of my meetings today, and I thank the people of China for > once again welcoming me and my delegation to your country. > > *FOREIGN MINISTER YANG:* (Via interpreter.) Thank you, Madam Secretary. > > *MODERATOR:* (Via interpreter.) Now we open up the floor for questions. * > China Daily.* > > *QUESTION:* (Via interpreter.) Good morning, Madam Secretary. The United > States is implementing a rebalancing strategy in the Asia Pacific region. > And some senior U.S. officials, including yourself, have repeatedly said > that this is not targeted at China. But judging from some recent U.S. > moves in the region, including the strengthening of military alliances with > countries in the region, many people have come to the conclusion that the > fundamental role of the strategy is to contain China and to thwart Chinas > development. How do you look at this? > > *SECRETARY CLINTON:* Well, thank you for asking that question, because I > want to be very clear. As the President and I have said many times, the > United States welcomes a strong, stable, prosperous China that plays a > role in world affairs commensurate with its size and helps to maintain and > shape the global order. And we believe strongly that China has a vital > role as a force for security and peace, stability and prosperity, > regionally and globally. And so along with the rest of the international > community, the United States counts on Chinas leadership in addressing > many of our common global challenges. > > So that is why we have worked so intensively. We have deepened and > broadened our cooperation on a range of issues bilaterally, regionally, and > globally. Our two presidents have met 12 times. Vice President Biden and > Vice President Xi have had very successful exchanged visits in each of our > countries. We have held four Strategic and Economic Dialogues, which took > the government-to-government relationship much deeper and broader than at > any time prior to the Obama Administration. > > So Im very proud of the strength and resilience that we have built into > our relationship. It makes it possible for us to talk about anything and to > find ways to tackle issues frankly and forthrightly. > > Now, that includes our work on economic and trade issues, which are very > critical to creating jobs and opportunity on both sides of the Pacific. We > are very clear, as we have these discussions, about the need to develop > what we call a level playing field for economic investments in both our > countries. It also enables us to work together through multilateral > institutions, like the East Asia Summit, which the United States has > joined out of respect for the importance of that organization; APEC, which > is another vehicle. Ill be seeing President Hu and other Chinese officials > in Vladivostok in just a few days. > > So it means we can cooperate on a much broader range of issues, but we do > not see eye-to-eye on everything. And I would not expect anyone to imagine > that two countries as large and diverse as we are would ever see > eye-to-eye. We have different experiences, different perspectives. But what > we have done is to embed the importance of dialogue and cooperation so that > when we work together, its to the benefit of everyone. When we have these > differences, we work through them. > > And I am absolutely convinced that our collaboration has been vital. Weve > worked together on peace in Sudan and South Sudan. We are working to deal > with Irans nuclear ambitions. We havent agreed on how to handle Syria, > but we havent stopped talking about what should be done, because the > violence continues. The instability is quite concerning. We dont agree on > a lot of human rights issues, but we have maintained a strong and ongoing > dialogue. And this is a relationship that matters to both of us, and I am > very convinced that weve established a strong foundation, > government-to-government and people-to-people. > > I cannot help what someone in your country says or someone in my country > says. We are going to have critics in both of our countries who are going > to second-guess decisions that we are making. But I feel strongly that we > are on the right track in building a positive, cooperative, comprehensive > relationship for the 21st century. > > *MS. NULAND:* All right. Next question. (Laughter.) The next question, > Indira Lakshmanan from Bloomberg News, please. > > *QUESTION:* Thank you. Foreign Minister Yang, your ministry spokesman > said this week that countries outside the region shouldnt intervene in > China Seas territorial disputes. Do you accept that the U.S. has a > legitimate national interest in ensuring freedom of navigation and commerce > in the South and East China Seas? Or does Vice President Xis > cancellation of his meeting with the Secretary signal displeasure with U.S. > interference? And do you agree with statemedia commentaries that say > increased U.S. naval and military presence in the Pacific is about > containing China? > > And Madam Secretary, do you come out of these talks any more confident > that China is ready to sign up to a code of conduct on the South Seas > issues? > > Thank you. > > *FOREIGN MINISTER YANG: *(Via interpreter.) On the South China Sea, the > position of the Chinese Government has been consistent and clear-cut. > China has sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea and their > adjacent waters. There is plentiful historical and jurisprudential evidence > for that. > > As for the dispute over the sovereignty of some islands and reefs of the > Nansha Islands and the overlapping rights, interests, and claims over some > waters of the South China Sea, these should be discussed by the directly > concerned countries on the basis of the fact of historical fact and > international law, and handled and settled through direct negotiations and > friendly consultation. People talk about the importance of respecting the > DOC. What I have outlined is not just Chinas position, but an important > principle and spirit of the DOC. It is the consensus of all the signatories > to the DOC and important commitment the parties have made. > > Recently, I have visited several of these Asian countries, who are also > member-states of ASEAN. Like China, these countries also believe that the > parties concerned should act in accordance with the principles and spirit > of the DOC and on the basis of consensus work towards the eventual adoption > of a code of conduct in the South China Sea. > > Nowhere else do China and the United States share more converging > interest and interact more frequently than in the Asia Pacific region. At > the moment, the international situation continues to undergo profound and > complex changes, and the prospect of a world economic recovery is still > quite grim. We hope that China and the United States will work together > to develop a positive and pragmatic relationship. That is also the shared > expectation of the people in the Asia Pacific region. We hope to work with > the United States and other countries in the Asia Pacific to make our > region one of openness, inclusiveness, mutual benefit, and win-win progress. > > As for the United States policy towards the Asia Pacific region, we have > always hoped that the United States would size up the situation and make > sure that its policy is in conformity with the trends of our current era > and the general wish of countries in the region to seek peace, development, > and cooperation. And this is also Chinas wish and has been Chinas way > of behavior. We believe our two sides should step up consultation on Asia > Pacific affairs and to make a success of the East Asia Summit and other > important meetings before the end of the year. > > And I wish to emphasize that the Asia Pacific Economic Leaders meeting is > just a couple of days away. Our two sides need to step up communication and > cooperation to make sure the APEC meeting will be a full success. > > The current schedule of the Secretarys visit has been agreed by the two > sides. I hope people will not add unnecessary speculation. We attach a > great deal of importance to Secretary Clintons visit to China. And I > want to add also that the freedom and safety of navigation in the South > China Sea is assured. For China and our neighboring countries, the South > China Sea is really a lifeline for exchanges, trade, and commerce. There > is no issue currently in this area, nor will there ever be issues in that > area in the future. Thank you. > > *SECRETARY CLINTON:* I appreciate the Ministers comments about the > commitment China has to a code of conduct that was foreshadowed in the > Declaration of Conduct agreed to by China and ASEAN nations 10 years ago. > We believe, as I said in Jakarta, that it is timely now to proceed with > that work and help to lower the tensions and create the code of conduct in > the next period, hopefully in preparation for the East Asia Summit. > > After my talks over the last few days, I believe that with leadership and > commitment China and ASEAN can ramp up their diplomacy. And the United > States stands ready to support that process in any way that would be > helpful to the parties. > > *MS. NULAND:* Next question, Margaret Brennan, CBS News. > > *QUESTION:* Thank you. On Iran, its continuing to pursue a nuclear > program and negotiations have stalled. Specifically, what steps is China willing > to take to prevent the pursuit of a nuclear weapon? > > And on Syria, China at the Security Council has blocked any outside > intervention to stop the ongoing violence. Is there any agreement on how to > bring about a political transition? > > *FOREIGN MINISTER YANG: *(Via interpreter.) On the question of nuclear > issues in the Middle East, I wish to emphasize that China is opposed to > the efforts of any country, including Iran, to develop nuclear weapons. At > the same time, we believe the Iranian nuclear issue should be resolved > peacefully through diplomatic negotiations. We believe there is positive > value in the P-5+1 dialogue with Iran, whatever form it may take. We > believe the parties should continue to exercise calm and be committed to > diplomatic negotiations. > > Some parties have put forward some proposals. They need to be studied > seriously. The positive elements in those proposals should be taken > seriously and be incorporated. China has been active and serious in our > participation in P-5+1 dialogue with Iran. And in our contact with various > parties, weve been emphasizing that there should be a clear and objective > reading of the situation. China stands ready to stay in close contact, > communication, and coordination with the United States and other relevant > parties on the Iranian nuclear issue. > > China strictly abides by the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. Of > course, all along we have been opposed to unilateral sanctions. When such > sanctions affect other countries and damage other countries interests, it > is something we cannot accept. Although there might be some divergent views > between China, the United States, or others on the Iranian issue, we > believe there is an ongoing momentum of exchange, communication, and > cooperation. And we hope to sustain the momentum of exchanges and > cooperation with the relevant parties. China will continue to work > persistently for the peaceful settlement of the Iranian nuclear issue. > > On the question of Syria, I wish to emphasize that although Mr. Kofi Annan > has stepped down as the Joint Special Envoy, but it is the general view of > the international community that his six-point plan should continue to be > implemented. Secretary Clinton and I and the foreign ministers of some > other countries took part in the Foreign Ministerial Meeting of the Action > Group for Syria, which took place in Geneva. Like many countries, China shares > the view that the communique of that foreign ministers meeting has positive > significance for appropriately handling and resolving the Syrian issue. And > we are willing to ramp up communication with the relevant countries in the > UN Security Council and to carry out coordination. And the relevant UN > Security Council resolutions regarding Syria should be implemented in > earnest. > > Although the situation is very complex, China has been emphasizing all > along that the various parties should arrive at a cessation of fire and an > end to violence, and the various parties in Syria should begin a political > dialogue. And like many countries, we support a period of political > transition in Syria. > > We also believe that any solution should come from the people of Syria and > reflect their wishes. It should not be imposed from outside. We are all > member-states of the United Nations. We believe that on the question of > Syria the purposes and principles of the UN Charter should be upheld and > implemented, especially the principle of non-interference in other > countries internal affairs. > > And on the question of Syria, let me emphasize that China is not partial > to any individual or any party. I think history will judge that Chinas > position on the Syrian question is a promotion of the appropriate handling > and resolution of the Syria issue. For what we have in mind is the interest > of the people in Syria and the region and the interest of peace, stability, > and development in the region and around the world. > > The various countries have some differing views on the issue of Syria. I > believe the parties need to increase their consultation, all for the sake > of peace, stability, and development in the region as well as the well > being of the Syrian people. > > *SECRETARY CLINTON:* Thank you very much for your question. And before I > turn to Syria, let me just say we have worked very closely with China in > the P-5+1 and in the Security Council to create unprecedented pressure on > the Iranian Government. > > With respect to Syria, it is no secret that we have been disappointed by > Russia and Chinas actions blocking tougher UN Security Council > resolutions, and we hope to continue to unite behind a real path forward to > end the violence in Syria. We share the goal of wanting to see the violence > end and the political transition begin, and we are discussing additional > ways we can bring that about. > > We believe that the situation in Syria is a threat to peace and stability > in the entire region, and the longer the conflict goes on the greater the > risk that it spills over borders and destabilizes neighboring countries. We > have already seen dangerous clashes in Lebanon and growing tensions in > Turkey and Jordan. We have discussed with our Chinesecounterparts the > need to respond to the UNs appeal for contributions to support the > humanitarian needs of the people. The best course of action remains to > unite the Security Council behind real consequences if President Assad > continues to brutalize his own people and threaten the security of the > region. > > I agree with the Foreign Minister that the communique issued as a result > of our meeting in Geneva is a very useful framework for moving forward, and > we will continue to consult to see whether that is something that the > Security Council itself could adopt as a message to the government and the > opposition about what is expected. > > Meanwhile, the United States will continue to work with a growing group > of likeminded nations to support the Syrian opposition and plan for the day > after Assad goes, because we are convinced that he will. Thank you. > > *MODERATOR:* (Via interpreter.) Final question, Xinhua News Agency. > > *QUESTION:* (Via interpreter.) I have a question for Foreign Minister > Yang. Weve taken note of the repeated statements from both China and the > United States on various occasions that both sides are committed to > building a cooperative partnership and to exploring a new type of major > country relationship. But we also see that from time to time the two > countries have disputes on some economic and trade issues. Some people even > posit that confrontation between Chinaand the United States is > inevitable. How do you look at this? > > *FOREIGN MINISTER YANG: *(Via interpreter.) Before answering this > question, please allow me to make some additional points regarding the > Iranian nuclear issue. > > The UN Secretary General and the Arab League have appointed a new Joint > Special Envoy for Syria, Mr. Brahimi. Recently, I talked with him on the > phone. I said in the phone call that China fully supports his mediation > efforts, and we hope all the parties will also support his mediation > efforts so that there can be an appropriate and peaceful solution to the > situation in Syria. > > We hope that members of the international community will bring their > positive influence to bear and get the various parties in Syria to adopt a > realistic, calm, and constructive attitude so that there can be an early > beginning of political dialogue and transition in that country. A Syria > that is peaceful, stable, and enjoying development, bringing benefits to > the people of not just that country but also the region. > > And we pay very close attention to the humanitarian issue surrounding > Syria. We have already channeled humanitarian assistance to some people in > Syria in plight, and we will provide assistance to the Syrian refugees in > Lebanon, Jordan, and some other countries. > > This year marks the 40th anniversary of Mr. Nixons visit to China and > the issuance of the Shanghai Communique. In these 40 years, the China-U.S. > relationship has gone through a lot, but generally speaking it has been > continuously moving forward, bringing tangible benefits to the people of > our two countries and contributing to peace, stability, and development in > the world. President Hu Jintao and President Obama have had 12 face-to-face > meetings, and they have reached important consensus on working together to > push forward a China-U.S. cooperative partnership based on mutual respect > and mutual benefit and on working together to explore the construction of a > new type of major country relationship. This points the direction for the > further development of our bilateral relationship. The various government > departments in both countries should redouble efforts to implement this > joint vision of our presidents. > > The economic relationship between China and the United States is an > important driving force of our overall relationship. In the economic > exchanges between two large nations such as ours, it is quite inevitable > that there might be some disputes or even frictions. We hope that both > sides will act in the spirit of openness and appropriately handle and > resolve these issues through consultation. Actually, the two sides have > already made some important progress in that regard. > > China and the United States differ from each other in our histories, our > cultures, ideologies, social systems, and actual national conditions. So > its impossible for our two countries to see eye to eye on all the issues, > but we believe that the mutual respect for each others core interests and > major concerns is an important precondition for the steady and smooth > development of our bilateral relationship. If we can stay focused on that, > then we can overcome various disputes or frictions and their distraction to > the relationship and maintain the dialogue and cooperation, which is the > primary facet of our relationship and to make sure this relationship will > continue to be mutually beneficial going forward. > > It is apparent to all that China has made important progress in its human > rights. On the basis of mutual respect and nonintervention in others > internal affairs, wed like to continue to have human rights dialogue with > the United States and some other countries. > > Like many countries, China is also a victim of cyber attacks. Wed like > to work with the United States and some others to step up our > communication and cooperation with respect to ensuring cyber security. > > And China is making continuous efforts towards the denuclearization of > the Korean Peninsula and the maintenance of peace and stability on the > Peninsula. We support the efforts of the relevant countries to maintain and > increase dialogue with the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea. > > In short, history and facts has repeatedly proven that China and the > United States have interwoven interests, and cooperation will benefit > both sides where confrontation will hurt both sides. It has been Chinas > clear choice to work to promote our cooperative partnership with the United > States on the basis of the three joint communiques and joint statements. > This will serve the fundamental interests of people in both countries, and > it is what the international community expects us to do in the 21st > century. > > Thank you. > > *MODERATOR:* (Via interpreter.) This brings us to the end of the joint > press conference. I want to thank Foreign Minister Yang and Secretary > Clinton. > [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/87280bee10.html --]]

1 0

Google Fiber no san� la brecha digital
by carlton.samuels＠gmail.com Sept. 9, 2012

Sept. 9, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Google Fiber no sanó la brecha digital De: carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com ... La brecha que existe aquí y allá .... no sólo dónde se encuentra. Qué hacer al respecto, te preguntarás? - Carlton ============================== Carlton Samuels A Móvil: 876-818-1799 * Estrategia, Planificación, Gobierno, Evaluación y Turnaround * ============================= _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/cb77d2a736.html --]]

2 1

Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociaci�n Trans Pac�fico sobre IP
by carlton.samuels＠gmail.com Sept. 8, 2012

Sept. 8, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Proyecto de Acuerdo de Asociación Trans Pacífico sobre IP De: carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com Sala: Gracias por los enlaces y sus comentarios adicionales. El escritor menciona Guardián desmotado hasta preocupaciones de propiedad intelectual - especialmente wrt entretenimiento y productos farmacéuticos - y se extiende la imagen a la vista. Hmmm, algo cojonudo ..... pregunto qué los chicos en Corea del Sur, China y India está pensando? Bueno, Ol 'Henry K al rescate una vez más: "..... no hay amigos permanentes .... pero intereses permanentes .... - Carlton ============================== Carlton Samuels A Móvil: 876-818-1799 * Estrategia, Planificación, Gobierno, Evaluación y Turnaround * ============================= En Tue, 8 de septiembre 2012 a las 3:47 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro @ gmail.com> escribió: > The TPP will be worse than the SOPA. > > Add this to the EFF link:- > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/27/pacific-free-trade-deal > **** > > ** ** > > ** > http://www.alternet.org/story/156059/trans-pacific_partnership%3A_under_cov… > > > This was sent to me by one of the members of the ALS that I am a part of. > Pay particular attention to the "NAFTA" on steroids bit. What is also > interesting is the news that Russia has just signed an MoU with the US > strengthening greater partnership, notwithstanding the support that it got > from the US in joining the WTO, You can imagine that if Russia is persuaded > to join the TPP then the likelihood that they will receive the relevant > traction to widen the circle of the TPP Party/Parade will definitely cause > the concerns that was raised by the EFF that was shared to us by Carlton, > see: > https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/tpp-creates-liabilities-isps-and-put-… to > be a reality in the not too distant future. This means ISP liabilities > amongst a host of other things. > > > On another note, Mr Wu Hongbo is the new Under Secretary General for the > United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA), see: > http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/usg/index.shtml > > > For developing countries, the concept of "free trade" may sound lucrative > but the reality is that it only disadvantages one (the loser). There is no > such thing as a free lunch. To see why this is relevant to our discussions, > I recommend visiting the link that Carlton shared earlier. > > > I find the US position on this to be schizophrenic because on one end they > are proclaiming an open and free internet and taking extraordinary measures > to run miles away from any Treaty negotiations (please note that I am not > for nor against Treaties, merely thinking critically about the issues) and > yet they are going to extraordinary lengths to go around the world by > sending their highest political officer to gain momentum for the TPP. > > > It brings to mind that nations at the end of the day are about interests > and "as long as it suits them". I will also hasten to add that there are > many citizens in the US who are also wanting greater transparency around > the TPP negotiations as it is likely to impact the architecture of the > Internet and the rules of the game. > > > Kind Regards, > > Sala > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Carlton Samuels < > carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Here's a development you might wish to follow. Some analysts say it is >> even more dangerous than pernicious ACTA to the public interest. Those >> countries in the L & CA region with a Pacific littoral may be party to it. >> >> >> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/tpp-creates-liabilities-isps-and-put-… >> >> >> - Carlton >> >> ============================== >> Carlton A Samuels >> Mobile: 876-818-1799 >> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* >> ============================= >> _______________________________________________ >> APAC-Discuss mailing list >> APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss >> >> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org >> > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/1b34a8aa63.html --]]

1 0