For example, Interpol reports that most of the child pornography available on Internet sites now originates in Japan due to their lack of laws prohibiting its production (Editor 1999)
Noting the extent of the problem, Interpol, the international law enforcement organization, estimated last year that eighty percent of the child pornography available over the Internet was produced in or distributed through Japan.
See Interpol ties 80% of world's child pornography to Japan, ASAHI SHIMBUN/ASAHI EVENING NEWS, Dec. 4,1998, available at 1998 WL 22369868 [hereinafter Interpol ties] ("Germany . . . [has] amended laws to enable police to charge Internet service providers that allow child pornography to be distributed electronically").
According to estimates from Interpol, as much as 80% of the child porn available on commercial sites worldwide originates in Japan. A police study found more than 3,000 Websites based in Japan distributing pornography, 40% of them featuring children.
Interpol, the international police organization that hosted the Lyon meeting, estimates that 80 percent to 90 percent of the world's commercially distributed child pornography is produced in Japan, although mostly foreign children are depicted.
Interpol, the international police agency, has estimated that between 70 percent and 80 percent of the child pornography available on the Internet came from Japanese sources.
"Some figures say 80 percent and some say 20 percent; we really don't know a good way of measuring it," said Keiji Goto, an official at the National Police Agency who campaigned on behalf of more stringent laws. "But it is sure that Japan is the No. 1 provider of child pornography on the Internet."
"Interpol, the international police organization, estimates that 80 percent of the world's commercial child pornography materials found on the Internet are suspected to be produced or distributed from Japan."
ECPAT estimates that 60 to 80 percent of all pornographic images of ch
One of the worst parts of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) was its ridiculous secrecy, under which it was easy for negotiators and industry reps to see draft text, but impossible for the public to do so except through leaks. Thankfully, those leaks showed just how bad ACTA was going to be for the Internet, and public pressure helped remove the worst provisions.
But the basic approach to doing deals didn't die, and it's back again this week as negotiators meet in Hollywood to discuss a new, totally secret intellectual property chapter for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a regional trade agreement.
Civil society and digital rights groups would dearly love to be part of the process; barring that, they'd like to know simply what the process is so that they can at least mount press conferences of their own. But even that is difficult.
According to Sean Flynn, an American University professor who has worked on these issues for several years, the cloud of secrecy is again in force. "Although there has been no official announcement about the planned meeting, public interest advocacy organizations have determined that intellectual property negotiations will be held January 31-Feb 4th at a hotel in West Hollywood," he wrote last night in an e-mail.
Flynn helped to organize a "public interest briefing" that would take place at the hotel and be open to any TPP negotiators interested in hearing a different perspective. It was not to be:
The public interest briefing was booked last week and advertised to all delegations, including the host USTR [US Trade Representative]. An hour after the invitation was sent, we received a cancellation of our venue by the hotel. The cancelation by by Sophie Jones, Event Sales Manager, Sofitel Los Angeles stated:
“I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news but unfortunately we will not be able to move forward with your luncheon for Tuesday January 31st. It was brought to my attention that we have a confidential group in house and we will not be allowing any other groups in the meeting space that day. Again, my apologies for the late notice. Hopefully we can work together in the near future.”
After receiving the cancellation, members of an advocacy organization called the hotel and were able to book a room for a claimed private event not related to the TPP. Apparently only TPP-related events were banned from the hotel at the request of an unidentified party. USTR is serving as the host of this meeting.
The meeting did take place... at a restaurant across the street from the hotel. A later, two-hour conference was held at the USC Law School and is available for streaming. The whole episode sounds both petty and farcical on USTR's part, but the issues are deadly serious.
Last year, versions of the TPP's US-written IP chapter leaked; its provisions went well beyond even ACTA, which was already the new high-water mark for IP enforcement. Where do things stand now? Are the other TPP countries on board with the US approach? Who knows! It's all secret.
While ACTA at least claimed not to exceed US law, Flynn and other professors allege that the leaked TPP IP chapter does go beyond what's in US law, doing things like extending copyright protection even to temporary "buffer" copies so crucial to digital devices.
As for USTR, it claims to be conducting "an unprecedented fifty-state domestic outreach strategy for TPP," and it's even hosting a largely worthless TPP blog. People can send comments to USTR through a special Web form, and negotiators do take in presentations from civil society groups on some occasions.
But negotiators still insist of shielding their work from the public, even on matters of increasing public concern, such as digital copyrights. And each agreement they negotiate mysteriously ends up just a bit tougher than the one before it. The time for "trust us" is over, and unlike ACTA, people want meaningful access to TPP documents before the draft text has been so worked over that no substantive change is possible. But without significant public pressure, that's not going to happen. Again.
The internet may have been very quick to rest on its laurels after the successful opposition to SOPA. First there was the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, or ACTA, a highly restrictive, multi-national law that looked a lot like SOPA and covered everything from music downloads to crops. That bill saw much of the same opposition that SOPA, and eventually saw some its most controversial provisions watered down in the final draft.
But there doesn’t seem to be any end: now, the fight over piracy on the internet moves East. The Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, is the newest legislation being fought over in the increasingly heated war for the internet. It’s being negotiated in nine-country talks that include the U.S., Malaysia, Japan, Vietnam, Australia, Peru, Brunei, New Zealand and Singapore.
It’s a familiar story: supporters say that intellectual property provisions are necessary to fight piracy, and critics are calling them draconian, over-reaching and oppressive. And like ACTA, critics are decrying TPP for being negotiated behind closed doors ― on Wednesday, negotiators met in a Hollywood restaurant veiled in secrecy. At Ars Technica, Nate Anderson writes about American University Professor Sean Flynn, who claims that a hotel near the negotiations had been explicitly asked not to allow public interest groups to hold meetings on the day of the negotiations.
He writes:
Last year, versions of the TPP’s US-written IP chapter leaked; its provisions went well beyond even ACTA, which was already the new high-water mark for IP enforcement. Where do things stand now? Are the other TPP countries on board with the US approach? Who knows! It’s all secret.
While ACTA at least claimed not to exceed US law, Flynn and other professors allege that the leaked TPP IP chapter does go beyond what’s in US law, doing things like extending copyright protection even to temporary “buffer” copies so crucial to digital devices.
Some of the strongest opposition is coalescing around the IP provisions, but the TPP is a broad agreement that will stretch into all aspects of international trade ― and groups have already raised their concerns about some other industries. In Tokyo, hundreds of Japanese citizens protested in Tokyo, saying that cheap Us imports could hamstring Japan’s already weak agricultural sector, and a number of U.S. congresspeople have also expressed deep concerns over what effect the agreement might have on generic brands of prescription drugs.
What’s becoming clear is that Intellectual Property provisions are becoming a part of the basic negotiations of international trade, and neither lawmakers nor free-internet advocates are going to let this one drop. TPP may be the battleground now, but this question isn’t going to go away.
Earlier today, file-sharing website The Pirate Bay called 2012 “The Year of the Storm,” referring to the growing tension between internet activists and lawmakers. It’s started off hot, with the shutdown of Megaupload and the fight over SOPA, and it doesn’t seem like it’s going to calm down any time soon.
【一大ポルノ産業による被害を暴く】http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/1876756896/
『Big Porn Inc: Exposing the Harms of the Global Pornography Industry』
キャロライン・ノーマさんも執筆・翻訳で参加されています。
オーストラリアからはノーマさん、Meagan Tylerさん、 Sheila Jeffreysさん他。シーラ・ジェフリーズ教授はノーマさんの指導教授だそうです。
各国からは Gail Dines教授、この方のPornlandは必読。Ｃ・マッキノン、ダイアナ・ラッセル、中里見博。
