US Trade Rep criticises tech trade barriers in Oz, NZ
Wary of telecoms, cloud, patent and copyright rules
Cloud storage: Lower cost and increase uptime
Australia and New Zealand have come under criticism from the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) over a raft of tech issues.
In its latest 420-page National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, the USTR expresses concerns at Australia’s National Broadband Network, and government concerns at offshore storage of personal data; while New Zealand is in the crosshairs for legislation currently before parliament that would ban software patents.
While the USTR recognizes that the NBN in Australia will create “improve the non-discriminatory access to network services”, it remains critical of foreign investment limits on the incumbent carrier, Telstra.
Of greater concern, however, is that Australian government agencies are taking a wary approach to cloud computing. The USTR singles out the Department of Defence, the National Archives, the Australian Government Information Management Office, and Victoria’s state Privacy Commissioner, all of which have at various times sent “negative messages” about cloud computing services.
The offshore hosting debate in Australia centers on two concerns: that cloud providers in other jurisdictions may accept lesser privacy and security controls than would be required in Australia; and that the data may become subject to laws in other jurisdictions. The USTR says the notion that data may be “scrutinized by foreign governments” appears “based on misinterpretation of … the Patriot Act and regulatory requirements”.
In particular, the USTR dislikes Australia’s proposed implementation of e-health, saying that legislation requiring onshore storage of citizens’ personally-controlled electronic health records (PCEHRs) “would pose a significant trade barrier for US information technology companies with data centers located in the United States or anywhere else outside of Australia”.
The legislation’s explanatory memorandum, it should be noted, doesn’t single out America, nor does it raise government snooping as the main concern. Rather, it notes that if PCEHRs are stored outside Australia, “very few effective enforcement options would be available if that information were to be misused or mishandled”.
Criticism of New Zealand is based on that country’s proposed laws to forbid software patents, and on the idea that rights-holders should have to help pay for the cost of pursuing alleged infringers through ISPs.
Regarding the proposed patent law, which seems stalled in parliament (as noted by Stuff.co.nz, it has been awaiting its second reading in parliament for more than a year), the USTR says the clause excluding software “departs from patent eligibility standards in other developed economies”.
The Kiwis also suffer the withering slap of the USTR’s censure for requiring rights-holders to contribute $NZ25 to issue an infringement notice under that country’s Internet file-sharing laws, a cost which it says “has deterred some rights holders from using the system”. ®
COMMENTS
US Trade Reps...
Can suck on lemons.
Firstly the United States is the very last nation that has any cause to complain about other nations behaving in a protectionist manner; the way they behave when it comes to agriculture is disgusting, for a place that prides itself on the "free market" they sure don't act like it when it's not in their interests...
Secondly... They are complaining that we want to keep medical records located in Australia so they are subject solely to our laws? Seriously? And bitching because we want to keep control of vital infrastructure? Seriously?
...
I repeat my earlier statement, they can suck on lemons... rancid overripe lemons... it might improve their disposition.
There is just SO much wrong with this outburst it's hard to know where to begin!!!!
{it remains critical of foreign investment limits on the incumbent carrier, Telstra.}
Oh yeah, and how much foreign investment is permitted in U.S. companies. I'm thinking of airlines in particular here, but there are numerous others that can not be bought into or are severely curtailed as to percentage of foreign ownership.
{The offshore hosting debate in Australia centers on two concerns: that cloud providers in other jurisdictions may accept lesser privacy and security controls than would be required in Australia; and that the data may become subject to laws in other jurisdictions. The USTR says the notion that data may be “scrutinized by foreign governments” appears “based on misinterpretation of … the Patriot Act and regulatory requirements”.}
So the U.S. wants to control ALL data? Come on, if you think this is not a concern to Australia, how's about the U.S. complete their outsourcing of all their industries and putting a few cloud database server farms in other countries. Oh, you wouldn't? For security and privacy issues?
Dearie me, that is a concern, then. Oh, and misinterpretation of the Patriot's Act? No, just past experience of U.S. agencies wanting to gobble up all the information that it can force out of other countries. The day they brought in fingerprinting and photographing visitors was the day I swore I would never visit the U.S again, and I have lived and worked there (legitimately) in the past . I fail to see why if I have no criminal record I should be treated by a criminal, and to say that it's to stop terrorism, I ask the question. When did any of this techno babble ever foil a terrorist plot? They've either been found by on the ground intelligence or purely by accident.
I'm going to stop now before my blood pressure gets REALLY out of control, and yes, I know there's one or two generalisations in there, but the sheer hypocrisy of most things U.S. these days is unbelievable. Free trade? On yer bike, we've got to protect our manufacturers/producers from the dreaded Australian steel/beef & NZ sheep meat and no doubt there are other countries who have suffered at America's idea of "free trade".
Let the down-voting begin!
Au contraire
"based on misinterpretation of … the Patriot Act and regulatory requirements”. Ah no. I think everone understands the patriot act perfectly ... You just wish they didn't.
IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
Requirements Checklist for Choosing a Cloud Backup and Recovery Service Provider
Cloud based data management
Enabling efficient data center monitoring
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
